exile Posted January 25, 2015 Author Share Posted January 25, 2015 I am able to respond to the response - within a certain time period. Is there anything that people wish for me to ask based on the response? I'll bring the quoted point up. I suppose you could start with any factual inaccuracies that are routinely well known or cliches known to be untrue/misleading - that would never go unchallenged in (say) a Scottish based political programme - and ask why Dimbleby didn;t pull them up on them; and if he is unable or unwilling to intervene, then why didn't they have someone on SNP to answer for those points? That would allow you to bring in the wider point about the panels being routinely unionist etc. Whatever points you make should obviously be factually accurate themselves, so before making any of these points, I'd check their factual basis - for example if making the point about how often Scottish unionist positions are given free airing on non-Scottish editions of Questions Time, it would be handy to have the stats to hand - It may not have occurred to them that that is ever an issue (ie as long as the Scottish edition has balance). Of course Salmond sometimes featured on non Scottish editions so would need to be balanced by awareness of that, even if the pro-independence view is always outnumbered and routinely unrepresented at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringo Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 The BBC seems to be able to challenge or edit opinions when it suits them though. At times it doesn't suit them so it fair game and fair viewing from their perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Bongo Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 (edited) The BBC seems to be able to challenge or edit opinions when it suits them though. At times it doesn't suit them so it fair game and fair viewing from their perspective. They (Andrew Neil) did a good job on the leader of the Greens today - Havent watched it but by all accounts Natalie Bennett was a car crash. In fairness Murphy was peeled apart too but not to the same extent Edited January 25, 2015 by Ally Bongo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 They (Andrew Neil) did a good job on the leader of the Greens today - Havent watched it but by all accounts Natalie Bennett was a car crash. In fairness Murphy was peeled apart too but not to the same extent Quite bad to watch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bannannan Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Bit out of her depth in the cut throat world of British politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) This is all I could write with 1,500 characters (I actually have 16 characters left though...): Hello, I'm writing again in response to the response that I received a couple of days ago on the issue of the SNP topic on Thursday's Question Time. First of all I agree that all the comments made on the program are the views on the individual who made the comments, and they aren't necessarily the official stance of the BBC. However, in the response I received it was noted that "[Question Time] aims to enable viewers to make up their own minds by giving the opportunity for a variety of viewpoints to be heard." My main concern with this is that the SNP were not represented on the panel - despite a question being asked about SNP policy (that seemed to be chosen before the programme). This means that viewers may hear view on the SNP that could be damaging to their election chances - especially when the party itself are unable to defend or explain their reasons for their policies. It could, also, mean that people formulate their views without hearing the position of the party, leading to inaccurate opinions and increased stigma against the party, and its supporters, that could be unwarranted – this could lead to divides among the constituent parts of the UK. Additionally, as the SNP were unrepresented it means that comments such as the ones made by the UKIP MEP could have been debated. Especially the comments about English tax paying for Scottish services – in which all the free services listed were introduced when the Scottish Government had a budget surplus. Any changes that anything think I can make before I send it? Edited January 26, 2015 by Clyde1998 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishcumnock Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 If you're referring to me - Reading.wasn't meaning you ,question for the unionist backing bbc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 wasn't meaning you ,question for the unionist backing bbc. That makes a bit more sense now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishcumnock Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Ever helpful , fish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Second response made - you can get very little written with 1,500 characters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andymac Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 If you're referring to me - Reading. Royalist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Royalist. I wonder what the nickname would be when the royals get kicked out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andymac Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 I wonder what the nickname would be when the royals get kicked out. Never happen so you are ok with your name. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishcumnock Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 I wonder what the nickname would be when the royals get kicked out. the unemployed, the lepers or the tourist guides ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted January 29, 2015 Author Share Posted January 29, 2015 From Wrexham tonight... with Sajid Javid, Peter Hain, Rhun ap Iorwerth, Germaine Greer and blogger Kate Maltby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flure Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Watching it for the first time in aeons. My GP has told me to watch my blood pressure. So, I might not see it through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringo Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Already mentioned per capita spending in Wales compared to England. Same tired argument used with Scot V Eng. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flure Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 Already mentioned per capita spending in Wales compared to England. Same tired argument used with Scot V Eng. That's the hospital door argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 As was said during referendum if we are such a drain then let us go. Wales would happily follow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mariokempes56 Posted January 29, 2015 Share Posted January 29, 2015 (edited) If they had the brains.. Edited January 29, 2015 by mariokempes56 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Wales allows their cricket team to be called "England". They're even more pathetic and subservient than we are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bristolhibby Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Wales allows their cricket team to be called "England". They're even more pathetic and subservient than we are. Good point. Why is it not the England and Wales cricket team? The association is called the English and Welsh Cricket Board is it not? J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barney Rubble Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Good point. Why is it not the England and Wales cricket team? The association is called the English and Welsh Cricket Board is it not? J Same way we get the Bank Of England instead of the Bank of the United Kingdom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scunnered Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 Same way we get the Bank Of England instead of the Bank of the United Kingdom. Both the Bank of Scotland and the Bank of England predate the Union... Not sure if that matters right enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stocky Posted January 30, 2015 Share Posted January 30, 2015 (edited) Wales was actually incorporated into England Legally around 1504? Legally they are not a country, they are a principality... they have English law, etc I.M.O., Cornwall has more legal right to independence, up untill around 1400 Cornwall was listed as separate from England, treaties used to be signed England and Kernow... it was slowly incorporated and ruled from London, I dont think it has ever legally been incorporated. Scotland joined the Union as an Equal partner... aye right.. some people still think that.... we were economically and culturally colonised and still are. what was the quote Wales was Colonised by England but they dont really careIreland was colonised by England and they did something about itScotland was colonised by England and we are in complete denial.. Bought and sold for English gold..... Edited January 30, 2015 by stocky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.