The service provided by BBC Scotland

[MacK1950 2,231]

CLOSING RANKS TO THE CLUB THEY LOVE PATHETIC:rfcbouncy:

[boabie 230]

That's exactly the response I received a couple of years ago when complaining to them. Don't let it stop you continuing and I sincerely hope you get a result in the end. We didn't.

[ian1964 10,415]

That's exactly the response I received a couple of years ago when complaining to them. Don't let it stop you continuing and I sincerely hope you get a result in the end. We didn't.

 

I'm not expecting a result mate,I will probably pursue it with an email to the trust now as that is the next step!,again I'm not expecting any kind of result but the more hassle I can cause them then that will satisfy me to an extent.

It would be great if thousands complained and also if it was possible to stop paying our license fee as money,or lack of, is the only way you get any chance of some sort of result.

[calscot 0]

could potentially compromise the BBC’s impartiality

 

That's a weird reply - the whole point of the ban is the lack of impartiality.

[pete 2,499]

That's a weird reply - the whole point of the ban is the lack of impartiality.[/color]

 

That was my first thought as well.

[ian1964 10,415]

Just sent this email to the BBC Trust,thanks to BD for his assistance in constructing the email,actually BD wrote the email for me.

 

FAO BBC Trust

 

Dear Sirs

 

Ref -

 

I refer to my complaint and the response received from Ian Small, Head of Public Policy & Corporate Affairs, BBC Scotland.

 

In summary, this is in respect of BBC Scotland’s refusal to cover Rangers’ games at Ibrox and how this is acting outside of its Charter.

 

The response received is totally inadequate for the following reasons:

 

1. I gave 2 specific reasons why the BBC is acting outside of its charter. Mr Small said that he could not agree with me but failed to give any reasons why he felt that the 2 reasons that I gave were incorrect.

 

It is an unacceptable response to just say “I cannot agree” and not address the points raised. It suggests that no thought is being given to the Charter in the decision making process of the BBC.

 

 

2. Mr Small claims that the stance taken by the BBC “protecting basic Charter principles … of… independence and impartiality,” the whole ongoing issue with Rangers FC is based on the lack of impartiality!,I believe?.

 

It is a bit of a jump to suggest that because the BBC cannot send one out of many journalists to a ground that their independence is at risk. This claim is not justified or explained by Mr Small.

 

Secondly I would point out that to the best of my knowledge the Charter does not mention the word “impartiality”. This again would back up my assertion that no thought is being given to the Charter in the decision making process of the BBC. It would be better for staff to understand what it does actually say and not make things up.

 

3. Mr Small claims that if the BBC were to send any other of their numerous journalists then this “could potentially compromise the BBC’s impartiality.” This does not show any degree of confidence in the other BBC journalists. I also note the word “potentially” and therefore the acceptance that it may not happen. Why is such a stance being taken on the off-chance that the BBC’s impartiality is affected?

 

Is the simple reporting of a football club really going to put the BBC’s impartiality into question? Is this not a severe over-reaction?

 

4. I have also been informed that Dundee FC banned a BBC reporter but in that case different reporters were sent to Dens Park instead while the situation could be resolved. This seems like a mature way of dealing with a dispute with a third party and I would be grateful if you could confirm if that was the case and if so, explain why a similar approach was not taken in the case of Rangers.

I am left to conclude that the handling of complaints by BBC Scotland is totally inadequate and I have to wonder if the issues raised by Rangers FC were dealt with in such a haphazard way which left them with no option but take the action that they did.

 

I would be grateful if the issues raised in my previous complaint in respect of the breach of the BBC Charter and also in respect of the points raised above.

 

Thank you for your attention in this matter.

 

Kind Regards

Ian1964

Edited March 31, 2016 by ian1964

[Scott7 5,168]

I was with you all the way on this, Ian, 'til I watched the highlights of the QotS match on BBC with no commentary and no expert (ahem) summariser. It was great! Let them stay away.

[pete 2,499]

2 things I noticed in Small's reply.

 

We believe this action to be without justification.

 

Has this fact been looked into by an independent body or persons? Or even just been looked into. Have there been discussions with Rangers to hear their complaint?

 

There is no violation of Charter as a result of taking such a stance. Indeed, it is on the basis of protecting basic Charter principles, those of the BBC’s independence and impartiality, that such an action has been taken.

 

The only way the BBC's impartiality can be compromised is if Rangers complaint has no justification. That could only be judged by an independent body or persons. As their action was almost directly after the Rangers decision I would guess that nobody has even bothered to hear Rangers complaint.

 

Or does he mean the other journalists may be impartial.

[ian1964 10,415]

You've got to laugh at BBC Scotland news there,saying this weekend Rangers could win the league if results go their way,then asks does the top league need Rangers?, and step forward the guest the question was asked to,Stuart Cosgrove....................................no!

[Bluedell 5,329]

That's now over a month since the latest email was sent. Ian, has there been any reply or any sort of acknowledgement?

 

If not then perhaps forward it again with a polite request for an expected timescale for a reply.