BBC Scotland's presentation of Aluko's penalty - the Pacific Quay Judiciary

[26th of foot 5,902]

Vincent Lunny is bestest mates with Paul McBride QC.

 

I wonder if he'll turn to his mate for advice, maybe whisper in the QC's ear as he fists him?

[Zappa 0]

Ain't there a body watching over TV and radio stations to which one we might appeal?

 

Oh, you'll love this. It's a peach!

 

Ofcomâ??s Broadcasting Code sets standards for the content of television and radio programmes in the UK.

 

Ofcomâ??s latest Broadcasting Code "covers all programmes broadcast on or after 28 February 2011"

 

Please now go to - Section Five: Due Impartiality and Due Accuracy and Undue Prominence of Views and Opinions

 

Right at the top of Section Five you'll find the following extremely interesting sentence -

 

This section of the Code does not apply to BBC services funded by the licence fee, which are regulated on these matters by the BBC Trust.

 

For those who don't know what the BBC Trust is, you'll find information here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Trust

[metlika 0]

So an independent body, run by the government, has no jurisdiction on the BBC where people have to put a licence fee and put its trust in the BBC itself, so in a word BBC assess itself, pointless.

[Zappa 0]

So an independent body, run by the government, has no jurisdiction on the BBC where people have to put a licence fee and put its trust in the BBC itself, so in a word BBC assess itself, pointless.

 

It's set up that way so that the BBC essentially aren't accountable for impartiality, accuracy or the promotion of biased views and opinions. A government-run media corporation like the beeb needs to be that way so that the people are delivered the programming and messages that the government needs it to deliver. In times of war (for example) and on specific hand-picked topics, the BBC can spread completely biased propaganda by giving the UK public only one side of a story while deliberately omitting the other. Mistruths (lies), misrepresentations and calculated failure to report extremely important facts are commonplace.

[Super_Ally 0]

Hang on. If the ref had a clear view and gave it, why are they even looking at it? I thought the remit was only to look at things refs missed or issues of serious foul play. Shouldn't even be looking at it, especially when most other teams get away with worse week in week out.

[laudrup11 0]

Hang on. If the ref had a clear view and gave it, why are they even looking at it? I thought the remit was only to look at things refs missed or issues of serious foul play. Shouldn't even be looking at it, especially when most other teams get away with worse week in week out.

 

If Aluko is to be punished for this surely the ref should face a similar fate ?

after all he awarded the penalty without hesitation.

[calscot 0]

I don't think the referee can be blamed, there is a difference in seeing something live, in the heat of the game, at full speed, from one angle while trying to keep an eye on other possible infringements; and sitting repeatedly watching slowmo replays from various angles at something you know is going to happen, where and when.

 

Give the guy a break...

[der Berliner 3,363]

This section of the Code does not apply to BBC services funded by the licence fee, which are regulated on these matters by the BBC Trust.

 

Sounds like UEFA trying to get their case with Sion being handled by a COA they set up on their own, but claiming it is independent of them and their decision.

[der Berliner 3,363]

In any case, Britons who have heard or seen the programme above may still complain to the BBC online and if nothing comes of it, contact the BBC Trust on that matter. Should the latter fail to react, one may call in Ofcom nonetheless and present our case as one where the BBC and their BBC Trust fails to keep their own promises on impartiality et al.

[Zappa 0]

In any case, Britons who have heard or seen the programme above may still complain to the BBC online and if nothing comes of it, contact the BBC Trust on that matter. Should the latter fail to react, one may call in Ofcom nonetheless and present our case as one where the BBC and their BBC Trust fails to keep their own promises on impartiality et al.

 

Exactly. The BBC complaints procedures are explained here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/handle-complaint/

 

I have to say though, that from reading their complaints procedures it's deliberately set up to make it easy for them to fob complaints off and difficult for anyone complaining to get anywhere with them. You're looking at months and months of jumping through hoops with the inevitable outcome of having to take your complaint to ofcom who aren't even regulators of the BBC when it comes to matters of impartiality etc. Total waste of time. They're untouchable.