Topic: GBeebies (anything about Brillo's propaganda network in here)

[Kenny's Jacket]

My impression when seeing him in that clip with Sunak was that he was just itching to punch the PM. (I know, I know, this might apply to many of us.) But this fella looked as though he might actually do it! So it comes as no surprise to me that he has a history of violence. He seemed unhinged - and nothing to do with the COVID vaccine, of course.

Agreed - As someone who has suffered a vaccine injury, I have certain gripes, but I dont think anyone is to blame or 'done in' over it

That said going 'Reservoir Dogs' on Lee Anderson would have certain therapeutic benefits.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Agreed - As someone who has suffered a vaccine injury, I have certain gripes, but I dont think anyone is to blame or 'done in' over it

I'm sorry to hear that, Kenny. I knew you had your difficulties, but did not realise they were caused by a vaccine. Rare, of course. But we all know it happens.

That said going 'Reservoir Dogs' on Lee Anderson would have certain therapeutic benefits.

Not a fan then!? 

[Kenny's Jacket]

I'm sorry to hear that, Kenny. I knew you had your difficulties, but did not realise they were caused by a vaccine. Rare, of course. But we all know it happens.Not a fan then!? 

Its a long Story mate, I was told that on the balance of probability my Stroke was caused by a clot from the Astra Zeneca.  If only Id had the Pfizer,

He is 2nd on my shit list, top is Braverman, obviously you cant make that comment about a woman

The culture war racist tories are abhorrent, Anderson represents them so well.

Guillis another

[Yorkykopite]

What was amazing about that exchange between Sunak and the crazy man John Watt was that Sunak was 'forced' to just suck it up. As JC said, the bloke really looked like he wanted to clock Sunak. In return Sunak did what Mr Crazy told him to do ("look me in the eyes Sunak!") and was 'forced' to meet his extreme offensiveness with a show of respect. It was a bad day for Sunak, but a terrible day for the office of the Prime Minister - worse even than Sunak's 'fan-boy' performance in front of Elon Musk, and worse than the £1000 bet he accepted on live TV with Piers Moron. Where's the dignity man?

I say 'forced' because in a way the PM was facing a creature that he and his stupid party have brought to life. The conspiracy nut who must be respected.

But this phenomenon - the phenomenon of being able to abuse elected politicians, including Prime Ministers, and get nothing but respect in return - has been a long time coming. It started I think with a woman ambushing Blair outside a hospital and personally blaming him for some medical maltreatment of her husband. Blair nodded inanely and accepted it was probably his fault. (Can't abuse a voter in return can you?) Very soon everyone was at it. Bus is late? Blame the Mayor of London. Leccy rebate got lost in the post? Blame the Minister for Energy. It's as if people want their own Cabinet minister available 24/7 so they can sound off face to face. The only politician who has ever dealt with an abusive elector well is John Prescott. A left uppercut to the jaw.

[KillieRed]

Gordon Brown was petty & ill-tempered, but he should never have apologised to that woman he called a bigot (in private) because she was one.

[Yorkykopite]

Gordon Brown was petty & ill-tempered, but he should never have apologised to that woman he called a bigot (in private) because she was one.

Was she? I thought she was quite a representative sort of person - someone under economic stress, struggling to understand the causes of that stress, struggling to find the right language to express the feelings. Bigotry tends to be a bit more obvious than what she came up with. Hence the own-goal of Brown's comment.

I have no idea if the gutter press got hold of the woman afterwards and made her a champion of something she really wasn't. A vague memory tells me this happened.

[Nobby Reserve]

But this phenomenon - the phenomenon of being able to abuse elected politicians, including Prime Ministers, and get nothing but respect in return - has been a long time coming. It started I think with a woman ambushing Blair outside a hospital and personally blaming him for some medical maltreatment of her husband. Blair nodded inanely and accepted it was probably his fault. (Can't abuse a voter in return can you?) Very soon everyone was at it. Bus is late? Blame the Mayor of London. Leccy rebate got lost in the post? Blame the Minister for Energy. It's as if people want their own Cabinet minister available 24/7 so they can sound off face to face. The only politician who has ever dealt with an abusive elector well is John Prescott. A left uppercut to the jaw.

Interesting post full stop. With regards to this bit, though, is all that not just an expression of the frustration one feels when trying to resolve a problem with a company/organisation, and simply cannot get to deal with anyone who can sort the issue?

Corporations outsourcing the customer service function to some cheap overseas country where some inexperienced worker reading off a script but having just a rudimentary mastery of the English language, in order to maximise profit. Public sector organisations underfunded and the customer service function gets insufficient resources. The result is anger borne of frustration.

When you actually get some who just listens, sympathises and offers a solution, it's a massive sense of relief and thanks, which really you shouldn't have to have.

[Nobby Reserve]

Was she? I thought she was quite a representative sort of person - someone under economic stress, struggling to understand the causes of that stress, struggling to find the right language to express the feelings. Bigotry tends to be a bit more obvious than what she came up with. Hence the own-goal of Brown's comment.

I have no idea if the gutter press got hold of the woman afterwards and made her a champion of something she really wasn't. A vague memory tells me this happened.

Again, I agree with you (what's happening to me???). She was airing genuine concerns over immigration levels (which isn't racist in itself, and she wasn't saying "All those coloured immigrants" - indeed, at that time the immigration concerns derived from the influx of white, Eastern-European workers, albeit with a minority of shitheads coming here to play the system and get free healthcare)

Just as I hate that there can't be a frank discussion on Palestine/Israel because misguided and cliched accusations of 'anti-Semitism' get thrown about, so I hate that we can't have a frank discussion about immigration because misguided cliched accusations of racism get thrown about.

[Yorkykopite]

Interesting post full stop. With regards to this bit, though, is all that not just an expression of the frustration one feels when trying to resolve a problem with a company/organisation, and simply cannot get to deal with anyone who can sort the issue?

Corporations outsourcing the customer service function to some cheap overseas country where some inexperienced worker reading off a script but having just a rudimentary mastery of the English language, in order to maximise profit. Public sector organisations underfunded and the customer service function gets insufficient resources. The result is anger borne of frustration.

When you actually get some who just listens, sympathises and offers a solution, it's a massive sense of relief and thanks, which really you shouldn't have to have.

You've probably identified my least desired social encounter. Dealing with racists and anti-semites - not that I meet many - is much easier than dealing with the corporate brush off. The prospect of a day on the phone trying to reclaim money I'm owed from, say, BT Sports can be enough for me to surrender and not even try. So I get that.

But I don't think this is the reason why people like Crazy Man go full frontal with a well-known politician. First of all the cameras have to be there, which leads you to think that the process is performative rather than some kind of much-needed catharsis. You can certainly see that in Crazy Man. It's a rehearsed speech he's giving to Sunak. Pretty well delivered, I admit, if the thing you want to project is articulacy, fury and mental instability. But it's definitely performative. And in that sense it's a minute of fame. "Look at me. I was rude to the Prime Minister/Home Secretary/Leader of the Opposition etc etc. Admire me!" I don't think that such people are necessarily looking for redress for a grievance. They just want to shout at the Top Man/Woman. And politicians, of course, present a good target. They are usually well known and they are generally despised. Shouting at them in public is like shouting at paedophiles in court. Everybody's with you AND you are the most virtuous person in the crowd. You're the one who cares most. I'm sure we've all met people like that.

It makes democratic politics difficult though since democracy is fuelled by respect. I remember Macron chastising a young man for shouting "Hey Emmanuel!". That's all. But it was enough. Macron explained that he should be called "Mr President". The dignity of the office. I liked that. Not the least of Sunak's faults is that he has no respect for the office he holds, which is why I mentioned the disastrous encounter he had with Musk. None of the Tories do at the moment, as can be seen by two of the three last incumbents. (May did, I thought)

[Yorkykopite]

Again, I agree with you (what's happening to me???). She was airing genuine concerns over immigration levels (which isn't racist in itself, and she wasn't saying "All those coloured immigrants" - indeed, at that time the immigration concerns derived from the influx of white, Eastern-European workers, albeit with a minority of shitheads coming here to play the system and get free healthcare)

Just as I hate that there can't be a frank discussion on Palestine/Israel because misguided and cliched accusations of 'anti-Semitism' get thrown about, so I hate that we can't have a frank discussion about immigration because misguided cliched accusations of racism get thrown about.

Yes, I'm with you - but only so long as we agree that there is a real thing out there called anti-semitism and a real thing called racism. And that both are probably more common than we often care to admit.

[Nobby Reserve]

Yes, I'm with you - but only so long as we agree that there is a real thing out there called anti-semitism and a real thing called racism. And that both are probably more common than we often care to admit.

There are indeed both. And genuine cases are pernicious and must be stamped on by any society with claims to be civilised.

My issue is that not everything labelled 'anti-semitism' or 'racist' is actually so. Instead, the terms are [ab]used by some to close down criticism or debate.

[Huyrob]

Sunak was a bit David Brent… whenever in his mind he thought he had said something his “ team” would approve of ….he ended his sentence with  …” right “.
So his most repeated words seem to be “ right” and “ plan”.  Make of that what you want.
Ps. You can’t reverse the words to “ Plan right “ ..right. 

[west_london_red]

Just read a piece in The Guardian, GB News has paid £660k to Tory MPs for appearing since it started and paid Labour MPs £1100… that’s impartiality for you.

[killer-heels]

Just read a piece in The Guardian, GB News has paid £660k to Tory MPs for appearing since it started and paid Labour MPs £1100… that’s impartiality for you.

I dont know about how much is paid but I reckon Talk TV is even more biased than GBeebies..

[thaddeus]

Just read a piece in The Guardian, GB News has paid £660k to Tory MPs for appearing since it started and paid Labour MPs £1100… that’s impartiality for you.

Money well spent 

GB News is going to revel in being the voice of the opposition once Labour are elected.  They already play on the Tories not being right wing enough but generally hold back from damning criticism of Sunak and his cabinet ministers.  There'll be no such restraint with Labour in charge.

[Black Bull Nova]

Rees-Mogg has been paid £325k by this lot (part of the £660k), that, just to give him a platform for this 19th century view of the world.



Any station which has a programme called 'that was the Woke that was' is clearly full of fucking idiots. It's just a reactionary set of dickheads being paid to spout their biases and paid for by some rich man with an agenda.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Rees-Mogg has been paid £325k by this lot (part of the £660k), that, just to give him a platform for this 19th century view of the world.

Any station which has a programme called 'that was the Woke that was' is clearly full of fucking idiots. It's just a reactionary set of dickheads being paid to spout their biases and paid for by some rich man with an agenda.

And tells you something about the age of their target audience. They cannot even get basic stuff right about how to gain a boarder audience to sustain their business. Like the Tory Party, they are totally fucking inept. Not that I am complaining of course.

[Fromola]

Just read a piece in The Guardian, GB News has paid £660k to Tory MPs for appearing since it started and paid Labour MPs £1100… that’s impartiality for you.

This is the issue with the media in general. Being a right-wing shock jock pays very well. Lee Anderson is a complete and utter idiot but he gets paid a six figure salary by Beebies to be a parody of a bigoted and ignorant working class northerner. They've got GB News, Talk TV, all the right wing newspapers, the Spectator. They all pay well. But maybe Anderson isn't as stupid as he appears and he's just playing a character to pay for his pension.

Labour/certainly the left just don't have that same cash grab. Just as well in some respects but it's why discourse and overton window just goes further and further right because that's what pays. it also means the Tories can never be right wing enough as well, although the Andersons and Bravermans try to shift the party further and further right. Even the Reform types are complaining that Richard Tice isn't right wing enough.

Alf Garnett would have his own show on GB News these days.

[Jiminy Cricket]

This is the issue with the media in general. Being a right-wing shock jock pays very well. Lee Anderson is a complete and utter idiot but he gets paid a six figure salary by Beebies to be a parody of a bigoted and ignorant working class northerner. They've got GB News, Talk TV, all the right wing newspapers, the Spectator. They all pay well. But maybe Anderson isn't as stupid as he appears and he's just playing a character to pay for his pension.

I don't think it is a parody. He is surely bigoted and certainly ignorant.

[Fromola]

I don't think it is a parody. He is surely bigoted and certainly ignorant.

Yeah, I mean more in terms of him being parody of what the Tories think a working class northerner is. Ignorant, thick, bigoted, uneducated. They hold up Anderson as some kind of poster boy of the working class, a demographic they wouldn't piss on.

[Nobby Reserve]

Yeah, I mean more in terms of him being parody of what the Tories think a working class northerner is. Ignorant, thick, bigoted, uneducated. They hold up Anderson as some kind of poster boy of the working class, a demographic they wouldn't piss on.

I think he acts like a parody- but it's made easier for him because he has some belief in a lot of what he says.

This is a son of a miner, who also went down the pits and took industrial action later (post-the Miner's Strike). I don't know if he was an NUM member or the 'scab' UDM. But he knows what it's like to live on the breadline, has been a volunteer for CAB and homeless charities. Worked for the Labour MP and was a Labour councillor himself.

He's actually a lot like many traditional Labour voters - socially/culturally pretty conservative/right-wing (as in, small-minded, fearful of cultural change, easily flip to blaming minorities when things go a bit bad)

His [anti-]Damascene moment seems to have been when he took up the case of blocking Travellers setting up on a neighbouring field. He seems to have got no support from his fellow Labour councillors (indeed, some scorn instead) and took it upon himself to have boulders placed to block the entrance.... following which he was charged with fly-tipping!

In his eyes - and the eyes of many/most - he was doing a public service to prevent the incursion of a group of people that frequently cause damage to the locality and bring petty crime and anti-social behaviour. Yet he is the one who is prosecuted - not the 'horrible' people he was trying to stop harming his neighbourhood. And, furthermore, if he speaks out against the travellers and their behaviours, he's the one demonised.

There's also a decent possibility that he spotted how the political winds were blowing when he switched to the Tories in 2018. He'd almost certainly had some contact with them before then and they viewed his recruitment as a no-lose gambit. His status as the Labour-man-turned-Tory and 'no nonsense' comments have helped his grift - and a lucrative slot on GBeebies.

So, whilst I think he does believe all/most of the stuff he says, he exaggerates it to cement his status and keep the grift going.

[FlashGordon]

I think he acts like a parody- but it's made easier for him because he has some belief in a lot of what he says.

This is a son of a miner, who also went down the pits and took industrial action later (post-the Miner's Strike). I don't know if he was an NUM member or the 'scab' UDM. But he knows what it's like to live on the breadline, has been a volunteer for CAB and homeless charities. Worked for the Labour MP and was a Labour councillor himself.

He's actually a lot like many traditional Labour voters - socially/culturally pretty conservative/right-wing (as in, small-minded, fearful of cultural change, easily flip to blaming minorities when things go a bit bad)

His [anti-]Damascene moment seems to have been when he took up the case of blocking Travellers setting up on a neighbouring field. He seems to have got no support from his fellow Labour councillors (indeed, some scorn instead) and took it upon himself to have boulders placed to block the entrance.... following which he was charged with fly-tipping!

In his eyes - and the eyes of many/most - he was doing a public service to prevent the incursion of a group of people that frequently cause damage to the locality and bring petty crime and anti-social behaviour. Yet he is the one who is prosecuted - not the 'horrible' people he was trying to stop harming his neighbourhood. And, furthermore, if he speaks out against the travellers and their behaviours, he's the one demonised.

There's also a decent possibility that he spotted how the political winds were blowing when he switched to the Tories in 2018. He'd almost certainly had some contact with them before then and they viewed his recruitment as a no-lose gambit. His status as the Labour-man-turned-Tory and 'no nonsense' comments have helped his grift - and a lucrative slot on GBeebies.

So, whilst I think he does believe all/most of the stuff he says, he exaggerates it to cement his status and keep the grift going.

Not every Traveller is a 'horrible' person. No need to tar them all with the same brush.

[Nobby Reserve]

Not every Traveller is a 'horrible' person. No need to tar them all with the same brush.

I said "In his eyes"

(But fwiw, in my experience, they have always created problems round here - I could list a long catalogue of incidents, both trivial and more serious)

[FlashGordon]

I said "In his eyes"

(But fwiw, in my experience, they have always created problems round here - I could list a long catalogue of incidents, both trivial and more serious)

Even if every single Traveller you had ever encountered created problems, it's still wrong to tar them all with the same brush. Replace Traveller with any other ethnic group and those sentences sound terrible.

[Nobby Reserve]

Even if every single Traveller you had ever encountered created problems, it's still wrong to tar them all with the same brush. Replace Traveller with any other ethnic group and those sentences sound terrible.

I'm not sure how 'travellers' have come to be labelled an ethnic group and I heartily disagree they should be.

They're just the recent descendants of Irish itinerant workers who would follow the work through the [mainly agricultural] year. Now that seasonal work has largely disappeared.

You are basically saying that no matter how a specific group of people persistently behave, they should be beyond criticism if they are deemed an 'ethnic group', even if that behaviour is predominantly unlawful and inflicts misery on other people.

It's a nonsense.

[Nobby Reserve]

Back on topic, and OFCOM has temporarily located its own bollocks to rule that the GBeebies episode with Dan Wootten and Laurence Fox breached broadcasting rules.

No doubt they'll misplace their testicles once more when it comes to punishment (and continue to deem GB News as not a news programme, so it doesn't have to adhere to stricter broadcasting standards of impartiality)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-68468218

[WhereAngelsPlay]

All of these c*nts will be shitting it at the thought of a Labour Gov, they've been left to shit all over the rules by employing sitting fucking MPs, it's disgusting.


Bastards.

[Kenny's Jacket]

All of these c*nts will be shitting it at the thought of a Labour Gov, they've been left to shit all over the rules by employing sitting fucking MPs, it's disgusting.


Bastards.

They will be more toxic in opposition

[WhereAngelsPlay]

They will be more toxic in opposition

They can be toxic in court.

c*nts.

[FlashGordon]

I'm not sure how 'travellers' have come to be labelled an ethnic group and I heartily disagree they should be.

They're just the recent descendants of Irish itinerant workers who would follow the work through the [mainly agricultural] year. Now that seasonal work has largely disappeared.

You are basically saying that no matter how a specific group of people persistently behave, they should be beyond criticism if they are deemed an 'ethnic group', even if that behaviour is predominantly unlawful and inflicts misery on other people.

It's a nonsense.

You can take that up with the European Commission.

No, what I'm saying, is you can't blame a whole sub-section of society for the actions of others.

[Ray K]

Dan Wootton fired from GBeebies - Byline Times

Dan Wootton has finally been axed from his £600,000-a-year GB News role after the broadcasting regulator upheld a complaint over the misogyny row which saw him suspended from the channel five months ago. 

Wootton has been off-air since 27 September last year when he and Laurence Fox made derogatory comments about a female journalist on Dan Wootton Tonight, which resulted in 8,867 complaints to Ofcom – making it 2023’s most complained about broadcast.

In its judgement, which found that GB News was in breach of ‘generally accepted standards’, Ofcom revealed that it had recently been sent new evidence by lawyers for the channel which it had previously been “unable” to provide due to an “‘internal employment process”.

The judgement, released on Monday, said: “On Friday 1 March 2024… solicitors on behalf of the licensee [GB News] sent Ofcom new evidence which it said it had been unable to send previously due to an internal employment process.

“The solicitors said this information supported the licensee’s position that it had asked Mr Wootton to read out an apology and he refused, but it had been unable to give Ofcom this information until this point as ‘it was considered unfair to Mr Wootton… during an employment process’.

“The licensee asked Ofcom to delay publication of the decision so that Ofcom could consider the information.”

Given this detail, the publication of Ofcom’s decision seemingly confirms that Wootton’s internal employment process with GB News is now over.

The journalist announced last month that two police investigations into him had been concluded, with no further action being taken.

While GB News did not respond to a request for comment regarding Wootton’s employment status, an insider told Byline Times: “He’s definitely gone for good.”

[TepidT2O]

Their turnover is only about £6.4m. Yet they lost over £42m
They hardly make any money.  Incredible

[thaddeus]

Their turnover is only about £6.4m. Yet they lost over £42m
They hardly make any money.  Incredible

As the motives are seemingly not financial then they're presumably about pushing a certain narrative (/propaganda).  £42m is quite the bill for talking in an echo chamber.

[killer-heels]

As the motives are seemingly not financial then they're presumably about pushing a certain narrative (/propaganda).  £42m is quite the bill for talking in an echo chamber.

That wont last.