Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#1
Well with all the problems at the BBC we are now hearing mr patton has agreed the outgoing chief will be paid £450,000
it has caused uproar even in conservative ranks, where the tory chair of media and sport stating, this is out of order
and other tory MP's saying Patton has let the public down(license payers)
seems another wound opens up
2 more bbc people resigned this morning
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
#2
A political point about the BBC incompetence eh Keith, some might suggest its an obsession.
Guest 703- Registered: 30 Jul 2010
- Posts: 2,096
#3
A technical point Keith, it wasn't agreed by Patten but by the BBC Trust -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/who_we_are/trustees/Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
#4
To months ago some government fool gave the new head of the BBC, a contract that guarantees the man 6 months pay if he leaves the job, and 12 months pay if he is sacked
Why are public sector workers being give contracts like this?
Good to see Phillip Davies shovelling crap all over them
Over to you Barry
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
#5
Its scandalous, dont pay your licence fee you'll be prosecuted, now we see where our money is going.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#6
A great deal of the Licence Fee has ever gone this way, and still does. Along with executives in the Private Sector, with which there is said to be the most tenuous of links, remuneration packages for those at the 'top' have grown out of all proportion throughout the Boom years that were anything but.
Kudos is something seen in entirely monetary terms, and is now Greek to us all.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#7
...and while we are at it. At least this guy went, what about certain heads of commercial media that oversee law-breaking and yet stay in post?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#8
As the pay-out was double what it need have been I think the resignation might have been not so voluntary after all, Anyway he seems not to have been up to the job going by the interview I saw yesterday, not one really acceptable answer to the questions asked.
Having said that the Newsnight team responsible for this mess should be the ones getting the push rather than being side lined as seems to have happened. Sadly we all know that when a BBC department head gets questioned about something the viewers think is wrong the big wig always end up saying "I was right".
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 693- Registered: 12 Nov 2009
- Posts: 1,266
#9
Now, I may be a little old-fashioned, but if you resign, why should you expect any pay off at all? Millions of people resign from their jobs every year without getting a year's salary for doing so.....I'm thinking of resigning from my own job and wonder if I'll pay myself a year's dosh for doing so.
I think the Bank manager might veto that one!
Keith, just a minor point: the two bods who went from Auntie this morning were "invited to stand aside" rather than resign [I]per se[I]. If a year's salary is part of the deal, I should imagine that half the Corporation's staff will be rather hoping that they are likewise "invited to stand aside".
True friends stab you in the front.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#10
I think it is a case of those high up in any job use the word 'resign' while for the ordinary employee the term would be 'sacked'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#11
In local government they put them on ``garden duties``.....for `year`....before they receive their golden ``good-byes``
When we finally get our East Kent Council.....the CEO`s and the unnecessary three management teams can look after
our garden..........
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#12
Oh the irony...
"
The outcry arising from the BBC's failings over the Jimmy Savile affair and the latest Newsnight debacle is well justified. These events cast grave doubts on the credibility and professionalism of the corporation's journalists and executives, but the integrity, honesty and fairness of the manner in which the BBC reports news must now be questioned.
For far too long Left-wing views have held sway in every facet of news and topical programmes offered by our national broadcaster.
An organisation that relies on its funding from the taxpayer must be even-handed.
Mick Richards
Llanfair Waterdine, Shropshire "
My emphasis.
No mention of that other organisation which gets oodles of public money...The Conservative Party, or of the Police, for that matter.
Some folk don't know whether to put a shoe on it or shoot it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/9670630/Following-the-Newsnight-disgrace-taxpayers-must-now-question-how-the-BBC-reports-news.htmlIgnorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#13
What an absurd statement there Tom.
The BBC under its Charter is supposed to be impartial in its political coverage. For that it gets the licence fee. The BBC has long been in breach of its charter by being openly left wing in outlook (left wing, not necessarily Labour incidentally...) and also pro-EU. It has actually admitted an institutional EU bias. It also recruits exclusively from the leftie bible the Grauniad.
So what public money does the Conservative Party get then Tom? I cannot let such a statement go unchallenged, we do not have taxpayer funded political parties in this country, thankfully. What on earth has the police got to do with it as well?
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#14
An unbiased and balanced discussion of the matters surrounding Savile and his like could not talk of the BBC and nothing but the BBC.
As the opposition gets public money, 'Short Money' in the commons and 'Cranborne Money' in the Lords, have the Conservatives not received any of this?
Police failings have a lot to do with this same issue, are they not paid by the public purse?
Where is the comparator in this talk of BBC left bias? Fox news? Glen Beck? You'll be saying next that this is the first time you've heard of this fellow Patton.
P.S.
I find the fifth 't' in your opening line extraneous.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#15
There are always comments that the BBC is biased from both reds and blues (not noticed the yellows
) so the Beeb are unbiased it is just that neither side like being criticised.
Edit, I wonder what is wrong with the T in 'there'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#16
Tom - Short Money and Cranborne Money (going back to Wilson) are payments to fund the office of HM Official Opposition and are not party political payments as such but to cover an important parliamentary process.
Once again Tom you miss my point about bias, likewise Jan.
I am not suggesting a pro-Labour, or any party bias but a 'left bias' that is very subtle. This bias includes favouring Conservative's from the 'wet' as it was or left of the Conservative spectrum as much as Labour, LibDem or whatever. It is very clear and pronounced in the way they big-up left wing causes and issues such as the environment and the EU. There have been many surveys that identify this bias and the pro-EU bias was actually admitted by the BBC.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#17
Drop the other shoe Barry, what is missing from the output of the Beeb? Franco's lighter side? Argentina's misunderstood years? Goose-step your way to fitness?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 693- Registered: 12 Nov 2009
- Posts: 1,266
#18
I have to agree with Barry over the 'bias' issue, especially where the EU is concerned. Any more bias and the BBC would have to fly the EU standard over Broadcasting House......and whence does Auntie receive an almighty chunk of funding? Why, Brussels, of course.
Something amiss here? I think we should be told........
True friends stab you in the front.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#19
I have relished at times the BBC being a tad left wing. I enjoyed it and still do. As the establishment in general is mostly conservative both small and large C it can be a refreshing approach. Over the years ITN has been the exact opposite, i have very often thrown my 'other shoe' at the screen over some of their reports... so between the two we got a reasonable balance. ITV news is less of a player nowadays or so it seems ..what with the rise of Sky News. I havent quite figured out yet which side of the political divide Sky News is on, but I reckon it supports secretly whosoever Mr Murdoch is pushing in his papers. Currently this is the Conservatives.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#20
"
Appointments
Governors were usually appointed from senior positions in various walks of British society. Appointments were part-time positions and lasted for four (formerly five) years. Four governors were given specific responsibilities: for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the English regions.
Governors were nominally appointed by the monarch on the advice of ministers. In practice, governors were chosen by the government of the day. This has led to claims of political interference, in particular during the years of Margaret Thatcher's premiership.
Controversy
The Thatcher government appointed a succession of governors with the apparent intent of bringing the BBC "into line" with government policy. Marmaduke Hussey was appointed chairman of the Board of Governors apparently with the specific agenda of bringing down the then-Director-General Alasdair Milne; this government also broke the tradition of always having a trade union leader on the Board of Governors.
BBC director general Mark Thompson said "staff were "quite mystified" by the rise of Margaret Thatcher but that there was "less overt tribalism" among its journalists.[1]
"Conservative commentators have long criticised the BBC for being a hotbed of Left-wingers and an internal report from 2007 said it had to make greater efforts to avoid liberal bias."[1]
It has also been suggested that Harold Wilson's appointment of the former Tory minister Lord Hill as chairman of the Board of Governors in 1967 was motivated by a desire to undermine the radical, questioning agenda of Director-General Sir Hugh Greene - ironically Wilson had attacked the appointment of Hill as Chairman of the Independent Television Authority by a Conservative government in 1963.
In January 2004 Gavyn Davies, who had been appointed chairman of the Board of Governors by the Labour government in 2001, resigned in the wake of the Hutton Inquiry. Lord Ryder, previously a Conservative Member of Parliament and a member of Margaret Thatcher's personal staff, replaced him as Acting Chairman. It has been claimed that Ryder and other Conservatives on the Board of Governors were effectively responsible for "forcing out" Director-General Greg Dyke, who had not initially believed that his offer of resignation would be accepted by the Governors."
From 1922 to 2006 there were 21 Chairs of BBC Governors;
6-Barons,
6-Knights,
2-Lords,
1-Viscount,
1-Earl
So, Trots the lot of them?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Board_of_Governors_of_the_BBCIgnorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
