On living in a Communist State…

This morning, I looked back at my Twitter feed for yesterday and decided that I’d quite like to watch The One Show on iPlayer with my breakfast.  Not, of course, for reasons you might think.  What I had seen on Twitter were references to a report on the ‘Megatrain’ and given that I am a ferroequinologist, I thought I might find it quite interesting.*

Unfortunately, I discovered that yesterday’s show wasn’t available, so I watched a bit of Alex Salmond getting excited about Scottish Independence before reading the BBC News Page.  And there I discovered what everyone else had seen on Twitter about the One Show – that Jeremy Clarkson had made some controversial comments.  Is that why I cannot watch it?

Apparently he said that those on strike yesterday should have been lined up and shot.**  But does anyone really think that he genuinely believes that, and would have actually shot them given half a chance?  Or was it just a bit of classic exaggeration, designed to make a point?

Television, especially comedy, employs the latter a lot, and often to good effect.  And, offensive though his comments may have been to some, the underlying idea that he doesn’t have much time for those on strike is a fair point.  After all, most of us have graciously accepted that on average we now live longer, and on average we have to pay more for everything.  Including our pensions.  So why should a group of men on six figure salaries attempt to hold the country to ransom?***

I am struggling with the BBC’s apparent censorship of yesterday’s One Show.  After all, there are lots of potentially offensive things on TV.  Plus, in this case, we’re talking about an iPlayer episode, the content of which has been plastered all over the news.  So you should be able to make an informed choice about whether or not you wish to see it.

Unfortunately, the BBC has denied us that choice.  They have decided what we can and cannot hear about yesterday’s strikes, and have decided to protect my ears from Clarkson’s comments, even though my eyes have been unable to avoid them on their news page.  Why haven’t they gone to the same trouble in the past with other offensive comments?

The question is, of course, whether the episode would have been left on iPlayer if Clarkson had instead said “anyone who votes Tory should be lined up and shot.” 

Meanwhile, the sad thing is that in trying to make a point, and in limiting free speech, the BBC have also denied me the chance to watch a report I’d have been genuinely interested in.

 

*Yes, really

**I’m sorry if you found reading that offensive.  Please feel free to complain about this blog and campaign for its removal.

***I am, of course, talking about the Union bosses.

Comments

Tim said…
I don't know if the Clarkson comments are the reason for the programme not being on iPlayer, but it's ludicrous if they are, given there's a video clip and full transcript of the event on the BBC's own news site (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15993549). Incidentally, I don't watch the one show, but I have a lot more sympathy for Clarkson having read the transcript, as he explicitly said the joke didn't represent his view, and it was clearly meant as a joke. Unlike Karen Jennings of Unison, who compared Clarkson to Gaddafi with all seriousness.
Thu Dec 01, 05:44:00 PM GMT
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

the purpose of religion

One of the things which featured in the recent debate on this post is the idea that “religion should be about improving oneself”. This has got me thinking; ‘religion’ of course takes many forms, but in the vast majority of cases I disagree with this. To paraphrase MarkC, religion is certainly something which as a by-product might help with “improving oneself”, but however you measure self-improvement it is not the sole point, certainly not in the Judeo-Christian case. In fact, if your sole aim is to “improve yourself”, why waste your time playing around with the trappings of religion? Most religions are based around the idea of faith in God, and that, surely, is the point. Considering Christianity specifically, Jesus said “ Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself ” and so ‘religion’ should not be in danger of becoming all about wo...
Read more

atheism is a matter of faith, not science: the debate continues

Following the letters page in last Wednesday's Metro and the follow-up comment on this post I’m pleased to see that the beginnings of a debate are brewing, and I intend to use this post to pick up the baton again. Unsurprisingly, I’m going to start by responding to the aforementioned comment. I apologise if my tone was deemed to be a bit sharp, but I have no hesitation in defending the point I was trying to make. According to dictionary.com , faith can be defined as “belief that is not based on proof.” As there is no proof that God does not exist, belief that God does not exist (i.e. atheism) must be faith. Now, I take your point that “as human beings we are always revising and fine tuning what we hold to be true based on the evidence to hand, what we discover and our ability to determine what is probable or improbable.” To digress slightly, that is why switching on the Large Hadron Collider is going to be something of a milestone, as it could eit...
Read more

milk and sugar?

I've been debating with my housemate as to whether tea or coffee is more popular world-wide. We've both done quick web-searches, and we've both got results to match our different claims. I say tea, he says coffee. So, to settle the debate, it's down to you. Do you prefer tea or coffee? Please leave a comment below - one word is all it takes.
Read more