Skip navigation


Well, this morning we hear that the director general of the BBC has resigned, despite yesterday saying he was going to say…..

Have to say watching the BBC debate themselves is humourous to say the least, and despite the former director general appearing to have chosen to fall on his own sword, I have to say, there are questions that seem to be absent while the question of trust and reorganising the management structure and all that distracting crap continues.

Listening to the BBC trusts chairman, former politician Chris Patten mention the huge numer of management levels within the BBC did pose a question to me.

You have to note that in our societies news organisations are acutely aware of the legal boundaries that have to be overcome when mentioning peoples names in association with things like child abuse. We live in a world of slanger laws, litegation, sueing people for deformation of character etc. No one will say anything on national TV or media if there is a chance that they will end up in court.


Surely Lord Mcalpines name wouldnt have simply been thrown into the story and that story being passed up through the many many levels of any media organisation without there being an eivdence to validate that persons name being included. Someone, somewhere would say ‘hang on a second, why is this guys name involved if there is no evidence to substantiate its inclusion?’

Or they would more likely be saying, ‘Cant just cant include this persons name because we don’t have any evidence for why its there?’

Especially if it ends us all up in court and ultimately will reflect badly on our programme or media organisation.

The more coverage that I watch, the more I get the feeling that the important questons arent being asked and the attention is being diverted away from the point I raised above.

Quite simply……..if there wasnt any evidence in the first place for Lord Mcalpines name being involved in the first place, why was it?

Is this a situation of a political figure with lots of connections in the Old Boys club, being rightly included in an issue but then heads rolling because a news programme had the courage to actually bring it up?

People in the news remember like to have their jobs… one is just going to do this for a laugh without a reason.

And as for Patten waffling on about the British peoples trust in the BBC….well, Savile came out, and that happened in the past….so does Trust only exist when the British people are ignorant of the secrets being kept by an organisation such as the BBC. I’m pretty sure Saviles behaviour was known at the time, but it was in a time when things like that were just ignored or hushed up because of the popularity of the figure involved. But when it comes out, the fingers start pointing.

So Trust is ignorance of the truth ‘Lord’ Patten?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: