Complaint to BBC regarding Pete the Badge

[Chris in London]

You realise how it works? I mean social media for these type of companies? They employ any "nobody", they probably employed a 18 year old kid to Tweet and Facebook..... You realise they're not going to pay someone £30k a year to Tweet and Facebook? In fact the kid was probably sacked afterwards, so I hope it makes you sleep well at night.

I can't get over why so many blues are arsed enough to make a 127 paged thread, it seems all too precious to me!

There is an entire department called 'BBC trending'. They take social media very seriously. It is not something they leave to the YTS trainees.

 

[urban genie]

Well they managed to mention wigan reaching the cup final in today comentary, though fell short of naming us... be we knew what they meant ;-)


Also can we rename this site bertmoon as bertie is now growing on me since the carfuffle, and also because it's been used as a term by some blues for last couple of years much to rag fans annoyance, all this proves is the bbc know fuckall about our club, our fans and the local rivalry.

The most insulting thing is that they did it to try and bait us, so just as bad.

 

[ancoats]

we are so soft (manchester city) in having those c*nts up in court the media really go to town on us and our media or press office really do get my goat up when you see our name being talked about and we just take it with nothing coming back. i think that's why we are a easy target the little digs the highlights of motd the panel all have a dig at something then the money gets a mention empty seats players wages are we the only club that pay big wages

every time we come up on live tv in the cup and if we are playing a lower level club its like a free for all the amount of money spent on this city team yaya wage is bigger than the wage bill in all the other clubs in this league and the bench just look at the amount of money sat on the bench

i really think they have a book of the info to use when manchester city are on tv why are we cannon fodder for them its easy to see why when the people in our media just don't have the balls to bring or take them on

 

[nmc]

Everyone getting their pants in a bunch! It's not even the real Match of the Day account, it's a fake one!

This is the real one




People who get all up in arms over this sort of thing without checking its authenticity are the type of fans that make the rest of us look like a bunch of overreacting dicks!

They've taken the offensive bit down... weeks ago. Keep up.

 

[kaz7]

You realise how it works? I mean social media for these type of companies? They employ any "nobody", they probably employed a 18 year old kid to Tweet and Facebook..... You realise they're not going to pay someone £30k a year to Tweet and Facebook? In fact the kid was probably sacked afterwards, so I hope it makes you sleep well at night.

I can't get over why so many blues are arsed enough to make a 127 paged thread, it seems all too precious to me!

You really need to read the whole thread,they have admitted doing it a while ago

 

[Gordyola]

Everyone getting their pants in a bunch! It's not even the real Match of the Day account, it's a fake one!

This is the real one




People who get all up in arms over this sort of thing without checking its authenticity are the type of fans that make the rest of us look like a bunch of overreacting dicks!

Good grief, do you really believe that " People" are stupid enough to not know what is genuine and what is fake? That includes the complaints team at the BBC who removed the offending tweet and sort of apologised.

 

[bluestevei]

so does anyone know if Pete the badge has said anything about this, I'm sure someone would of said something as hes at city all home games

 

[Bozo]

You realise how it works? I mean social media for these type of companies? They employ any "nobody", they probably employed a 18 year old kid to Tweet and Facebook..... You realise they're not going to pay someone £30k a year to Tweet and Facebook? In fact the kid was probably sacked afterwards, so I hope it makes you sleep well at night.

I can't get over why so many blues are arsed enough to make a 127 paged thread, it seems all too precious to me!

I do realise how it works, it's part of my own job (FYI, modern media does indeed pay out decent salaries for content managers/editors, it's not just someone sat at a desk tweeting all day)
Have you read the thread at all? It goes much further than their silly little Bertie post.

 

[quiet_riot]

https://www.umaxit.com/index.php/co...e-badge-when-the-bbc-cyberbullied-a-pensioner

The Story Of Manchester City’s Pete The Badge: When The BBC Cyberbullied A Pensioner

Stephen Tudor

This is a story about the BBC cyber-bullying a 71 year old football supporter nicknamed ‘Pete the Badge’. This is a story about a fan-base and forum drawing a line in the sand and demanding accountability. This is a story that exposes the inherent dangers attached whenever old media attempts to mimic the looser codes and morals of new media and consequently come horrendously unstuck. The sorry tale begins with a posting on the BBC Match of the Day Facebook page early last month. Here it is in all its ill-considered – and very possibly spiteful – glory.

There are so many things egregiously wrong with this that it’s difficult to know where to start. So let’s begin with the photo itself and work our way out.
Even if you’ve never visited the Etihad or been to your club’s ground when they host Manchester City, it is entirely possible that you recognise the fella. I can recall several occasions when Sky – or ironically the BBC – have featured Pete in montages of fans prior to a game and at least one time when the presenter mentioned him with warm affection straight after. There is a reason for this and it’s a reason that is abundantly clear from the photograph. In a modern football environment full of corporate day-trippers and BMW dads, Pete’s attire evokes nostalgia for a bygone age while acting too as a reminder that following the fortunes of eleven players here, there and everywhere is an eccentric pursuit. He is, to television companies who have bleached the game of all its colour through investment that totals billions, authenticity and tradition by association. There is another reason of course why cameras seek him out: you look at him and, no matter your club allegiance, you smile.

There are a couple of things you need to know about Pete before we move on and I’ll do so speedily because he should not be the protagonist of this story, not when he’s already been placed front and centre within it without giving any form of permission. As previously stated he is a pensioner who has supported the Blues for just shy of sixty years. In that time he has seen more live games than you or I will ever do (and it’s worth bearing in mind at this juncture that he wore an abundance of City clothing and paraphernalia during sustained periods of hooliganism where few dared even wear their club scarf) and has spent more money doing so than you or I will ever spend on our one true love. He is also, by every account bar none, a thoroughly lovely guy who is always happy to chat City and football to one and all. He is intelligent, fun, and funny and according to unverified reports suffers from an unknown level of Asperger’s. I debated long and hard whether to include the latter detail but feel its possibility is possibly pertinent to what follows.

Should you not be a Manchester City supporter you may well be puzzled as to why the offending post is being written about here. And for that matter why it’s led to a multitude of complaints made to the BBC and a rumoured investigation taking place within the corporation’s walls as to how the hell this was allowed to see the light of day.

You may also have probably guessed by now that it might have something to do with the name ‘Bertie’.

Every club has a derogative term given to them by local rivals. Some, such as Tottenham’s, originate in offensive intent but have been mellowed in recent years by Spurs fans themselves taking ownership of the term. Others begin life entirely innocuously but then take on an insulting slant due to who is saying it and why. An example of this is City fans’ ‘nickname’ for United: rags. It is a term believed to derive from the second world war bombing of Old Trafford that temporarily impoverished the club and left them wearing shirts that were somewhat tatty. Reminding them of this isn’t particularly pleasant of course but by the same token it’s hardly Clarkson-esque either. Yet if I hear a Blue say the word I know it’s shorthand for antagonism: there is loathing and a dismissive hostility behind the word. Consequently United fans understandably bristle on hearing it.

They in turn have several disparaging names for City supporters. ‘Bertie’ is one. ‘Bitter’ another. ‘Citeh’ too, to denote their strange mocking of their neighbours stereotypically having more localised support.

All three were spawned from a cartoon in a United fanzine back in the day, featuring a morose character dwelling in Stockport named ‘Bertie Magoo the Bitter Blue’. With his blue nose with ‘loser’ written on it and a t-shirt stating ‘Bell is better than Best’ we’re barely talking Viz levels of satire here but it is humorous and harmless nonetheless. The terms though, when flung now as insults, are shorthand for loathing, belittlement and hostility.

So for the BBC of all organisations – one founded on impartiality let’s not forget and with a mandate and obligation to report the news not make it – to resort to such cheap, cruel and wholly unnecessary measures remains staggering even one month on. They have mocked an elderly, popular, loyal supporter with an eccentricity that suggests an undetermined condition purely in the name of clickbait. Aside from basic decency this was a clear breach of their editorial guidelines one of which states, “BBC content must respect human dignity…derogatory remarks aimed at real people must not be celebrated for the purposes of entertainment.”

Maybe, to reluctantly play devil’s advocate for a moment, it was misguided more than cruel. Perhaps the social media arm of the BBC tried to ape the ‘cheeky’ and provocative ethos laid down by Paddy Power and others? If so they failed spectacularly and brings to mind that person we all know, the one minus a bone of humour in their body who tries to join in with the office banter and points out a colleague’s physical defect to the visible discomfort of all present.
More probably though it was a United supporter taking advantage of his position to take a pathetic swipe at a vulnerable Blue – and vicariously – all Blues. I can imagine him and his recently-relocated-to-Salford-from-London Red mates having a good chuckle at his fine work and I hope the little f***er has been severely reprimanded. I also hope in the future the culprit applies for a position at one of the ‘lad sites’ and boasts of his escapade only to be told, “Sorry mate, you’ve got us wrong. We do have standards you know and that’s a bit on the nose for us.”

Should you be reading this and consider it all a storm in a teacup please consider this: is it even remotely imaginable that the BBC would ‘celebrate’ (for no discernible reason incidentally – ‘Over fifty years’ is hardly an anniversary) an elderly United supporter with the words ‘rag we salute you’? Or for that matter put up a photograph of a vulnerable Liverpool fan – without that person’s permission remember – and use him to take a snide swipe at the club’s fan-base by referring to him as a ‘bin dipper’?

“He’s been going to Liverpool for over fifty years. But today he has excelled himself. Bin dipper we salute you.”

If you believe that is even slightly conceivable then no hard feelings and I’ll hopefully see you again shortly.

When Blues became aware of the astonishing post all hell immediately broke loose. Since City’s post-takeover rise to prominence supporters have split into two camps, one of whom believes the media show persistent bias against them, the others insisting such a mind-set amounts to paranoia. It’s worth noting that in this instance even the latter group responded with shock and disgust. Excuse the pun but it united us all.

A flood of complaints ensued to the BBC – largely from members of the Bluemoon forum – and at this point the good old ‘Auntie Beeb’ could have nipped the situation in the bud: fronted up, admitted culpability and apologised, and insisted the matter was being dealt with internally because they were taking the matter very seriously.

Instead, cowardly and unscrupulous as they are while insisting we should all – by law – continue to fund their existence, they lied and denied.

First, in an identikit reply to each and every complainant, they claimed the picture was sourced from a national picture agency that was already captioned ‘Bertie’. This is plainly untrue. Having worked for numerous sites in my time and used numerous picture agencies I have never once encountered one captioned in such a colloquial manner. This was proven soon after by a Bluemoon forum member who located the agency in question and discovered that the picture was dryly described as, “Manchester City v Swansea – Premier League – Etihad Stadium. A Manchester City fan before the Premier League match at the Etihad Stadium, Manchester’.

Next, the BBC insisted that nobody involved was aware of the derogatory term. Here the first lie damns the second and with the caption written in-house this has to go down as the most astounding and unfortunate coincidence of all time. It’s strange enough that an employee decided to allocate Pete with a completely random name (a random name not exactly widespread in popular parlance) but what rotten luck for the Beeb that it’s the one name City fans regard as a slur to their standing.

An article on the BBC website last year entitled ‘Why are Man City fans called Berties?’ also discredits their already weak assertion.

The BBC’s next move was to change the caption above the photograph of Pete to, ‘I wonder who he is supporting today.’ If only they had gone with this from the start. Well, in a way, they had because this was now the very same picture and caption they had used one year earlier. This further discredits their insistence that Pete – a well-known supporter featured on their television programmes – was an entirely unfamiliar figure to them.

First they insult. Then they insult your intelligence.

So where are we now in this sorry tale? It appears we have reached an impasse with the BBC ceding to an apology and admitting to a lack of due diligence yet persisting in their stance that the offending post was put up in error and not as a purposeful jibe.

Yet City fans know the truth. The truth is quite frankly incontestable.

I will leave you with the thoughts of a Bluemoon member named ‘Thaksinssoldier’ whose take on the issue resonated with me.

“The BBC can slag off a player. They can slag off Pep. They can slag off attendances. They can slag off money. That’s all part and parcel of the game, whether we like it or not. What they can’t do is pick an individual fan, outside the ground and openly embarrass the guy. He isn’t paid to be subjected to that. That’s off limits. 100%.”

Sensational.


@Lucky Toma tekkaboo

 

[Lucky Toma]

Ta QR. Hopefully more articles follow elsewhere and this gets wider coverage.