BBC: Once again the BBC has been discredited

The BBC used to be credited as a reputable public broadcaster. Now, it has been made a joke, a playground for so called stars and political parties for their own personal agendas. The return of Gary Lineker has been yet another embarrassment. He was taken off air, presumably for having violated the rules of the Corporation. As soon as he went back, he immediately used his private Twitter account - once again - to do exactly the same that he did before and that motivated disciplinary measures. Who actually controls the BBC? It was bad enough to see the BBC controlled by political agendas promoted by BBC 'tribes'. The BBC has been publicly humiliated. BBC's reputation is in tatters.

BBC: Where there is danger, there is opportunity - Time for change?

 For some of us, moves concerning the BBC and the now really and trully defunct BBC World Service (what now exists is merely a skeleton service and a shadow of what used to be the record breaking broadcaster) were a catastrophic mistake. The BBC actually withdrew from the international arena, very much like other international broadcasters.

In 1991, I attended a gathering organised by an organisation based in Barcelona. Representatives from the BBC, Radio Netherlands, Deutsche Welle, Radio France International, Radio Austria International, Radio Moscow International, and others met in Sitges. What happened afterwards was forseable. For several broadcasters the writing was on the wall. In Britain, the move towards Value for Money (translated as Value for Rubbish) was already underway and one of the promoters of such move was none other than John Birt (now Lord Birt). Kenneth Clarke and Tony Blair sealed the fate of the radio and television services provided by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Britain lost and lost pre-eminence in many parts of the world including Latin America.

Year after year, budget cuts followed by very bad management have led to more and more service cuts at the BBC. There was a time when the BBC was supposed to present two opposite points of view and have three independent sources that could confirm the veracity of what was being reported. Not anymore. In the rush to very much mirror the private sector, the BBC have lost credibility dramatically. The move to replace BBC presenters with agency staff was catastrophic and there were reports of presenters being adviced to register as external service providers in order to avoid taxes. Having what are supposed to be BBC flagship programmes presented by agency presenters was not a happy idea and the recent Lineker Affair is a clear example of what is wrong about the BBC - vast amounts of TV Licence paid to external presenters and producers while the BBC is forced to scale down the organisation because of budgetary constraints.

Gary Lineker: Using the BBC for political agendas

 

For a long time, there has been criticism regarding BBC Superstars and the fact that they are overlypaid when the coorportation has been downsizing and cutting down services.

Not a year goes by without hearing announcements regarding services being cut off to save money and it is not any money. It is about money gathered because people most of whom do not watch the BBC are forced to pay under duress.

Despite the fact the he made a name because of football, Gary Lineker has very well known political views and political allegiances. If we want a BBC that is seen as impartial, Gary Lineker is not the best exponent of such impartiality and perhaps, and without perhaps, this led the BBC to make the decision not to allow the presenter to host a very public football programme. His twitter comments led to confrontation and even division between peoples that hold similar political views. Exponents of the Jewish Communities in the UK have shown that they are not happy - in some cases that they are deeply unhappy - to hear or see that the experiences of 70 or so years ago are being used for party political purposes in the United Kingdom. Is this a watershed moment? Are people tired enough of seeing words like Nazi, Fascist, Racist, Homophobe, Transphobe used to prevent any qualified debate about many of today's issues and ills?

Gary Lineker is not a Member of Parliament. Perhaps he should consider leaving the BBC, stopping being a sports presenter, and engage in politics full on. Then he could talk about politics using his own steam instead of using his presence as presenter of a public broadcaster to promote his views. It is become apparent that many communities in the United Kingdom are not happy when they are flooded with illegal immigrant centres and their local economies that were already in trouble before their hospitality industry was used for purposes that have nothing to do with the reasons why the hospitality industry was created. Calling disgruntled and desperate local communities Far Right or Racist is in itself a form of abuse. Local inhabitants become hostages of circumstances beyond their control. They become victims of decisions made by political groups that are not to have to cope with the repercusions of their decisions. 

What is happening in many local communities across the United Kingdom shows, once again, the disconnect between the well-off and the poorer segments of society. The said centres are not set up in well-off areas. The said centres are set up in the poorest areas of Britain. Rich Liberals and Champagne Socialists are condemning the poorest in Britain to live in conditions that Rich Liberals and Champagne Socialist would not want to live in.  

Enforcing migration laws reinforces rights and security

Enforcing migration laws protects rights and security. People traffickers must not be allowed to continue their illegal and potentially murderous business. Porous borders are also a gigantic national security risk and especially in the times we are going through. Who can guarantee that plotters and saboteurs will not enter the country disguised as illegal migrants? 

Britain is on the brink of all-out war. It would be fairly easy to enter and blow up military installations, carry out assassinations, damage vital infra-structure and engage in all other kinds of actions that will be critically damaging. We don't allow people to enter the country via an airport or a harbour without proper documentation. Why should thousands of people be allowed to enter the country by simply landing on the coasts without any documentation?

Rishi Sunak is on the right path to ensure both that rights are respected and British borders are secure but, as usual, Opposition politicians and political activists will be in favour of criminality as long as it suits their political agenda. 

France is a safe country and there are British diplomatic and consular agencies in France. Why not approaching a British agency in France to ask for permission to enter Britain? It is self-evident that those entering Britain illegally have no intention and never had the intention to procede legally. They are not coming for war zones. They are coming via the European Union and therefore they hiave the legal means to apply for permission if they so wanted.

Having said that, the debate is ruined by things that have little or nothing to do with the real need to control British borders and the misery created by the chaotic state of migration will go and on and everything is deemed to be placed before the altar of political correctness, criminal organisations will prosper while law abiding communities will be sacrificed.