Business & Finance0 min ago
Dear Bbc
85 Answers
Please give Clive Myrie half an hour on one of your digital platforms so he can anchor a sob-fest with close-ups of distressed health workers being close-upped to tears and leave the six o'clock news for news.
That item was like watching the worst of American reality guff.
Shameless.
That item was like watching the worst of American reality guff.
Shameless.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by douglas9401. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
//Do you think it's right that camera crews should be roaming round the country filming inside various hospitals, particularly their ICUs?//
Not just the transmission, but have these people all consented to being filmed?
As I've said before, i think a lot of this is affecting the wrong people in the wrong way. News should be giving the facts, either way, not concentrating on terrifying the already terrified.
Not just the transmission, but have these people all consented to being filmed?
As I've said before, i think a lot of this is affecting the wrong people in the wrong way. News should be giving the facts, either way, not concentrating on terrifying the already terrified.
Diddly, I don’t know if you missed my post at 09:11 Wed or if you’re choosing to ignore it. I suspect the latter. This government propaganda you mention that the BBC is broadcasting could be … just could be … designed by the BBC to promote the idea that the government’s handling of the pandemic is less than ideal - hence the enormous pressure the hospitals and the staff are under. Possible?
Ask yourself this, then Danny.
Why else would it be screened? Because one thing's for sure - it's not to grab the attention of an audience. Just about everybody I have spoke to about it believes the same as me - it is ridiculously over the top and serves no purpose other than to instil terror. In that aim it's failed because most people I know simply don't watch it. In fact I can't imagine anybody wanting to watch, night after night, footage of patients in ICUs tee'd up to machinery, hospital staff up to their elbows in hard work and bodies being put into mortuary storage.
Why else would it be screened? Because one thing's for sure - it's not to grab the attention of an audience. Just about everybody I have spoke to about it believes the same as me - it is ridiculously over the top and serves no purpose other than to instil terror. In that aim it's failed because most people I know simply don't watch it. In fact I can't imagine anybody wanting to watch, night after night, footage of patients in ICUs tee'd up to machinery, hospital staff up to their elbows in hard work and bodies being put into mortuary storage.
Why do the BBC think this self gloating and let's be honest smug sniggering and having a good old laugh at nurses crying is such huge fun? Why? The BBC's attitude is let us all laugh at others distress after all they are only women it is not as if they matter is it? The BBC says they are clearly thickie nurses. The producers must be brought down.
//They're at it again tonight.//
Indeed they are. I recorded last night's 6pm effort (as I do every night at present so I can simply skip through it). I kept last night's edition and compared it to tonight's. There are two scenes where medical staff are attending to patients: one where five or six of them are turning a patient over; another where they are adjusting some machinery a patient is tee'd up to. Do you know what? They are exactly the same. Same patients, same staff same numbers displayed on the machine. There may be more but of those two I am absolutely certain. The article was supposed to be a report from yet another hospital. This is not news. It is propaganda interwoven with unpleasant library footage accompanied by a slightly, more terrifying commentary.
Indeed they are. I recorded last night's 6pm effort (as I do every night at present so I can simply skip through it). I kept last night's edition and compared it to tonight's. There are two scenes where medical staff are attending to patients: one where five or six of them are turning a patient over; another where they are adjusting some machinery a patient is tee'd up to. Do you know what? They are exactly the same. Same patients, same staff same numbers displayed on the machine. There may be more but of those two I am absolutely certain. The article was supposed to be a report from yet another hospital. This is not news. It is propaganda interwoven with unpleasant library footage accompanied by a slightly, more terrifying commentary.
//In light of all the Deaths why don't we hear of Undertakers being overwhelmed?//
Good question ... and how come all the essential workers who have kept the tills running for us at the supermarkets, without being swathed in plastic and deep cleaning us before we get to the till, and deal with hundreds of people every hour, aren't crying their eyes out every time anybody speaks to em?
Good question ... and how come all the essential workers who have kept the tills running for us at the supermarkets, without being swathed in plastic and deep cleaning us before we get to the till, and deal with hundreds of people every hour, aren't crying their eyes out every time anybody speaks to em?
//Because, incredible as it may seem, there are sources other then the BBC.//
So why the huge worry about how the BBC report it then if they are just one of many - of which some are reporting the news just how it should be? I'll guess that it's either one or both of:
a) We all pay an individual licence tax and therefore feel entitled to BBC content tailored to our own personal preference.
b) Even though it's too left, too right, too antiquated, too woke, etc. to be of any credibility at all we are worried that it will incorrectly influence the opinion of the public that isn't clever enough to know what it is and might erroneously read meaning into what's being reported.
// Let's forget about the excessive coverage. Do you think it's right that camera crews should be roaming round the country filming inside various hospitals, particularly their ICUs? //
Safety concerns didn't prompt the OP, it was the camera work but I'll answer both. Regarding safety it's a news reporters job to do that, as they do in many unsafe places, it is a COVID risk yes but I see unnecessary risks everywhere, every day, I wish this was the worst thing that was going on. Re the camera work yes I do think there is a line regarding emotiveness that an objective news service should try not to cross and the same 30 mins of footage can be used to tell very different stories, they should tell the story and try and show people the reality but too much and people just become immune to it so should be used sparingly.
So why the huge worry about how the BBC report it then if they are just one of many - of which some are reporting the news just how it should be? I'll guess that it's either one or both of:
a) We all pay an individual licence tax and therefore feel entitled to BBC content tailored to our own personal preference.
b) Even though it's too left, too right, too antiquated, too woke, etc. to be of any credibility at all we are worried that it will incorrectly influence the opinion of the public that isn't clever enough to know what it is and might erroneously read meaning into what's being reported.
// Let's forget about the excessive coverage. Do you think it's right that camera crews should be roaming round the country filming inside various hospitals, particularly their ICUs? //
Safety concerns didn't prompt the OP, it was the camera work but I'll answer both. Regarding safety it's a news reporters job to do that, as they do in many unsafe places, it is a COVID risk yes but I see unnecessary risks everywhere, every day, I wish this was the worst thing that was going on. Re the camera work yes I do think there is a line regarding emotiveness that an objective news service should try not to cross and the same 30 mins of footage can be used to tell very different stories, they should tell the story and try and show people the reality but too much and people just become immune to it so should be used sparingly.
//So why the huge worry about how the BBC report it then if they are just one of man//
Errr ... because with all "the others" we have a choice whether we subscribe or they are free to view. We are forced to pay the outrageous "licence" tax and are subject to 24/7 woke propaganda for our forced contributions. If they are so unafraid, why are they afraid of competing in the free World of Jeeernalissum?
Errr ... because with all "the others" we have a choice whether we subscribe or they are free to view. We are forced to pay the outrageous "licence" tax and are subject to 24/7 woke propaganda for our forced contributions. If they are so unafraid, why are they afraid of competing in the free World of Jeeernalissum?
// Regarding safety it's a news reporters job to do that, as they do in many unsafe places,//
Yes they do. But almost always the danger they face will only harm they themselves. We are constantly told to "stay at home" and that every unnecessary contact has the potential to costs lives (in fact it's usually more blunt than that and just says that they cost lives, no question). So, here we have people wandering about the country in and out of hospitals (which are, remember, just about the worst risk when it comes to contracting the virus) sticking cameras and microphones into people's faces. To what end? To tell the audience what they already know, what they have known for some months, and what they will be well aware of until it recedes. Are these necessary contacts? Of course they're not. Meanwhile couples cannot go for a quiet meal and sit in the corner of a well spaced well run restaurant to have a meal. Which presents the greatest risk, do you think? A waiter wearing a face covering serving a meal to a couple in such an establishment or a film crew invading an already overcrowded ICU? Please don't talk about risks. Just because you see unnecessary risks everywhere is no reason to condone what is utter stupidity demonstrated by broadcasters.
Yes they do. But almost always the danger they face will only harm they themselves. We are constantly told to "stay at home" and that every unnecessary contact has the potential to costs lives (in fact it's usually more blunt than that and just says that they cost lives, no question). So, here we have people wandering about the country in and out of hospitals (which are, remember, just about the worst risk when it comes to contracting the virus) sticking cameras and microphones into people's faces. To what end? To tell the audience what they already know, what they have known for some months, and what they will be well aware of until it recedes. Are these necessary contacts? Of course they're not. Meanwhile couples cannot go for a quiet meal and sit in the corner of a well spaced well run restaurant to have a meal. Which presents the greatest risk, do you think? A waiter wearing a face covering serving a meal to a couple in such an establishment or a film crew invading an already overcrowded ICU? Please don't talk about risks. Just because you see unnecessary risks everywhere is no reason to condone what is utter stupidity demonstrated by broadcasters.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
And Even More Good News From Labour.
News1 min ago
Radio Times Wordfinder Week 51
Crosswords14 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
