Am I losing my hearing? Surely this didn't come from the public funded BBC??

[andrew_2010 0]

Newsdrive link

 

listen in to the text that was read out 57-58 mins in.

 

It is worth remembering this comment is related to a science/medicine vs the vatican issue.

 

To me that is a purely sectarian comment and, coming from a publicly funded institution, is unacceptable. I will not pay a licence fee to have Rangers fans, or any other social group for that matter, disrespected in that manor. Imagine if it had been anti-islam? or anti-asylum seekers? etc... heads would roll.

 

If the PC tone had not been set, and they dished out "banter" in equal measures from both sides, this would not be a significant issue. This is not the case.

 

Serious question, is it possible to refuse to pay for a tv licence, yet still purchase pay-per-view such as sky?

[alexscottislegend 2,068]

Unfortunately , yes you still have to!

 

Can you give a short resume of offending item?

[Bluedell 5,342]

I haven't listened to it, but I understand that it was "Margaret says half human half animal hybrids are not new Ibrox has been there for half a century"

 

Certain people in BBC Scotland have an agenda against our club and reading out things like this are just part of it.

 

Other examples that spring to mind are:

- reading out a text on Monday claiming that the Gers fans were singing a sectarian song at 89 minutes at the cup final. (no proof or justification of course).

- making a racial comment about Sebo

- skipping over our great European performances in their new reports.

- Having a photo on their website which called "kevinc*ntthomson" if you looked at its properties.

 

There are loads of other examples. The thing is that they are clever at doing it. They are more subtle than the likes of McNee and Spiers and therefore more dangerous, as most people won't know they have an agenda.

 

Just keep an eye out for it, guys.

[craig 5,199]

The "Kevinc*ntThomson" issue was on here a while back and the BBC apologised.... after being inundated with complaints.

 

Their apology ? Sometimes people say things in a light-hearted manner, but they should realise they are producing items for the public to see.....

 

So in other words.... we couldnt give a shit what was said but as you have all complained we will give a half-hearted apology and hope all is swept under the carpet.

 

And yet the Tims think the media is against THEM ?!?!?!?

[Gribz 743]

Serious question, is it possible to refuse to pay for a tv licence, yet still purchase pay-per-view such as sky?

 

Away from the issue, but this is one thing i wanted to do since I got my own place. I cant believe people are forced to pay for this without the option. I bet millions upon millions of people would opt out of the BBC if they had the choice and jusy paid for sky channels.

 

It would be a different story if the BBC were the only provider / supplier of channels. When I stayed there I would pay Sky a fee as they supply a good product but the BBC supply shite. Out here in SG we only have one provider "Starhub" so paying the license doesnt bother me and they supply all the channels from all over - yet its a mere 35 quid per year compared to 150 pounds in the UK.

 

If everyone just stopped buying the license the Government and BBC would have no option but to drop the charge - they couldnt arrest millions of people and it would have to go to a vote which the people would win. Yet again its another example that the power is within the public but nobody uses the power and everyone just leaves it to the next man.

 

Its like tax - everyone hopes and expects maybe one day it will come down with the next man doing the protesting - but its only going to continue to go up and up and up until the masses finally take a stand. Unfortunatly to gather such group takes using the media to reach everyone hence why the Government have this under control and feed the media the scripts.

[Wija 0]

Can't listen as I am at work, but if this comment was made on the BBC I would appreciate someone putting it on hear as text as per what was said so I can complain to the BBC. I would also urge all other people to do so.

 

The racist Church of Rome is not only a vile lie, but is instatutionally bigotted and praises apartheid amongst its followers to other religions. It is also singularly ensuring AIDS is rife the world over, and also clearly is stopping people who have problems in conceiving can get no help, and also people with illness's that require this type of work to help future generations.

[pete 2,499]

I listened for 20 minutes but never heard anything untoward. If it is what Bluedell said then i actually find it quite funny. Are we not going over the top if we cannot accept a piece of humour?

[andrew_2010 0]

I listened for 20 minutes but never heard anything untoward. If it is what Bluedell said then i actually find it quite funny. Are we not going over the top if we cannot accept a piece of humour?

 

Yes it was what bluedell said. And I agree with you pete! it was just a joke and the reaction to these are going ott. However, in a debate about the RC church vs science/medicine, surely the BBC would have had the sense to not bring football into a religious/current affairs debate? afterall They appear to condemn the inverse!

 

If they can make jokes, we should be allowed to make jokes! banter is banter! most of the footy related stuff is MEANT TO offend! its a wind up! and thats part of the fun! now we're not allowed anything discriminatory or offensive, so why should others?

 

would they have read out a text calling another social group like Pakistanis, Jews or teachers or nurses half human half animals??

 

I have calmed down from last night btw! but still deeply offended!

[Wija 0]

But isn't that where the issue is, we can laugh at it and go along with the 'craic. But timothy and the hordes of orcs that follow the Evil Emperor can't laugh at it, and can't have the 'craic. That is why if it was someone making a joke about the Dhim's it would be "hang them at dawn."

[Bluedell 5,342]

I listened for 20 minutes but never heard anything untoward. If it is what Bluedell said then i actually find it quite funny. Are we not going over the top if we cannot accept a piece of humour?

We have to be able to laugh at ourselves, but I don't find this as being particularly funny, especially not on such an emotive subject. It's just part of the continued demonisation of our support by a media who are not willing to be even-handed.