Enemies within?

[Frankie 8,150]

Andy Steel (@Andypendek) discusses Charles Green and the BBC while exploring how far we need to go to be politically correct and/or attractive.

 

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/147-enemies-within

 

When a famous person, or organisation, shoots itself in the foot its always half hypnotic and half horrifying to watch. When it's someone or something you dislike, the pleasure certainly outweighs the pain, but by the time you get old (over 30, say) the level of genuine, adolescent joy you can whip up from the calamities of others ought to have withered and a kind of fascinated, scientific observing takes its place.

 

Anyone looking for high profile clangers won't have had far to go this last few weeks. The BBC, always on the end of the nation's ire, found itself obliged to apologise for the appalling John Inverdale and his 1970's comment about Marion Bartoli's looks. His subsequent explanation - that he was highlighting the fact that champions don't have to be 6ft blonde supermodels - was as unconvincing as his clubbable, establishment routine. He was caught out being a plain old arsehole, ignoring the athletic abilities of the person before him in order to concentrate on the far more important issue of her appearance.

 

For what its worth, and that is nothing, I think Marion Bartoli is quite attractive. But that has no bearing on her ability to whack a tennis ball over a net, and if you want to earn a living talking about that sport it ought to be obvious that sporting ability and not potential sexiness is what you should be focusing on.

 

The BBC apologised, Inverdale apologised, and there the matter rests. Good enough? For some, I suppose it is. Personally I think a body which collects an tax from every woman in the country, sexy and otherwise, sporty and otherwise, is pretty much obliged to bag people who not only think like this - hard to control thought, mind you - but who step boldly forward to broadcast these kind of retro opinions on air. You can't expect people to fund crassness of that level.

 

The BBC have sadly misjudged what Britain expects of it, really. We want an old fashioned body which would no more think of belittling an athlete's looks than it would of sending out Sue Barker in only bra and panties to interview Andy Murray. We actively want a fuddy duddy BBC which we can poke a stick at more in affection than anger, but we have now got a body which wants to be the epitome of equality while allowing itself a degree of leeway when its employees disgrace it which would leave a South American dictator green with envy. Talking of green....

 

We had experience of how organisations with staff who let their mouth run off too far are treated recently when the departed CEO Charles Green did his best to demolish 30 years of race relations in football with his 'Paki' comments. Admittedly, I do know some Pakistani Scots who have no issue with that term. I once had a moustache growing contest with a pal of mine when we were 17 which he won, on the grounds that 'all us Pakis get hairy young'. Hardly enough defence though, if even one potential Rangers fan of the future if put off by the word.

 

Certainly, few hesitated to put the boot in to Rangers, with any apologies being deemed too little too late. Maybe they were. Green paid the price anyway, in terms of job if not bank balance. Which made the interview of George O'Grady on Radio Scotland during the Scottish Open a bit more interesting, since Mr O'Grady also fell foul of the racial nomenclature issue recently, dropping a clanger over his 'coloured players' remark. I doubt I was the only 40+ white person left a little bewildered, given this term is what we were educated to believe was not offensive, but times change and both Mr O'Grady and myself have plainly been left behind.

 

Richard Gordon has no such problems, managing to get through an interview with Mr O'Grady untroubled by such concerns. No doubt he'd extend the same courtesy to Charles Green...aye, right! Once again, a big body (the BBC) leaves itself open to claims of bias and inconsistency. Both it and Rangers have been under attack for many years, the latter quite often from the former, but you have to wonder whether their enemies could do a better job of harming them than these bodies do themselves.

 

If we are to have standards, we need to stick to them. If the BBC were so horrified by Charles Green, they can't then invite George O'Grady on to bum up the Scottish Open, nor think an apology will suffice for dinosaurs like Inverdale. Golf, the Beeb, and Rangers have all misread what the country wants of them, and all have paid the price to some degree.

 

At least club level golf has at last opened its doors to all and sundry, resulting in a surge of excellent young English golfers who will dominate the next decade; the BBC still struggles with its mix of Thatcherite profit ethos & Reithian public service; while we are desperately trying to engage with an ever shifting present while still held back by the baggage of history. Of the three, I think we have the most work to do in 'fitting in' to 21st century Britain. To some that is cause for celebration: for me, it is a matter of huge concern.

 

We stand or fall by our actions as a club and a fanbase. Whether someone finds us sexy or not is neither here nor there; but if they perceive us to be a ugly stain upon the nation, our recovery will be so much harder. Maybe in the end Inverdale was right, and it does come down to appearances. If so, Rangers, like the BBC, might be their own worst enemy.

[chilledbear 16]

So what do we do when media dinosaurs such as the BBC, do not report truthfully and edit film to make our Manager look like an idiot.

 

What chance do we have to change an image, when the scottish media do not want that image to change.

[Frankie 8,150]

So what do we do when media dinosaurs such as the BBC, do not report truthfully and edit film to make our Manager look like an idiot.

 

What chance do we have to change an image, when the scottish media do not want that image to change.

 

I think that's a fair point.

 

As it stands there is a bit of a stand off between our club and sections of the (Scottish) media. Club has rightly been frustrated with some media coverage yet spends a small fortune on PR. Moreover, despite BBC Scotland bans and Daily Record legal letters, the inconsistent coverage continues.

 

Generally, I think the club is doing the right thing by concentrating on its in-house stuff. However, even that only goes so far when you have a worldwide profile to protect and develop.

[der Berliner 3,245]

Well, over here there is the "Presse Rat", i.e. the "Press or Media Council". If any media outlet would have published what the BBC did, the continuous snydes of Scrote et al, anyone could have taken them to the Presse Rat who would take them to the cleaners. Freedom of Information and press freedom is held in very high regards over here. But if it is misused, media folk will face the music.

 

As I said countless times, AFAIK, Ofcom only waits for the BBC to give them enough amunition to break their self-controlling monopoly. Scrote and couldn't help themselves and provided tons of ammunition. Sadly enough, it was not used by the Bears to get Ofcom onto the scene. It is still there though, if people would act.

[foggy dewhurst 0]

as i said before its time to fight back lets take the fight to the ones that are out to harm the rangers

[crucible 0]

Why would we be our own worst enemy, our worst enemy is the press nothing surer. who bury celtic stories like that of their rabid vile songs against Drummer Rigsby.

 

If so, Rangers, like the BBC, might be their own worst enemy.

[amms 0]

So what do we do when media dinosaurs such as the BBC, do not report truthfully and edit film to make our Manager look like an idiot.

 

What chance do we have to change an image, when the scottish media do not want that image to change.

 

When that happened we rightly complained. The complaint was upheld and apology made or am I mixing it up with another report?

 

I disagree that 'the Scottish Media' don't want that image change, some no doubt don't but why do you feel that's the majority view?

[aweebluesoandso 290]

BBC Scotland is beyond repair, their bigotry is to deep and ingrained now, best consigned to history imo.

[amms 0]

Why would we be our own worst enemy, our worst enemy is the press nothing surer. who bury celtic stories like that of their rabid vile songs against Drummer Rigsby.

 

If so, Rangers, like the BBC, might be their own worst enemy.

 

Serious question, what do you think should have happened in that instance?

[chilledbear 16]

When that happened we rightly complained. The complaint was upheld and apology made or am I mixing it up with another report?

 

I disagree that 'the Scottish Media' don't want that image change, some no doubt don't but why do you feel that's the majority view?

 

I would say yes we complained and in my mind got a grudging apology. BBC employees were adamant on twitter they had done nothing wrong. It's also clear they have not changed in their attitude to Rangers.

 

The image of Rangers and Supporters sells newspapers, journalists have made a decent living highlighting our wrongs, while ignoring others.

 

All in my opinion mind !!