Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   mpjgregoire@mamot.fr's status on Monday, 13-Mar-2023 08:15:46 JST mpjgregoire

   • Kermode

   @gemlog Maybe, maybe not. Could be the BBC has a long-standing policy that Mr. Lineker infringed — I'd disagree with that policy if so. I don't know enough about how this decision was made or of similar cases in the past to have an informed opinion.

   I'd bet that Downing Street did not phone up someone at the BBC to complain, and also I'm confident the BBC bureaucracy is not principally composed of Tories, but it is possible poltical appointees in the BBC made this happen.

   • clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     keithzg (keithzg@fediverse.keithzg.ca)'s status on Monday, 13-Mar-2023 08:15:49 JST keithzg

     in reply to

     • Kermode
     @mpjgregoire @gemlog Oh it's definitely pure politics, even if merely mediated by the systems and procedures and culture put in place by (or simply distorted by the gravity of) a party or movement.
     
     Pressure can be applied informally, or outright without explicit communication. A political appointee here, a firing there, or even just a promotion or two where the choice senda a clear message, and people will get the idea, and won't need written directives from the politicians or parties in question to know what they're expected to do in future scenarios and to feel the pressure to act accordingly. Particularly when it's in regards to an incident being very loudly and publicly litigated in the social and formal media!
     clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     keithzg (keithzg@fediverse.keithzg.ca)'s status on Monday, 13-Mar-2023 08:15:51 JST keithzg

     in reply to

     • Kermode
     • keithzg
     @mpjgregoire @gemlog In fact, very relatedly: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/mar/10/david-attenborough-bbc-wild-isles-episode-rightwing-backlash-fears
     clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     keithzg (keithzg@fediverse.keithzg.ca)'s status on Monday, 13-Mar-2023 22:59:26 JST keithzg

     in reply to

     • Kermode
     @mpjgregoire @gemlog On paper I wouldn't entirely disagree with you, though I personally think they should have aired it (and also share @gemlog's weariness with faked doc stuff), but all of that is beside the point in this exact conversation. My point is just that it's notably a concession according to some sources, and demonstrates an example of the political pressure the BBC is constantly under these days without it needing to be a formal order from government:
     
     > Senior sources at the BBC told the Guardian that the decision not to show the sixth episode was made to fend off potential critique from the political right. This week the Telegraph newspaper attacked the BBC for creating the series and for taking funding from “two charities previously criticised for their political lobbying” – the WWF and RSPB.
     clacke likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     mpjgregoire@mamot.fr's status on Monday, 13-Mar-2023 22:59:27 JST mpjgregoire

     in reply to

     • Kermode
     • keithzg

     @keithzg @gemlog You know, I don't think I've ever seen an Attenborough documentary? I've heard they're good.

     If I understand correctly, the BBC paid Sir David to make five episodes of a show; environmental charities paid him to make a sixth. The BBC is allowing people to download episode 6, but not broadcasting it.

     Imagine the CBC paid for 12 episodes of #FrontiersOfConstruction and the Koch Foundation paid for a 13th. Would CBC be obliged to show it?