BBC Scotland have another cowardly dig

[calscot 0]

the other side to that is that if every MP had allegiance to their personal viewpoints then we'd have 600+ political parties and we'd have more elections than Italy.

 

Or you have a referendum every week...

 

I'm generally for the party system otherwise I wouldn't have a clue who to vote for and that's why I think it would work for fans groups representing share holders.

[amms 0]

The 2 guys from VB & RM who successfully raised the action which the BBC Trust eventually ruled on' date=' indicated otherwise to me AMMS. I quizzed them on the processes and format which they had to go through to bring their complaint to fruition.

 

As you are aware the BBC complaints system is a multi stage process which involves escalation of the complaint, should resolution not be found in the initial stages. This happened right the way through various management levels at BBC Scotland with the complaint being constantly escalated, as the BBC Scotland managers determining on the various stages continued to rule in favour of, for want of a better term - the defendants rather than the pursuers.

 

When the ruling eventually came through from the BBC Trust there was considerable resistance to it - even their business editor got in on the act via social media.

 

And it continues to this day with the likes of Spence - and the failed investigations into him as well as this latest incident.[/quote']

 

That's kind of my point. This is viewed as a little local squabble, so it being taken all the way is viewed as a waste of time, something of a sledgehammer to crack a nut. The view many in the BBC will take is 'are we really going to severely reprimand a journalist because he misnamed a football team?'. The complaints system exists and complaints can be taken all the the way to the top but I suspect those at the top will look at it and wonder is this really the biggest issue facing the BBC.

 

I think my point is we can complain and keep complaining, and some stuff is definitely worth complaining about, but at some stage we're going to need to engage too. Our influence can't be felt if we're outside shouting at the moon. We should be big enough and smart enough to sort this some other way.

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

I don't gettit?

[D'Artagnan 173]

That's kind of my point. This is viewed as a little local squabble, so it being taken all the way is viewed as a waste of time, something of a sledgehammer to crack a nut. The view many in the BBC will take is 'are we really going to severely reprimand a journalist because he misnamed a football team?'. The complaints system exists and complaints can be taken all the the way to the top but I suspect those at the top will look at it and wonder is this really the biggest issue facing the BBC.

 

I think my point is we can complain and keep complaining, and some stuff is definitely worth complaining about, but at some stage we're going to need to engage too. Our influence can't be felt if we're outside shouting at the moon. We should be big enough and smart enough to sort this some other way.

 

I agree re engagement amms - its one of the things TRS have demonstrated is particularly effective.

[Super_Ally 0]

I agree re engagement amms - its one of the things TRS have demonstrated is particularly effective.

 

Could you give some examples please?

[D'Artagnan 173]

Could you give some examples please?

 

I dont know if you have twitter SA - but the likes of Spiers and Tom English in particular clearly engage with the TRS guys - they know if they write something which is open to challenge they will be subjected to such challenge and often ridicule before a watching world.

 

When TRS talk about "engaging" it doesnt necessarily mean acquiescing but challenging in such a way that they are forced to respond.

[Super_Ally 0]

I dont know if you have twitter SA - but the likes of Spiers and Tom English in particular clearly engage with the TRS guys - they know if they write something which is open to challenge they will be subjected to such challenge and often ridicule before a watching world.

 

When TRS talk about "engaging" it doesnt necessarily mean acquiescing but challenging in such a way that they are forced to respond.

 

Thanks. I use twitter but only for business so I tend to avoid my personal interests on there.

 

I understand the idea that engaging with people with whom you have a difference is normally the most likely way to reach compromise or to create a change. In theory.

 

But I don't believe engaging with the BBC, Speirs, English will achieve anything.

 

Can you say that Speirs or English have been any less of a cunt since this tactic of engaging with them? I haven't seen it.

 

Engaging with people only works if they are willing to change or you have some leverage to change them. Speirs etc will not change. We might not be able to put them out of jobs or get BBC HQ to clamp down on their Scotland branch but I would say it is infinitely more likely to bring about a positive reaction from our point if view than "engaging" with these people. You can't engage with entrenched bigots. Their views and actions won't change.

 

It might appear like the more cerebral or sophisticated way forward but I think the likes of yourself, amms and andy steel are kidding yourselves if you think that it will be in anyway succesful.

[Waltersgotstyle 297]

Tam Cowan and Cosgrove at it again today asking...

 

"Has Traynor left the club or the company"

[Super_Ally 0]

To be honest I think amms, D'art andy steel etc (sorry to throw you all into one group but you seem to have a similar view on how we should address this) are the equivalent of the US going in and fighting according to the rules of war when they get into e.g. Vietnam and its all jungle fighting or Iraq with suicide bombers and hiding amongst the civilians.

 

You're trying to fight a clean war against the dirtiest, most cowardly and untrustworthy people out there. Keep going that way and you have no chance of victory (where victory us an even handed approach in the press).

[D'Artagnan 173]

To be honest I think amms, D'art andy steel etc (sorry to throw you all into one group but you seem to have a similar view on how we should address this) are the equivalent of the US going in and fighting according to the rules of war when they get into e.g. Vietnam and its all jungle fighting or Iraq with suicide bombers and hiding amongst the civilians.

 

You're trying to fight a clean war against the dirtiest, most cowardly and untrustworthy people out there. Keep going that way and you have no chance of victory (where victory us an even handed approach in the press).

 

I think that is very fair critique SA. I would see such engagement as a Home Guard rearguard action akin to holding the fort until the big guns arrive.

 

The big guns I refer to are the Club themselves entering the fray and forcing the necessary change and attitude with what I believe is very much an institution of Rangers bashing.

 

Is there really anything else we can do till that time, if ever arrives ?