Fraser on the BBC

[Walt Zingmatilder]

'andles for forks has been allowed an inordinately long time to express his views on this message board.

A review into this should be undertaken immediately .

Hopefully that will include the size of my fee.

[Walter]

Hopefully that will include the size of my fee.

at first I misread that . I thought you said ''feet''

[Shaker]

With a non-religious majority of the population, how much longer can Platitude for the Day hold out as Specifically and Exclusively Religious Platitude of the Day? Especially coming a couple of hours after Prayer for the Day as it does.

A god-slot crowbarred into a flagship news and current affairs programme is a very odd thing. It's like finding a screwdriver in your tuna mayo baguette - what the hell is that doing there.

[Sebastian Toe]

I think you can see where this is going.

No.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

at first I misread that . I thought you said ''feet''

You're thinking of our colleague, Sebastian Toe.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

With a non-religious majority of the population, how much longer can Platitude for the Day hold out as Specifically and Exclusively Religious Platitude of the Day? Especially coming a couple of hours after Prayer for the Day as it does.

A god-slot crowbarred into a flagship news and current affairs programme is a very odd thing. It's like finding a screwdriver in your tuna mayo baguette - what the hell is that doing there.

Don't you think ''news and current affairs'' is a bit generous for ''The Establishment Opinion Show'' Presented by the Headmasters Conference alumni 1962-1990?

[ProfessorDavey]

Don't you think ''news and current affairs'' is a bit generous for ''The Establishment Opinion Show'' Presented by the Headmasters Conference alumni 1962-1990?

Thought for the Day contributions from religious people since its inception - about 16,000

Thought for the Day contributions from non-religious people since its inception - zero

All you need to know really about its lack of impartiality.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Thought for the Day contributions from religious people since its inception - about 16,000

Thought for the Day contributions from non-religious people since its inception - zero

All you need to know really about its lack of impartiality.

Silly since it implies you want every piece of religious output challenged in someway like the Nicky Campbell Sunday TV show thus reducing further the miniscule amount of airtime given to religion.

I also firmly believe that the National Secular Society's claim that it is just here to end religious privilege be judged on it's use of figures in wanting the amount of airtime reduced from the paltry sub half a percent.

[Nearly Sane]

Silly since it implies you want every piece of religious output challenged in someway like the Nicky Campbell Sunday TV show thus reducing further the miniscule amount of airtime given to religion.

I also firmly believe that the National Secular Society's claim that it is just here to end religious privilege be judged on it's use of figures in wanting the amount of airtime reduced from the paltry sub half a percent.

As opposed to you lying about Eastenders being secularist?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

As opposed to you lying about Eastenders being secularist?

It depends how religion has been represented in that programme and the intent of the writers.

What is certain is that religious output of the BBC using figures from Terry and Keith's site is miniscule and they want it reduced because they think it extravagant......Fucking amazing.

[ProfessorDavey]

... like the Nicky Campbell Sunday TV show ...

Does the Nicky Campbell show ban contributions from people who aren't religious. Nope. In fact his 'Big Questions' show (I guess that's the one you are talking about) often has rather lively debate from people both with religious faith and those without.

Actually his show is more of an ethical debate rather than religious programming - sometimes one of the topics may have a overtly religious element to it but most don't.

[Walter]

Does the Nicky Campbell show ban contributions from people who aren't religious. Nope. In fact his 'Big Questions' show (I guess that's the one you are talking about) often has rather lively debate from people both with religious faith and those without.

Actually his show is more of an ethical debate rather than religious programming - sometimes one of the topics may have a overtly religious element to it but most don't.

BTW, Nicky Campbell has as much control over that show as trying to push cooked spaghetti up a cats arse.

[Nearly Sane]

It depends how religion has been represented in that programme and the intent of the writers.

What is certain is that religious output of the BBC using figures from Terry and Keith's site is miniscule and they want it reduced because they think it extravagant......Fucking amazing.

No , what's clear is that you have been misrepresenting what is secularist.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No , what's clear is that you have been misrepresenting what is secularist.

No Terry and Keith are talking utter shit when they go on about BBC coverage. Enmity should have known better than to have fished that article out of the toilet bowl.

If you are a supporter then I don't wish to share a platform with you thank you.

[Nearly Sane]

No Terry and Keith are talking utter shit when they go on about BBC coverage. Enmity should have known better than to have fished that article out of the toilet bowl.

If you are a supporter then I don't wish to share a platform with you thank you.

And I don't want to support you lying that Robot Wars is secularist.

[Harrowby Hall]

BTW, Nicky Campbell has as much control over that show as trying to push cooked spaghetti up a cats arse.

What strange pastimes you have.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And I don't want to support you lying that Robot Wars is secularist.

Oh and I suppose there is a Bishop who blesses each Robot is there?

[Nearly Sane]

Oh and I suppose there is a Bishop who blesses each Robot is there?

Strawman, and further misrepresentation of secularism. News night isn't secularist either. Nor is Flog It, Doctor Who  or Gunpowder.

[ippy]

I don't suppose the BBC's £10 million a year Religion & Ethics department always headed by a religiousoso of one kind or another would be something that could be seen as a slight bias.(I think it's an Islamic head of department at the mo, look it up).

ippy

[ProfessorDavey]

I don't suppose the BBC's £10 million a year Religion & Ethics department always headed by a religiousoso of one kind or another would be something that could be seen as a slight bias.(I think it's an Islamic head of department at the mo, look it up).

ippy

Indeed - given that it is supposed to be the Department of Religion and Ethics why should it not be headed up by a non religious ethicist - there are plenty of them about.

[Rhiannon]

And I don't want to support you lying that Robot Wars is secularist.

Robot Wars is a religion in and of itself.

All bow before Razer.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I don't suppose the BBC's £10 million a year Religion & Ethics department always headed by a religiousoso of one kind or another would be something that could be seen as a slight bias.

ippy

My response is £10 million pounds for what? 550 hours of programming a year over 10 national radio and TV networks. That is a well below half a per cent of the output.

That the NSS thinks that is extravagant amount of airtime tells us all we need to know about their intent.

How do you think a hard atheist appointment eliminate bias. Or is this a case of Good Bias and bad Bias.

[ProfessorDavey]

My response is £10 million pounds for what? 550 hours of programming a year over 10 national radio and TV networks. That is a well below half a per cent of the output.

That the NSS thinks that is extravagant amount of airtime tells us all we need to know about their intent.

How do you think a hard atheist appointment eliminate bias. Or is this a case of Good Bias and bad Bias.

I have no problem with the BBC broadcasting programmes about religion - indeed this is surely a part of its remit. However the BBC is required to be impartial and therefore it must not allow itself to appear to sign itself up to one type (or range of opinions) when alternative opinions exist. Hence the problem with TFDT - this allows in a completely unchallenged manner religious views to be promulgated in prime time (for radio) in a manner that is clearly not impartial, as non religious views are not permitted within the same time slot/format.

To get you away from your blinkered thinking Vlad let's translate this topological views. TFTD is the equivalent of allowing a politician a 3 minute opinion slot, completely unchallenged, akin to a party political broadcast. Now that would be OK if the slot were open to all political opinions - but taking the TFTD analogy this would be a slot only allowed for (for example) left wing political views while right wing political views were banned. It wouldn't matter if right wing political opinion (and left wing) were permitted elsewhere on the BBC, this would still not be impartial as the format gives a peculiarly powerful opportunity to promulgate views (as it is unchallenged) and unless the same format, at the same time, were allowed for other opinions then the BBC would not be being impartial, just as it clearly isn't on TFTD.

There is also another way to look at this - the only real justification for retaining TFTD is sims because it already exists - an argument from tradition and 'inertia'. Imagine a situation where TFTD didn't exist - never in a million years would the BBC contemplate creating a 3 minute slots for religious people to promulgate their views unchallenged while banning non religious people.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I have no problem with the BBC broadcasting programmes about religion - indeed this is surely a part of its remit. However the BBC is required to be impartial and therefore it must not allow itself to appear to sign itself up to one type (or range of opinions) when alternative opinions exist. Hence the problem with TFDT - this allows in a completely unchallenged manner religious views to be promulgated in prime time (for radio) in a manner that is clearly not impartial, as non religious views are not permitted within the same time slot/format.

To get you away from your blinkered thinking Vlad let's translate this topological views. TFTD is the equivalent of allowing a politician a 3 minute opinion slot, completely unchallenged, akin to a party political broadcast. Now that would be OK if the slot were open to all political opinions - but taking the TFTD analogy this would be a slot only allowed for (for example) left wing political views while right wing political views were banned. It wouldn't matter if right wing political opinion (and left wing) were permitted elsewhere on the BBC, this would still not be impartial as the format gives a peculiarly powerful opportunity to promulgate views (as it is unchallenged) and unless the same format, at the same time, were allowed for other opinions then the BBC would not be being impartial, just as it clearly isn't on TFTD.

There is also another way to look at this - the only real justification for retaining TFTD is sims because it already exists - an argument from tradition and 'inertia'. Imagine a situation where TFTD didn't exist - never in a million years would the BBC contemplate creating a 3 minute slots for religious people to promulgate their views unchallenged while banning non religious people.

TFTD is part of the BBC religious output what part then does the non religious have to play in it? The Non religious is certainly well enough represented and any introduction of it in TFTD will reduce an already miniscule amount of broadcasting time.

I'm wondering how would an atheist response to each of several religious viewpoints represent non bias toward atheism.

How would an atheist weekly wrap up of religion.....a Friday ''Don't worry about what you've heard over the past few days, There probably isn't a God so enjoy your weekend'' not come across as atheist bias?

On the other hand since atheism can be summed up in a sentence would you propose a kind of Jingle or something.

[ProfessorDavey]

TFTD is part of the BBC religious output what part then does the non religious have to play in it?

No it isn't - it is part of the BBC's Religion and Ethics output.