This whole thing reminds me of the incident with Clarkson on Top Gear using the word 'slope' – that is a derogatory term for Asians (apparently) but it's not a commonly known term... the BBC claimed not to be aware when there were complaints... but they had to publicly apologise! Now they're claiming not to know that they have used a derogatory term towards us... well like the Top Gear incident, apologise you cnuts!!! Can you imagine them writing an article about United fans using the term "Rag" or "Rags" ...no neither can I!!!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Complaint to BBC regarding Pete the Badge
- Thread starter Prestwich_Blue
- Start date
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
This whole thing reminds me of the incident with Clarkson on Top Gear using the word 'slope' – that is a derogatory term for Asians (apparently) but it's not a commonly known term... the BBC claimed not to be aware when there were complaints... but they had to publicly apologise! Now they're claiming not to know that they have used a derogatory term towards us... well like the Top Gear incident, apologise you cnuts!!! Can you imagine them writing an article about United fans using the term "Rag" or "Rags" ...no neither can I!!!
Which is what they should have done in the first place.
I can understand an editor not recognising it, or possibly being misled over what it meant, but once brought to their attention (and edited on the page), hold your bloody hands up and do better next time!
Trust in Pep
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2017
- Messages
- 51
Which is what they should have done in the first place.
I can understand an editor not recognising it, or possibly being misled over what it meant, but once brought to their attention (and edited on the page), hold your bloody hands up and do better next time!
It stinks this does. Some spotty geek rag had a dig at a vulnerable bloke for a few cheap laughs and RTs in London, Singapore, Asia and everywhere else they infest and now they are protecting him/her/it. Its not on. This needs taking all the way lads. We should write to MPs, get social media involved, flags at the match etc. The club might even help?
Gareth Barry Conlon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2014
- Messages
- 15,946
I don't like this guy being bullied any more than the rest of you. He strikes me as a gentle eccentric sort of bloke.
On the wider issue of the media treating us badly, I think it's not just our imagination, there is an agenda against us.
So fucking what? Man up. Grow a spine and a pair of big hairy bollocks while your about it.
All this whining is pathetic. Makes us look like a right bunch of mard arses.
Enjoy the journey - years of trophies and fun to come.
Well said. The constant victim mentality on these boards is pathetic at times and the media rage is Trump like. Does anyone even know if Pete is arsed about any of this?
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
It stinks this does. Some spotty geek rag had a dig at a vulnerable bloke for a few cheap laughs and RTs in London, Singapore, Asia and everywhere else they infest and now they are protecting him/her/it. Its not on. This needs taking all the way lads. We should write to MPs, get social media involved, flags at the match etc. The club might even help?
PB reckons the club have been in contact about it.
I don't think anyone decided to have a go at Pete as himself, I doubt they knew who he is when they got the photo - the "most Manchester City fan" picture they could find.
I do think that the appropriate inhouse response would be a bollocking, but I don't think that the BBC should be under any obligation to reveal their disciplinary measures to those who complain, unless their guidelines require it.
GortonBlue62
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 3,060
Shaving one's scrotum is de rigeuer these days, my friend.
That particular practice isn't widespread in Gorton yet.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
As MMA says, it's not about Pete or a personal attack on him. It's an attack on all City fans. Whether he's bothered or not doesn't come into this. If you were coming out of a away game with your mates and saw some opposition fans laying into a lone Blue, would you say "He looks like he can handle himself" or "It's not my problem" and just walk on?Well said. The constant victim mentality on these boards is pathetic at times and the media rage is Trump like. Does anyone even know if Pete is arsed about any of this?
GortonBlue62
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 26 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 3,060
This makes you look. Well tough...enjoy mr tough guy but unfortunately the situation demands a little more and you really do not seem to understand the ramifications of this issue.why TF do you think that clubs employ PR teams?
OK the language was a bit over the top but I stand by the point - we've got to accept that success comes with a price - we're not going to be lovable old useless City with the best set of fans in the world any more. I prefer the current situation, winning is a lot more fun than losing. We (City) have a great story to tell and the future looks better than anything that's preceded it.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Give it time....That particular practice isn't widespread in Gorton yet.
Gary James
Well-Known Member
Yet again something crops up that promotes MUFC unfairly. I take it everyone has seen the stuff about Stonewall and Unitec? While I applaud any club that gets involved in standing up for rights etc theBBC's boast that MUFC are the first to tie up with Stonewall is inaccurate. 11 years ago (yes as long ago as that) City teamed up with Stonewall and actually also paid Stonewallfor the Right - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/5290534.stm Our national broadcaster really does need to get its act in order.
squirtyflower
Well-Known Member
1. They're not interested in what other clubs doYet again something crops up that promotes MUFC unfairly. I take it everyone has seen the stuff about Stonewall and Unitec? While I applaud any club that gets involved in standing up for rights etc theBBC's boast that MUFC are the first to tie up with Stonewall is inaccurate. 11 years ago (yes as long ago as that) City teamed up with Stonewall and actually also paid Stonewallfor the Right - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/5290534.stm Our national broadcaster really does need to get its act in order.
2. They are unable to do any simple journalistic research
3. Imagine how bad it would look for United if it was reported they waited 11 years before bothering getting involved
4. We pay a tax that supports this nonsense
cleavers
Moderator
Sadly, all true.1. They're not interested in what other clubs do
2. They are unable to do any simple journalistic research
3. Imagine how bad it would look for United if it was reported they waited 11 years before bothering getting involved
4. We pay a tax that supports this nonsense
@Gary James , as the all knowledgeable person about City, can't you point out this 'mistake' to the author of the article and simply ask them to correct it ?
Gary James
Well-Known Member
I've tweeted them and BBC Radio Manchester Sport has retweeted it and I know there will be people at Manchester who go and tell the sports people downstairs. So, hopefully, the message will start getting through.Sadly, all true.
@Gary James , as the all knowledgeable person about City, can't you point out this 'mistake' to the author of the article and simply ask them to correct it ?
Gary James
Well-Known Member
Of course, once again, there wasn't a name attached to the article and so I guess they'll never know who wrote it as with Bertiegate. It must be great to work in a place where invisible people do all the work.I've tweeted them and BBC Radio Manchester Sport has retweeted it and I know there will be people at Manchester who go and tell the sports people downstairs. So, hopefully, the message will start getting through.
chesterbells
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 27,051
Of course, once again, there wasn't a name attached to the article and so I guess they'll never know who wrote it as with Bertiegate. It must be great to work in a place where invisible people do all the work.
That would be one easy change for them to make - name author everything, publicly
quiet_riot
Well-Known Member
Thanks for that @Gary James, BBC, BBC Sport and Match of the Day have all tweeted the United/LGBT story multiple times today. Worse when you consider it's inaccurate.Yet again something crops up that promotes MUFC unfairly. I take it everyone has seen the stuff about Stonewall and Unitec? While I applaud any club that gets involved in standing up for rights etc theBBC's boast that MUFC are the first to tie up with Stonewall is inaccurate. 11 years ago (yes as long ago as that) City teamed up with Stonewall and actually also paid Stonewallfor the Right - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/5290534.stm Our national broadcaster really does need to get its act in order.
80s Shorts
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,616
As MMA says, it's not about Pete or a personal attack on him. It's an attack on all City fans. Whether he's bothered or not doesn't come into this. If you were coming out of a away game with your mates and saw some opposition fans laying into a lone Blue, would you say "He looks like he can handle himself" or "It's not my problem" and just walk on?
I thought that was just what it is about. Many posts in this thread when I have dipped in and out have said as such.
I'm a blue through and through but could not give a fuck if some nomark arsehole via social media has apparently insulted me by association.
Just got a response to my secondary complaint. They admit that comment was added internally 'without the due diligence we would normally expect from any level of BBC journalism'. Tossers!
It continues. 'After internal discussions, we are satisfied that there was no malice intended towards the individual pictured, or City fans in general'. Lying tossers!
It then states 'We accept that this was a sloppy error and fell well below the journalistic standards the audience rightly expects from the BBC'. Sloppy tossers!
It ends. 'We apologise again for any offence caused.'
Next stage would be bbc editorial complaints units independant investigation.
It continues. 'After internal discussions, we are satisfied that there was no malice intended towards the individual pictured, or City fans in general'. Lying tossers!
It then states 'We accept that this was a sloppy error and fell well below the journalistic standards the audience rightly expects from the BBC'. Sloppy tossers!
It ends. 'We apologise again for any offence caused.'
Next stage would be bbc editorial complaints units independant investigation.
Just got a response to my secondary complaint. They admit that comment was added internally 'without the due diligence we would normally expect from any level of BBC journalism'. Tossers!
It continues. 'After internal discussions, we are satisfied that there was no malice intended towards the individual pictured, or City fans in general'. Lying tossers!
It then states 'We accept that this was a sloppy error and fell well below the journalistic standards the audience rightly expects from the BBC'. Sloppy tossers!
It ends. 'We apologise again for any offence caused.'
Next stage would be bbc editorial complaints units independant investigation.
go to the next stage
go on