BBC Trust gender bias? Proven correct!
Discussion
Breadvan72 said:
Hey Dandarez, have you been Head of the FT Group, and a non exec at HSBC and Pepsico? I haven't, but Rona Fairhead has. But, oh, she only got the BBC job because she's a woman. No doubt she only got those other gigs because she's a woman, too. After all, if someone says that something might happen, and it does happen, that's conclusive proof that it was always going to happen, isn't it?
No, of course not! But you misinterpreted me. I have no view either way! I was talking about Conor Burns' accusation about bias.
However, just because Rona Fairhead (I'd have my name changed by deed poll if I was her) gets the job means BA to most people, inc me, they really couldn't care less. Nobody thinks the BBC Trust will change or make 'our' lives better. That's what 'we' care about.
Mind you, I wouldn't have minded her remuneration at Pepsico in 2012. Just under $800,000.
As for women, my wife earns more than me! Then again I don't work as hard, I'm a lazy bugger that just reads and publishes.
Your thread title is to the effect that the allegation has been proven, which doesn't seem all that neutral a stance. The allegation hasn't been proven. If I say today that it will rain next Wednesday and it rains next Wednesday, that does not prove that I know in advance when it will rain.
Breadvan72 said:
I am never sure whether to have the mindset of the typical Mail/Telegraph reader .
Please don't put Telegraph & Mail in same sentence.I read neither, but the Telegraph is read as a serious right of centre paper (read by most right and left wing politicians), the Mail is a piss poor comic not even worth the ink used.
Breadvan72 said:
The Telegraph is half a serious paper, but half a slightly posher version of the Mail, with similar OMGFURRENERZ scare stories to shock and awe the faithful. To some extent, this mirrors the Guardian, which combines serious journalism with some ranty Spart daftness.
Stephen Fry told me once "We should all read the Telegraph, just to see what they are up to". He reads it every day.(apologies for the name drop)
Breadvan72 said:
I read the Spectator for the same reason - know what the bad guys are thinking.
Frank Field, John Strachey, Martin Bright, Anthony Horowitz. Hmmm.Clearly that won't work, you need to read (more of) The Guardian.
Polly Toynbee, George Monbiot, Owen Jones, Alastair Campbell.
Breadvan72 said:
The Telegraph is half a serious paper, but half a slightly posher version of the Mail, with similar OMGFURRENERZ scare stories to shock and awe the faithful. To some extent, this mirrors the Guardian, which combines serious journalism with some ranty Spart daftness.
I agree. It has far more news in it than the Mail but is just as biased. And weirdly obsessed with Kate Middleton. I'd have expected her to be too common for them.REALIST123 said:
Well a BBC 'historian' said tonight that some of the most important things she will bring to the BBC are that she is a woman and a mother. So her business record maybe isn't why she was hired.
This sounds horribly reminiscent of some of the female boardroom appointments which have been made with a view to achieving a clearer focus on "women's issues".Breadvan72 said:
Or maybe she was appointed because of her skills and experience. Crazy idea, eh?
Krazee!The thing is, there are credible suggestions that it wasn't quite as crazy.
Link in the OP said:
Ministers are “determined” to appoint a woman as chairman of the BBC Trust simply because of her gender, a senior Tory MP has suggested.
Conor Burns, a leading member of the culture, media and sport select committee, accused political leaders of interfering in the decision and said he had “serious concerns” about the way the appointment was being handled.
He said the replacement for Lord Patten of Barnes should be the “best person” for the job, regardless of gender, and that the issue should not be a “political football”.
Somebody well placed to be aware of ministerial interference speaks of gender-biased ministerial interference.Conor Burns, a leading member of the culture, media and sport select committee, accused political leaders of interfering in the decision and said he had “serious concerns” about the way the appointment was being handled.
He said the replacement for Lord Patten of Barnes should be the “best person” for the job, regardless of gender, and that the issue should not be a “political football”.
Those of us not on the select committee in question will read it and accept that there were and are 'serious concerns'.
Token females (and quotas for that matter) don't do the sisterhood any good, ask a sister (I asked a sister-in-law).
dandarez said:
Now you've lost all your credibility (if you had any of course).
This is a bit rich coming from the bloke who photoshopped Adolf Hitler's hairstyle and moustache onto a photo of an EU official and posted it on here, and later decided to delete it when even his usual cohorts told him he had been a bit of an arse.Had you forgotten? I hadn't...
hstewie said:Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff