BBC forced to withdraw claim that Man City have bought English football.

I put the BBC, Sky, and BT in the same boat. I don't subscribe to the latter sports offerings and were the BBC to rely on subscriptions rather than a licence they would soon go bust and the collection of Dirty Dans they have would be down the Labour!

Yeah, and you’d still have sky & bbc to rely on then. Actually, if you don’t subscribe to them either you wouldn’t.
 
The thrust of their defence is as you highlight "questions that our audience would like to ask". Does that mean that no matter how offensive that question was to other viewers the question would still be asked?
I don't ever recall similar questions being asked of The Dippers or ManUre during their periods of dominance.... Or maybe I've just got a shit memory.
 
The thrust of their defence is as you highlight "questions that our audience would like to ask". Does that mean that no matter how offensive that question was to other viewers the question would still be asked?
So roan has to decide which questions the audience would like to ask.
He will arbitrarily choose the nature and substance of those questions, according to HIS divination of the public view.
That means surely, that those questions will be heavily influenced by his own views, since they have to come from inside his own head.
 
The thrust of their defence is as you highlight "questions that our audience would like to ask". Does that mean that no matter how offensive that question was to other viewers the question would still be asked?
Correct, they are just pandering to their chosen rag/scouse demographic - which includes a disproportionate number of their own staff.
They never ask, for example, why have the Glazers taken the same amount of money out of United as Sheikh Mansour has invested in City?
Instead they provide a relentless negative narrative undermining City's achievements to identify more closely with their target audience.
 
Last edited:
Reply to my complaint

Subject: BBC Complaints - Case number CAS-5572998-RC5QVH


Thank you for contacting us in relation to the BBC One broadcast of BBC News at Ten on 7 August.

I understand you have concerns relating to Dan Roan's interview with Richard Masters as you feel there was a lack of impartiality.

I am sorry to learn of your concerns about this. The BBC believes that those in positions of responsibility should be given the opportunity to explain their thinking on matters of public concern and answer criticisms of it. The job of the BBC interviewer is to then put forward questions likely to be in the minds of our audience.

Dan's interview with Mr Masters was no exception. Dan asked Mr Masters about a range of subjects, including Man City, discrimination and the relationship between football and gambling.

Just because Dan questioned whether Man City's financial clout made the League unpredictable does not mean that it can be inferred that this is his own view. This is part of the grammar of a news interview and is often appreciated by BBC News at Ten viewers.

We do value your feedback about this. All complaints are sent to senior management and I’ve included your points in our overnight report. These reports are among the most widely read sources of feedback in the BBC and ensures that your concerns have been seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future content.

Thank you once again for getting in touch.

Deborah Dawson

BBC Complaints

www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

No difficulty in finding out who they think they are - explains it all really. I'm going to ask Debbie for a face to chat and suggest she looks at Banned Roan's oeuvre on twitter and elsewhere before she turns up. https://www.mancity.com/news/club news/club news/archive/2012/march/man city ban bbc man dan roan


Dear Deborah,

Could you ask Jurgen if they are always the victim & why is it never there fault. Just let him know me & my pals are interested.

Mr C Bids
 
Dear Deborah,

Could you ask Jurgen if they are always the victim & why is it never there fault. Just let him know me & my pals are interested.

Mr C Bids
Dear Deborah.

Could you ask your match commentators what the policy is for shoehorning a Rag's reference into match commentaries that have absolutely no relevance to their team, club or supporters?


Mr T. Tasch
 
I don't ever recall similar questions being asked of The Dippers or ManUre during their periods of dominance.... Or maybe I've just got a shit memory.

Nothing wrong with yer memory, D. Arsenal, Dippers, Spurs and MANUre were drooled over when they were dominant. No mention of money, the ruination of the game, or the disrespecting of opponents by knocking in goals left, right and centre. Just slobbering, hyperbolic text and visual puffery 24/7!
 
If you can afford it. Many many folk take their PL feed off MOTD and the iPlayer. Take away the license and who pays for that?

Perhaps the adverts on ITV could pay for Premier League highlights show on Saturday evening.

Alan Shearer and Ian Wright cost us £150 a year to listen to their bollocks.

Lee Dixon and Roy Keane cost fuck all because at half time Ray Winston pops up and tells us to 'gamble responsibly'.

Both sets of pundits, consist of ex players, no longer involved in the game (for obvious reasons), trading on their former celebrity. Their opinions are worth fuck all.

No contest. I prefer my half times to be 50% bullshit and 50% (often entertaining) adverts at a cost of £0.
 
Dear Deborah.

Could you ask your match commentators what the policy is for shoehorning a Rag's reference into match commentaries that have absolutely no relevance to their team, club or supporters?


Mr T. Tasch

Why are using a pseudonym to write to the BBC ? That is quite paranoid, that said just sticking one 's' in will make it quite easy for the 'team' to find you.

Yours B Misht.
 
Perhaps the adverts on ITV could pay for Premier League highlights show on Saturday evening.

Alan Shearer and Ian Wright cost us £150 a year to listen to their bollocks.

Lee Dixon and Roy Keane cost fuck all because at half time Ray Winston pops up and tells us to 'gamble responsibly'.

Both sets of pundits, consist of ex players, no longer involved in the game (for obvious reasons), trading on their former celebrity. Their opinions are worth fuck all.

No contest. I prefer my half times to be 50% bullshit and 50% (often entertaining) adverts at a cost of £0.

advertising spend is finite and decreasing on the "old" media with a flight by advertisers to the new on cost grounds. Making the BBC dependant on advertising revenue won't generate more it will simply spread a diminishing spend more thinly and would damage both of the big free to air TV channels and give more power to SKY and BT Sports when it comes to bidding for sports rights.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.