Are the BBC Racist

[Not-The-Messiah]

Countdown said:

JagLover said:

Like this?

2015 election 51% Conservative

https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

Ok. But it does kind of prove the point that NP&E really isn't representative of the wider public and is significantly right-wing biased.

Cons get 51% on poll vs 42% in reality
UKIP 31 % in poll vs 1.8% in reality
Labour 4% in poll vs 40%+ in reality

Would be interesting to see the BBC employees results for such a question. My prediction is that it would be total reversal.

[XM5ER]

You can read this one of two ways, the BBC is anti white South African (or racist if you prefer), or possibly fell for an easy bit of press release propaganda for the anc ahead of this protest.
https://www.iol.co.za/capetimes/news/thousands-of-...

[Ayahuasca]

I know the BBC tries to be inclusive, but is it also plural?

FFS

Standards, chaps.

[ATG]

Funkycoldribena said:

Countdown said:

Ok. But it does kind of prove the point that NP&E really isn't representative of the wider public and is significantly right-wing biased.

Cons get 51% on poll vs 42% in reality
UKIP 31 % in poll vs 1.8% in reality
Labour 4% in poll vs 40%+ in reality

Doesnt feel it though, feels very left wing to me.
Maybe the left shouts louder giving that impression.

I'm looking for a parrot

[hairyben]

jjlynn27 said:

otolith said:

AW111 said:

Use of the terms "virtue signalling" and "social justice warrior" in the same sentence tells us all we need to know about hairyben.

That he has committed a thoughtcrime which could be eliminated if only we could expunge those words (and thus those ideas) from the language?

No.

That he is parroting those words now, just because breitbart told him that it's rather cool to use them.

Never read breibart, and the person I listen to who mentions SJWs negatively most often is a gay liberal. I could say try again, but whether I form opinions listening to breibart, daily mail, the guardian, socialist worker, wikipedia or barry and fred down the pub is completely irrelevent, just another worthless distraction from someone unable to address the arguement/point that bothers them from an intelectual angle.

[Lance Catamaran]

I don't for one second think the whole organisation is, but they are happy to allow racist material such as this to be shown under their name

https://twitter.com/bbcthisweek/status/91861074637...

[kev1974]

They have managed to get themselves accused of racism here
http://metro.co.uk/2018/01/19/bbc-criticised-for-b...

The offending tweet:
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsbeat/status/95360215231...

[Russian Troll Bot]

You don't combat discrimination and racism with discrimination and racism. By only seeing someone's skin colour you do nothing to promote the belief that we are all the same.

[BlackLabel]

kev1974 said:

They have managed to get themselves accused of racism here
http://metro.co.uk/2018/01/19/bbc-criticised-for-b...

The offending tweet:
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsbeat/status/95360215231...

Just wait until the whole pick-your-race/race is a social construct movement gets going properly. We've already seen it with gender. You could then have, for example, a white man self identifying as a black person and applying for such ethnic minority only roles.

[amusingduck]

BlackLabel said:

kev1974 said:

They have managed to get themselves accused of racism here
http://metro.co.uk/2018/01/19/bbc-criticised-for-b...

The offending tweet:
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsbeat/status/95360215231...

Just wait until the whole pick-your-race/race is a social construct movement gets going properly. We've already seen it with gender. You could then have, for example, a white man self identifying as a black person and applying for such ethnic minority only roles.

Already happened in the good old US of A.


http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/20/us/rachel-doleza...

She was even the head of the local NAACP chapter

[anonymous-user]

amusingduck said:

Already happened in the good old US of A.


http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/20/us/rachel-doleza...

She was even the head of the local NAACP chapter

Those Amish girls are so hot

[Ayahuasca]

Not another BBC thread.

And it should be 'Is the BBC..', not 'Are the BBC..'

[Mike335i]

Ayahuasca said:

Not another BBC thread.

And it should be 'Is the BBC..', not 'Are the BBC..'

Best me to it, the BBC is one organisation.

I like the BBC. There, I said it.

[TheGuru]

jjlynn27 said:

No.

That he is parroting those words now, just because breitbart told him that it's rather cool to use them.

Yawn, don't the regressive left ever get sick and tired of their continual smugness and lecturing to others about what sort of words they can use?

[mac96]

BlackLabel said:

kev1974 said:

They have managed to get themselves accused of racism here
http://metro.co.uk/2018/01/19/bbc-criticised-for-b...

The offending tweet:
https://twitter.com/BBCNewsbeat/status/95360215231...

Just wait until the whole pick-your-race/race is a social construct movement gets going properly. We've already seen it with gender. You could then have, for example, a white man self identifying as a black person and applying for such ethnic minority only roles.

Something like this already happening in Brazil as well, with quotas to help black people into further education leading to arguments about who looks black enough. Having black ancestors is no longer enough...

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/black-o...

[ATG]

Russian Troll Bot said:

You don't combat discrimination and racism with discrimination and racism. By only seeing someone's skin colour you do nothing to promote the belief that we are all the same.

Not quite true. If you never see a black person reading the news, for example, then you might think that that is the natural way of things; black people shouldn't/couldn't/don't want to be TV journalists, and black kids might think it was impossible for black people to land those jobs.

By discriminating in favour of black TV journalists so that some start getting on air, you can start making it normal to see black faces reading the news, i.e. you can change people's expectations of the jobs that black people can have.

Before anyone says that this is unfair on white applicants during the period where they are being actively discriminated against, (a) tough luck, frankly, you might have to take one for the greater good, but (b) the only candidates who will really suffer are the weakest ones, and they'd not be landing these jobs in the first place if all races in the population were represented proportionately in the organisation to start with.

[Russian Troll Bot]

ATG said:

Russian Troll Bot said:

You don't combat discrimination and racism with discrimination and racism. By only seeing someone's skin colour you do nothing to promote the belief that we are all the same.

Not quite true. If you never see a black person reading the news, for example, then you might think that that is the natural way of things; black people shouldn't/couldn't/don't want to be TV journalists, and black kids might think it was impossible for black people to land those jobs.

By discriminating in favour of black TV journalists so that some start getting on air, you can start making it normal to see black faces reading the news, i.e. you can change people's expectations of the jobs that black people can have.

Before anyone says that this is unfair on white applicants during the period where they are being actively discriminated against, (a) tough luck, frankly, you might have to take one for the greater good, but (b) the only candidates who will really suffer are the weakest ones, and they'd not be landing these jobs in the first place if all races in the population were represented proportionately in the organisation to start with.

Companies should pick the best person for the job, and if you purposefully pick someone to fit a quota you are not selecting the most capable candidate. Is it not a bit patronising to tell a black person they need a helping hand to get their dream career as well? Not to mention by constantly being told you aren't being hired because of racism does nothing to break down barriers and just helps to foster an "us and them" attitude. Besides, if the hiring company really are racist they won't give a job to the minority candidate anyway, so the whole interview will be a waste of everyone's time.

Take the journalist job as an example - say a position opens up at the BBC and they have a number of highly qualified applicants who just so happen to be white and one minority candidate who works in a factory. Would they have to interview or even employ them? By your last paragraph I can also assume you would be happy to be turned down for an interview because of your skin colour?

I firmly believe that we should treat people equally regardless of their race, sexuality or gender. But this process is a two way street. If you want to be treated the same as any other skin colour then I fully support that, but you can't then demand preferential treatment because of your skin colour.

[ATG]

Russian Troll Bot said:

ATG said:

Russian Troll Bot said:

You don't combat discrimination and racism with discrimination and racism. By only seeing someone's skin colour you do nothing to promote the belief that we are all the same.

Not quite true. If you never see a black person reading the news, for example, then you might think that that is the natural way of things; black people shouldn't/couldn't/don't want to be TV journalists, and black kids might think it was impossible for black people to land those jobs.

By discriminating in favour of black TV journalists so that some start getting on air, you can start making it normal to see black faces reading the news, i.e. you can change people's expectations of the jobs that black people can have.

Before anyone says that this is unfair on white applicants during the period where they are being actively discriminated against, (a) tough luck, frankly, you might have to take one for the greater good, but (b) the only candidates who will really suffer are the weakest ones, and they'd not be landing these jobs in the first place if all races in the population were represented proportionately in the organisation to start with.

Companies should pick the best person for the job, and if you purposefully pick someone to fit a quota you are not selecting the most capable candidate. Is it not a bit patronising to tell a black person they need a helping hand to get their dream career as well? Not to mention by constantly being told you aren't being hired because of racism does nothing to break down barriers and just helps to foster an "us and them" attitude. Besides, if the hiring company really are racist they won't give a job to the minority candidate anyway, so the whole interview will be a waste of everyone's time.

Take the journalist job as an example - say a position opens up at the BBC and they have a number of highly qualified applicants who just so happen to be white and one minority candidate who works in a factory. Would they have to interview or even employ them? By your last paragraph I can also assume you would be happy to be turned down for an interview because of your skin colour?

I firmly believe that we should treat people equally regardless of their race, sexuality or gender. But this process is a two way street. If you want to be treated the same as any other skin colour then I fully support that, but you can't then demand preferential treatment because of your skin colour.

You've missed the point I was making. You've assumed that in the absence of "positive" discrimination there is already a level playing field where candidates are hired on merit alone. That is often not the case. We may need to give the system a deliberate shove to get it out of a rut.

[Russian Troll Bot]

I haven't, I've pointed out the flaws in positive discrimination and that you will not achieve a meritocracy by replacing one form of nepotism with another. Or to put it another way, if you were in charge of a company, would you employ the best people for the job, or those who represent the ethnic makeup of the UK?


Another good example, the East Midlands Labour Conference is charging white attendees £10 more for a visitors pass. Again, I am all for equality but this means paying the same as everyone else

https://login.labevents.org/application/eventappli...

[Countdown]

Russian Troll Bot said:

I haven't, I've pointed out the flaws in positive discrimination and that you will not achieve a meritocracy by replacing one form of nepotism with another. Or to put it another way, if you were in charge of a company, would you employ the best people for the job, or those who represent the ethnic makeup of the UK?

You’re assuming the “default” is a genuine meritocracy when it has been proven not to be on numerous occasions.