Jim Spence!!

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Some people will tell you that Jim Spence is a cowardly slimeball, who doesn't have the guts to stand up and come out with his opinion clearly, preferring to hide behind insinuation, half-truths and omissions.

Some people will tell you that the BBC long ago lost any credibility it once had and that the people who work there are second-raters to a man, because if they were worth a damn they wouldn't be working where they are.

Some people will tell you that the BBC are little more than state-funded liars; liars led by donkeys.

 

Not my opinion, you understand, oh deary me, no, no, no - it's just what some people will tell you.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

It was previously a lesbian, but had a gender change in Mexico City after the 1986 World Cup.

 

so it's true she's had a Taco added.

[andy steel 0]

I see on Frankie's Twitter feed at the side that Chris Graham and others are taking this to the next level.

 

FWIW I would beseech them not to. You need to pick your battles - when VB got their apology about Pacific Quay's coverage, they also let them off the hook by complaining about institutionalised bias, which the panel were never going to agree with.

 

Same with this - an employee's language has been publicly disparaged in response to complaints. Taking it any further will only result in rebuffal and rejection, allowing the idiot to say he has been exonerated when, as it stands, he's been bollocked for being a tool.

 

File it under a tiny victory, but one well worth filing away nevertheless.

[Super Cooper 0]

A pathetic reply passing the buck onto someone else. Why the need to mention it at all?

[The Real PapaBear 0]

I see on Frankie's Twitter feed at the side that Chris Graham and others are taking this to the next level.

 

FWIW I would beseech them not to. You need to pick your battles - when VB got their apology about Pacific Quay's coverage, they also let them off the hook by complaining about institutionalised bias, which the panel were never going to agree with.

 

Same with this - an employee's language has been publicly disparaged in response to complaints. Taking it any further will only result in rebuffal and rejection, allowing the idiot to say he has been exonerated when, as it stands, he's been bollocked for being a tool.

 

File it under a tiny victory, but one well worth filing away nevertheless.

 

It's a fair point, well made, sir - (although I'd debate whether the BBC remarks about Spence's language could be called 'disparaging' - more a mild rebuke, if you ask me) but I would suggest that Chris is right to pursue this.

 

We have to remember that Spence is not alone at the BBC; there are three or four others, all of whom seem to have unfettered access to a microphone, who are as bad as, if not worse than, Spence when it comes to fostering and propagating the lie that Rangers died.

Yes, you're right about picking your battles carefullu; yes, you're right about Spence probably being told to watch what he says, at least for a wee while, but what happens when his place is taken by Cosgrove or Spiers or McGlaughlin who come up in rotation to take a swing at us like the New York Yankees in a blowout inning?

 

The point about not extending the complaint beyond the actual instant is a good one - the BBC is institutionally biased and it is a nest of lying toads, but there's no point in trying to get them to admit that.

Far better to focus on this one point; that Spence used a diffusion technique to attribute his own views to 'others' by claiming "some people" say we're dead - a technique as dishonest as it is transparent.

If the official BBC position turns out to be the we are the same club as we always were, then any future defense of "but that's what some people say" can be rendered meaningless. Otherwise you could have commentators on the Fasnet Boat Race saying that "the Dutch crew are favourites this year, but they might go hurtling into space because some people say the Earth is flat"

We have to nail this fabrication once and for all at some point and it is battle that should have been fought months ago; but it wasn't so now's as good a time as any, and if Chris and others have the stamina and time for it, good on them.

 

But, one way or the other, let's put this one to bed. Either the BBC officially claims we died or it officially says we did not.

And if it officially says we did not then any employee who continues to promote this falsehood has to consider their position - or have their position considered for them.

[Calgacus 8]

Apparently Dundee United have banned him and the BBC - he's doing well this week!

[andy steel 0]

Much food for thought there, TRPB. You could well be right.

[54andcounting 0]

Everything you said mate is spot on and this bit is a perfect example of comparison.....

you could have commentators on the Fasnet Boat Race saying that "the Dutch crew are favourites this year, but they might go hurtling into space because some people say the Earth is flat"

 

Well said.

[ian1964 10,410]

Apparently Dundee United have banned him and the BBC - he's doing well this week!

 

FURIOUS Dundee United are set to go to war with TV chiefs over Gavin Gunning’s SFA ban.

 

The Irishman,lost his appeal against a three-game suspension for kicking out at Celtic incident, while STV held an online debate on the skirmish.

 

The Tangerines believe that is what prompted SFA compliance officer Vince Lunny to hammer defender Gunning.

 

They reckon Celtic pair Scott Brown and Joe Ledley were let off with offences because TV didn’t highlight them.

 

Now United could deny the Beeb and STV access to Jackie McNamara and his squad.

 

A Tannadice source said: “We’ve no problem with players being punished if they are in the wrong, but we can’t accept the inconsistency.

 

“There were other incidents in the Celtic game which were not highlighted by broadcasters and they have gone unpunished.

 

“To us it looks like the broadcasters are the ones who decide who gets called up and who doesn’t.

 

“If the SFA decide what cases will be brought up on the basis of who gets the most coverage, as it seems to be, then the system isn’t fair.

 

“Who is making the decisions — the SFA or the editor of Sportscene?

 

“We’re not the only club uneasy about this.”

 

Last season, former St Johnstone manager Steve Lomas claimed Lunny was too reliant on the BBC for his charge sheet, while Motherwell’s Stuart McCall voiced similar concerns.

[der Berliner 3,244]

Ra Hoops need all the protection from the Hammerthrowers in the Scottish game that they can get, you know? For they are representing Scotland on the broad majestic international arena called the Champions League. That is really important!