Comments on: The faux-outrage over BBC expenses http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/ Left-wing news, opinion and activism Fri, 25 May 2012 11:09:34 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: ukliberty http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52230 ukliberty Sun, 28 Jun 2009 21:11:00 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52230 My issue with MPs' expenses is not so much the amounts (although some of the claims were plainly ridiculous) but the fact that MPs and civil servants colluded in deceiving the electorate (and continue to do so) rather than openly voting for an increase in their salaries. By not having a TV licence I have chosen not to support the BBC's business practises. I have no such choice with my MP - or the rest of Parliament for that matter. My issue with MPs’ expenses is not so much the amounts (although some of the claims were plainly ridiculous) but the fact that MPs and civil servants colluded in deceiving the electorate (and continue to do so) rather than openly voting for an increase in their salaries.

By not having a TV licence I have chosen not to support the BBC’s business practises. I have no such choice with my MP – or the rest of Parliament for that matter.

]]> By: Rob Shorrock http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52145 Rob Shorrock Sat, 27 Jun 2009 21:34:00 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52145 In many ways the BBC is to be applauded for releasing all this stuff. Contrary to the main thrust of the article the issue really isn't about the level of expenses but the issue of transparency and accountability. It remains to be seen if other publically funded corporations follow suit without a fight. I sense, however, that it will not be long before the government produces a set of regulations on public access to financial information and amends the Freedom of Information and Data Protection Acts to stop the latter being used to deny the former. Rob In many ways the BBC is to be applauded for releasing all this stuff. Contrary to the main thrust of the article the issue really isn’t about the level of expenses but the issue of transparency and accountability. It remains to be seen if other publically funded corporations follow suit without a fight. I sense, however, that it will not be long before the government produces a set of regulations on public access to financial information and amends the Freedom of Information and Data Protection Acts to stop the latter being used to deny the former.

Rob

]]> By: Will Rhodes http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52086 Will Rhodes Sat, 27 Jun 2009 00:11:58 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52086 http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE55P1H820090626 Britain's dominant pay-TV firm BSkyB attacked media regulator Ofcom for unprecedented interference on Friday, saying it would launch legal action if forced to open its channels to rivals at a set rate. hehe http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE55P1H820090626

Britain’s dominant pay-TV firm BSkyB attacked media regulator Ofcom for unprecedented interference on Friday, saying it would launch legal action if forced to open its channels to rivals at a set rate.

hehe

]]> By: Marcus http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52083 Marcus Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:58:33 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52083 Why on earth is Prince Charles, of all royals, costing the taxpayer anything? The revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall ought to be enough for anyone. Why on earth is Prince Charles, of all royals, costing the taxpayer anything? The revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall ought to be enough for anyone.

]]> By: sally http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52079 sally Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:18:12 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52079 "No outrage in the press about that is there?" Of course not. Because the Royal family are a bunch right wing aristocrats. Just the sort of people the right wing media like as head of state. Theywould be quite happy to pay 2-3-5 times as much out of state funds. And some of their biggest suporters are those famous libertaians we hear so much about. “No outrage in the press about that is there?”

Of course not. Because the Royal family are a bunch right wing aristocrats. Just the sort of people the right wing media like as head of state.

Theywould be quite happy to pay 2-3-5 times as much out of state funds. And some of their biggest suporters are those famous libertaians we hear so much about.

]]> By: Freethinkeruk http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52077 Freethinkeruk Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:25:48 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52077 Great article and I agree with it all and I haven't said that for a very long time. Particularly noteworthy is the point that "Prince Charles cost us £3 million last year" and that is just as a direct payment, other costs are far, far more and the Royals in general cost around £180m and their accounts are not even audited. No outrage in the press about that is there? Great article and I agree with it all and I haven’t said that for a very long time.

Particularly noteworthy is the point that “Prince Charles cost us £3 million last year” and that is just as a direct payment, other costs are far, far more and the Royals in general cost around £180m and their accounts are not even audited.

No outrage in the press about that is there?

]]> By: councilhousetory http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52076 councilhousetory Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:22:31 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52076 13 I said it was interesting. How do you think it would be viewed in Harriet Harman's 'court of public opinion'? 13

I said it was interesting. How do you think it would be viewed in Harriet Harman’s ‘court of public opinion’?

]]> By: Charlieman http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52072 Charlieman Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:47:19 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52072 @10 I don't know whether the BBC employees went on a junket or necessary business trip. What I do know about business trips: * Event organisers arrange cheap deals with hotels. * Sometimes the company organises the trip for you. There is no choice where you stay. * Nobody with taste and the money to stay where they wished would stay at the Bellagio. Say what you want about BBC employees, but they generally have good taste. * Tacky hotels like the Bellagio always have cheap, vacant rooms. @10 I don’t know whether the BBC employees went on a junket or necessary business trip. What I do know about business trips:
* Event organisers arrange cheap deals with hotels.
* Sometimes the company organises the trip for you. There is no choice where you stay.
* Nobody with taste and the money to stay where they wished would stay at the Bellagio. Say what you want about BBC employees, but they generally have good taste.
* Tacky hotels like the Bellagio always have cheap, vacant rooms.

]]> By: sally http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52070 sally Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:41:23 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52070 I would love to see the expeses of the Mail. Darce's expeses would be very interesting. Come to that , I would love to see the detailed expenses of most private corporations. The idea that they are prudent is such bull. And everytime you buy one of their products you pay through the nose for it. I would love to see the expeses of the Mail. Darce’s expeses would be very interesting. Come to that , I would love to see the detailed expenses of most private corporations.

The idea that they are prudent is such bull. And everytime you buy one of their products you pay through the nose for it.

]]> By: angie http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52069 angie Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:38:31 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52069 I like news and politics and documentaries ...but I also like Hotel Babylon and Radio 1! I like news and politics and documentaries …but I also like Hotel Babylon and Radio 1!

]]> By: councilhousetory http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52067 councilhousetory Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:11:18 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52067 It is interesting though, that we are often told that public servants make sacrifices, aren't so concerned with materialism and could have whatever they wanted if only they went into the private sector. Yet middle-manager nobodies at the BBC have such a belief in their own entitlement that on a junket to Las Vegas (of all places) they had to go to the Bellagio. Not the Travelodge, the Bellagio. It is interesting though, that we are often told that public servants make sacrifices, aren’t so concerned with materialism and could have whatever they wanted if only they went into the private sector.

Yet middle-manager nobodies at the BBC have such a belief in their own entitlement that on a junket to Las Vegas (of all places) they had to go to the Bellagio. Not the Travelodge, the Bellagio.

]]> By: Charlieman http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52065 Charlieman Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:46:27 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52065 At the time of writing, the search term "BBC" scores one hit on the Daily Mail's news page. So much for the "story", even if Jacko claimed the prime spots. Mac, their cartoonist, obviously expected some embarrassments, hence this piss poor effort at enlightening humour: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/06/25/article-1195396-057BE021000005DC-305_634x463.jpg The Mail's solitary article did make two interesting disclosures, that an exec spent £130 hosting a discussion on Sport Relief and similarly £417.25 on Children in Need. I'm more than happy that the BBC spends money on such discussions, particularly if they talk about the propriety of a public broadcaster hosting such events. I'm not against the events per se, but I despise their tone and lack of intellectual rigour. The BBC's coverage of the Live 8 concert in 2005 was painful, even for those with broad sympathy for the campaign. At the time of writing, the search term “BBC” scores one hit on the Daily Mail’s news page. So much for the “story”, even if Jacko claimed the prime spots.

Mac, their cartoonist, obviously expected some embarrassments, hence this piss poor effort at enlightening humour:
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/06/25/article-1195396-057BE021000005DC-305_634x463.jpg

The Mail’s solitary article did make two interesting disclosures, that an exec spent £130 hosting a discussion on Sport Relief and similarly £417.25 on Children in Need. I’m more than happy that the BBC spends money on such discussions, particularly if they talk about the propriety of a public broadcaster hosting such events. I’m not against the events per se, but I despise their tone and lack of intellectual rigour. The BBC’s coverage of the Live 8 concert in 2005 was painful, even for those with broad sympathy for the campaign.

]]> By: James http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52061 James Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:43:54 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52061 Sally, I love the way you can post without uninformed stereotpyes, it's a real talent. Sally, I love the way you can post without uninformed stereotpyes, it’s a real talent.

]]> By: sally http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52059 sally Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:39:02 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52059 It is why I have always had a soft spot for Alasdair Campbell in his dealings with the scummy right wing media. Campbell lost me with what happened with the Iraq cluster fuck, but he understood the hostility of a Tory media to a Labour govt. Nobody spins more than the Mail. That is why they hated him so much, he gave them a taste of their medicine. And the Tory media has a very thin skin when the boot is on the other foot. The Right won’t rest until they have destroyed the BBC. They hate unbiased news media. Their dream is wall to wall Fox crap every day. It is why I have always had a soft spot for Alasdair Campbell in his dealings with the scummy right wing media. Campbell lost me with what happened with the Iraq cluster fuck, but he understood the hostility of a Tory media to a Labour govt. Nobody spins more than the Mail. That is why they hated him so much, he gave them a taste of their medicine. And the Tory media has a very thin skin when the boot is on the other foot.

The Right won’t rest until they have destroyed the BBC. They hate unbiased news media. Their dream is wall to wall Fox crap every day.

]]> By: Shatterface http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52050 Shatterface Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:15:52 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52050 Wow, an entirely sensible article (meaning I agree with you entirely) followed by equally sensible responses. This site is no fun anymore: I'll pop back when the public broadcasting-haters start frothing at the mouth. Wow, an entirely sensible article (meaning I agree with you entirely) followed by equally sensible responses.

This site is no fun anymore: I’ll pop back when the public broadcasting-haters start frothing at the mouth.

]]> By: Will Rhodes http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52049 Will Rhodes Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:08:53 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52049 The BBC should leak that certain newspapers are going to be nationalised - in the interest of public good, of course. See how those at'Mail get knickers in twist. The BBC should leak that certain newspapers are going to be nationalised – in the interest of public good, of course.

See how those at’Mail get knickers in twist.

]]> By: Richard J http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52033 Richard J Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:13:29 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52033 The whole thing rather had the feel of an over-ambitious recent graduate pushing his pet project in an attempt to crawl up the corporate ladder. The repeated rewriting of the article, seemingly to leave behind the several hundred comments failing to get outraged, sorely rankles. It was revealing, I think, that Private Eye reported that the Graun had recently laid off two experienced investigative reporters. The whole thing rather had the feel of an over-ambitious recent graduate pushing his pet project in an attempt to crawl up the corporate ladder. The repeated rewriting of the article, seemingly to leave behind the several hundred comments failing to get outraged, sorely rankles.

It was revealing, I think, that Private Eye reported that the Graun had recently laid off two experienced investigative reporters.

]]> By: Aaron http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52032 Aaron Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:08:59 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52032 <em>Yet these claims in any other business of a similar size would barely raise an eyebrow, as the more honest outside commentators are admitting. Prince Charles cost us £3 million last year; the BBC’s executive expenses over 5 years were £363,963.83. I know in an instant which I’d plump for every time.</em> Y'know, there is more sense in that one paragraph than almost all the shit I've read over the past few weeks. More manufactured outrage. How come the right don't bang on daily about the taxes we piss away paying for an over-privileged, undemocratic collection of kissing cousins? Yet these claims in any other business of a similar size would barely raise an eyebrow, as the more honest outside commentators are admitting. Prince Charles cost us £3 million last year; the BBC’s executive expenses over 5 years were £363,963.83. I know in an instant which I’d plump for every time.

Y’know, there is more sense in that one paragraph than almost all the shit I’ve read over the past few weeks. More manufactured outrage.

How come the right don’t bang on daily about the taxes we piss away paying for an over-privileged, undemocratic collection of kissing cousins?

]]> By: LazyStudents http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52024 LazyStudents Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:01:00 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52024 "At a time when there is so much unaccountability, both in public and private life, the BBC is one of the more responsive and open organisations. The danger is that it’ll brought down because of that rather than the opposite." I wish, wish, wish Auntie would stick up for herself every now and again. It's bigger than the Mail, it's better than the Mail. It can beat the Mail. What are the circumstances behind these being released? Was there really any need to reveal that BBC executives make rather reasonable claims? Re Emily Bell, I remember reading on Popbitch a while ago that she had been turned down for a high ranking post within the Beeb and to watch out for hideously anti-BBC stories on the Guardian. QED? “At a time when there is so much unaccountability, both in public and private life, the BBC is one of the more responsive and open organisations. The danger is that it’ll brought down because of that rather than the opposite.”

I wish, wish, wish Auntie would stick up for herself every now and again. It’s bigger than the Mail, it’s better than the Mail. It can beat the Mail. What are the circumstances behind these being released? Was there really any need to reveal that BBC executives make rather reasonable claims?

Re Emily Bell, I remember reading on Popbitch a while ago that she had been turned down for a high ranking post within the Beeb and to watch out for hideously anti-BBC stories on the Guardian. QED?

]]> By: Costigan Quist http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-52023 Costigan Quist Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:00:37 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-52023 Curiously, I probably watch BBC3 more than BBC1 or 2 at the moment, so I'd be a little pissed off if it were closed down. But then I wouldn't suggest the BBC bases it's broadcasting strategy on my personal opinions about its output. I agree, though, that the expenses stuff is a lot of noise about very little. Curiously, I probably watch BBC3 more than BBC1 or 2 at the moment, so I’d be a little pissed off if it were closed down. But then I wouldn’t suggest the BBC bases it’s broadcasting strategy on my personal opinions about its output.

I agree, though, that the expenses stuff is a lot of noise about very little.

]]> By: sunny hundal http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-78903 sunny hundal Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:47:00 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-78903 <span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">Well, at least Michael Jackson saved the BBC from enduring more faux-outrage over its expenses http://tr.im/pRdc</span></span> Well, at least Michael Jackson saved the BBC from enduring more faux-outrage over its expenses http://tr.im/pRdc

]]> By: Liberal Conspiracy http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-78904 Liberal Conspiracy Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:45:01 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-78904 <span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">Article: : The faux-outrage over BBC expenses http://bit.ly/Ej5wA</span></span> Article: : The faux-outrage over BBC expenses http://bit.ly/Ej5wA

]]> By: Carl Wheatley http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-78902 Carl Wheatley Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:11:03 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-78902 <span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">BBC expenses - interesting article http://bit.ly/jfprf</span></span> BBC expenses – interesting article http://bit.ly/jfprf

]]> By: sunny hundal http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-79670 sunny hundal Fri, 26 Jun 2009 06:47:00 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-79670 <span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">Well, at least Michael Jackson saved the BBC from enduring more faux-outrage over its expenses http://tr.im/pRdc</span></span> Well, at least Michael Jackson saved the BBC from enduring more faux-outrage over its expenses http://tr.im/pRdc

]]> By: Liberal Conspiracy http://liberalconspiracy.org/2009/06/26/the-faux-outrage-over-bbc-expenses/#comment-79860 Liberal Conspiracy Fri, 26 Jun 2009 06:45:01 +0000 http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/?p=5966#comment-79860 Article: : The faux-outrage over BBC expenses http://bit.ly/Ej5wA Article: : The faux-outrage over BBC expenses http://bit.ly/Ej5wA

]]>