Complaint to BBC regarding Pete the Badge

[Eds]

This bit is familiar...

"They believe that continuous replays attempt to create doubt about the validity of their positive moments or results in games, and feel that the opposite never occurs."

They always do that with us... look at the Sergio elbow incident (he was banned for) and how many times they replayed that over and over, from various angles... yet when the Rags do something dubious they get maybe one replay from one angle and move on!
There was also a goal we scored in the CL - can't recall who against now, but BT were determined to prove it was offside... disgraceful behaviour for an British TV channel who are supposed to support all our teams in Europe.

Back to the BBC complaint – of course they knew what they were doing using the name 'Bertie' ...proving it is the problem!

Possibly not as difficult as you may think - just very time consuming and laborious to do so. The BBC know it was done deliberately, we all know it was done deliberately and the BBC know that we know it was done deliberately. It's a question of who blinks first IMO

 

[big gaz]

Excellent. Keep fighting blues.

I,ve just come back to this thread and sir, can I say well done. Like many of us we have all heard the term before, but to label that term to Pete was wrong ( who like me we have all seen, but do not know him ) he is a straight up Manchester City fan end of. Now Berties we know them, but not Pete.

 

[Abe Frohman]

I am contacting to escalate the above referenced complaint to the next level as I am far from happy with the responses to date from Ms Tsang, Deputy Complaints Manager. I have attached the responses for ease of reference.

My original complaint surrounded a photograph published on your Facebook page of a vulnerable and immensely likeable Manchester City supporter with the narrative “He’s been going to Manchester City for fifty years, today he excelled himself, Bertie we salute you.” My complaint is about the offensive and infantile use of the term Bertie.
In Ms Tsang’s responses she claims that there is no malice intended towards Pete (that’s his name by the way) or any City fan and that, "None of the team on the BBC Sport website were aware of “Bertie” as being a derogatory term to describe City fans”.

I would like to refer you to an article by your BBC Sport Website team published on 4th February 2016 entitled “What are the top questions asked about your club?”. The third question in this piece asks, “Why are Man City fans called Berties”. You go on to discover in the answer provided that "You may have heard of a cartoon character in a United magazine called ‘Bertie Magoo the Bitter Blue,’ which is why United fans call City fans ‘the Berties’

If you still stand by your answer that nobody in the sports teams knows about this term, which is now clearly a lie as proven by the above article, and that no offence is intended please have the courage of your convictions and republish the original article in its entirety, after all you have not meant to cause any offence have you?
I have some questions that I want answers to in response to my escalated complaint;

1. What is the name of the journalist who published this item?
2. Why out of all the male names in the world was Bertie chosen when it was not used to be an offensive term?
3. Why was the original response not investigated correctly?
4. Who in the Sports department did Ms Tsang speak to to conclude that "None of the team on the BBC Sport website were aware of “Bertie” as being a derogatory term to describe City fans”?
5. Will you republish the original article again if you do believe it not to be offensive?

I would have had much more respect for Ms Tsang if she actually had the foresight to admit that this was done with the malice that all City fans who have read this are convinced it was intended. There really is no other explanation so please do not insult me with more untruths and respond with the answers to the questions I have asked. I would add that I am prepared to take this complaint as far as possible until you actually commit to tell the truth about this piece.

Regards

I do like to complain. And often.

You sir, however, can take a years supply of chocolate digestives for this superlative effort.

 

[cheekybids]

In tempted to make another complaint about unreasonable length of time to deal with complaints.

I'd probably give them a couple of tips like find out who did it interview them and make a decision, interview original investigator then make a formal apology, explain checks have been put in place to stop this in future .

It's not hard is it.

I saw an article investigating SBS in Australia about every single report on Trump was negative. It was questioning how a funded station could say they were operating impartially with this evidence.

I think we are incredibly naive with this impartial bullshit, it's like ffp just cos they say that's what it is doesn't mean it is.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

And we have a response to my escalation of the Pete the Badge complaint. Make sure you're sitting down:

Sounds legit. Anyone can mistype 'City fan' as 'Bertie'. I do it all the time.

Too fucking right I'll be escalating that Katherine, particularly after you told me a complete pack of lies in the first place.

I got pretty much the same reply apart from the last paragraph regarding escalation of complaints.

It seems they don't want this escalating. Scumbags!

As an institution, the BBC are morally bankrupt.

 

[paulchapo]

Live on the BBC tonight......ideal to get our point across.

 

[GeekinGav]

And we have a response to my escalation of the Pete the Badge complaint. Make sure you're sitting down:

Sounds legit. Anyone can mistype 'City fan' as 'Bertie'. I do it all the time.

Too fucking right I'll be escalating that Katherine, particularly after you told me a complete pack of lies in the first place.

was it on the Twitter page? as i only ever saw it on the Facebook MOTD page ... if they don't dont know which platform it was on, then they dont know their atses from their elbow's and are just spouting any old shit to try to appease us.

 

[BlueRockape]

So glad I don't pay these ****s a penny

 

[Metalartin]

I will be honest I didn't really get offended by the obvious reference to "Bitter Berties" because it's not the first time we've heard it and we know they are biased they always have been.

Having thought about it, what annoys me is it's like an individual there was clearly taunting City fans in general not just Pete("look at that Bitter Bertie typical City eh haha?"), we know it and they know it. If it was from somewhere like Paddy Power we know they "bantz" all the time and we'd be a bit silly to react in the same way but the BBC is supposed to be a different kettle of fish ie professional... the person who did it was unprofessional and they know it, what should happen is they acknowledge it, apologise(to Pete probably via letter but it's better than nothing and a statement apologising to the City fan base) then say it's been dealt with and we move on.

Instead they are basically either denying it or saying it's not a big deal by the way they've handled it, which is again unprofessional, when you are in certain positions there are certain expectations and responsibilities that rightfully come with all those perks they enjoy(such as the extra credibility they are given by default among other things). We put up with their biased anti-city bullshit enough while they tell us we are making something out of nothing if they are going to try and pull that same trick here and sit and tell us they don't have anything against City or City fans then they lose whatever little credibility they have left with us.

 

[Ric]

I will be honest I didn't really get offended by the obvious reference to "Bitter Berties" because it's not the first time we've heard it and we know they are biased they always have been.

Having thought about it, what annoys me is it's like an individual there was clearly taunting City fans in general not just Pete("look at that Bitter Bertie typical City eh haha?"), we know it and they know it. If it was from somewhere like Paddy Power we know they "bantz" all the time and we'd be a bit silly to react in the same say but the BBC is supposed to be a different kettle of fish ie professional... the person who did it was unprofessional and they know it, what should happen is they acknowledge it, apologise(to Pete probably via letter but it's better than nothing and a statement apologising to the City fan base) then say it's been dealt with and we move on.

Instead they are basically either denying it or saying it's not a big deal by the way they've handled it, which is again unprofessional, when you are in certain positions there are certain expectations and responsibilities that rightfully come with all those perks they enjoy(such as the extra credibility they are given by default among other things). We put up with their biased anti-city bullshit enough while they tell us we are making something out of nothing if they are going to try and pull that same trick here and sit and tell us they don't have anything against City or City fans then they lose whatever little credibility they have left with us.

Well put mate, sums up how I feel about it really.