Letter to BBC

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Public House Letter to BBC

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #72655
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    bbc:https://johnhilley.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/drool-britannia-complaint-to-bbc-over.html

    Zen Politics
    Articles, comment and meditations on power, oppression and political mindfulness

    Drool Britannia: complaint to BBC over naked militarist propaganda
    I wish to complain about the display of extravagant militarism celebrated in this live feed coverage of the aircraft carrier Queen Elizabeth:

    New aircraft carrier arrives in home port

    This is a level of state media propaganda the BBC typically attributes to North Korea.

    1. Please specify how many BBC reporters were allocated to this ‘story’, and the overall costs incurred to the licence payer. How can this level of resources and live feed reportage be justified?

    2. First Sea Lord Philip Jones Admiral Sir Philip Jones (sic) has been quoted in your report as saying: “Today, a new era of British maritime power is beginning.” Is it reasonable to assume that a substantive section of the public do not, in fact, wish to see any ‘resurgence’ of Britain as a major maritime power, with all the dark imperialist history, and current global aggressions, that involves? In a world of Western, corporate-driven war, and desire for diplomatic alternatives, do you accept that this kind of comment is deeply controversial, offensive and inflammatory to many? Why did you publish this statement without providing any anti-war-voice?

    3. The BBC Charter maintains that BBC output must always be impartial and balanced. Please indicate where any opposition to the commissioning of this £3 billion ship, or objection to UK militarism at large, is included in this set of reports. While many struggle to feed their families, is it fair to suggest that considerable numbers of people find this level of expenditure deeply immoral? Where is this public concern reflected in your coverage?

    4. Do you consider it moral or proportionate to be giving this fawning level of coverage and support for British militarism while that same UK state is providing massive arms and support to Saudi Arabia for the indiscriminate bombing of civilians in Yemen? Please indicate where the BBC has raised this dark anomaly, or allowed space for any substantive comment on it. The live feed includes glowing pieces detailing ‘HMS Queen Elizabeth in numbers’ and ‘Everything you need to know about HMS Queen Elizabeth’. Have the BBC produced any similar pieces specifying the numbers, scale and consequences of Britain’s killing equipment to tyrant regimes?
    I look forward to your considered and detailed response.

    Regards
    John Hilley
    Posted by John Hilley at 14:17

    #72657
    JackPMiller
    Participant

    They need to get Pearl Mackie back on as a companion for Dr. Who. She was great this past season. Just saying.

    #72660
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    They need to get Pearl Mackie back on as a companion for Dr. Who. She was great this past season. Just saying.

    ================

    Well it seems to me John Snow should use the Daleks against the white walkers.

    Just sayin.

    Thats what I would do.

    w
    v

    #72668
    JackPMiller
    Participant

    Well it seems to me John Snow should use the Daleks against the white walkers.

    Just sayin.

    Thats what I would do.

    w
    v

    What’s wrong with the cybermen?

    #72669
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Well it seems to me John Snow should use the Daleks against the white walkers.

    Just sayin.

    Thats what I would do.

    w
    v

    Stop being so sloppy. You’re mixing up Star Trek with Lord of the Rings.

    Next you’ll say that the Sammy Watkins trade makes a difference.


    .

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.