Extinction Rebellion, the BBC and a Deadly Embrace

A Little Historical Background (skip this if you like)

In 1957 a world renowned Social Scientist named Leon Festinger  studied an end-of-the-world cult to see what would happen when their end-date came and went.

He was particularly interested in what would happen after their prophesy failed ( a disconfirmation as he called it). Surprisingly the disconfirmation did not destroy the cults belief but rather the cult tended to re-direct and reinforce it with some pseudo-rationalisation as to why the disconfirmation occurred.

Before the end-date the cult was utterly convinced that the end-of-the-world was at hand. The primary members fed off each others belief in a bizarre social embrace which annihilated
any prospect of disbelief and locked them into the cult. While the leading members were middle aged, the "foot soldiers" were almost exclusively young. Most were teenagers.

Intelligence did not appear to be a criteria in cult membership. The cult included a PhD Astro-physicist, one of the leaders was a qualified medical doctor and another was a degree qualified electrical engineer.

Yet their cult belief was laughable. They believed that the world was going to end in a flood and that they (as the chosen) would be picked up by flying saucer.  As the end-date approached they saw every calamity affecting the world (in that year there were severe earthquakes in Iran) as proof of their belief.

When the end-date came and went, the cult were presented with the painful truth that their mutually inflated prophesy had failed. Festinger later on defined this state as one of "Cognitive Dissonance" . Instead of what most people would expect to happen (i.e cult members would realise their error and move on) the cult leaders pseudo-rationalised that the disconfirmation was due to their commitment. In fact in their view the cult had saved the world from certain annihilation.

Preposterous as it was, this pseudo-rationalisation drove the cults proselytising into over-drive. The press lapped it up.

The editorial policy for almost all newspapers was (then as now) to boost circulation.

The stories of a world about to end, governmental conspiracy and a "higher calling" boosted circulation and so played directly to the newspaper's editorial policy. The fact that the cult was based on an absurd premise was irrelevant.

The editorial policy came first.

So, what has it got to do with Extinction Rebellion and the BBC?

Unfortunately, in my opinion, quite a lot.

I hate to use  25 minutes of your time but if you have a chance please watch at least a few minutes of this video of one of the founders of Extinction Rebellion in an interview on BBCs Hard Talk. (starts one minute in)

Notice the end-of-days style prophesies with "6 billion dying from wars/starvation".  Notice the impending "social collapse", how "nobody was listening". Then we have the "lying elites" and "lying experts". It could be Festinger's flying saucer fanatics talking. And of course, like Festinger's cult, only Extinction Rebellion have the answer.

So what about the BBC?

Watch the interview. While it is perfectly reasonable for a public service broadcaster to interview fanatics, the interviewer allows the Extinction Rebellion founder to get away with just about any hair brained statement he cared to mention.

He continually refers to "the science" though what he quotes is out-and-out dark fantasy and bore no relation to anything from the IPCC let alone from any other reputable scientific source. Nobody asks what science he is referring to. Let alone requesting verification.

Unchallenged, he repeated several times that 6 billion would die. At one point early on he predicts mass starvation within ten years. No scientific references were given or sought. Each time the BBC presenter nodded it through.

When the interviewer does briefly corner him the Extinction Rebellion founder then declares the interviewer was not "emotionally" connecting to the problem. (Whatever that means.) Again this ludicrous assertion is given a free pass.

The BBC interviewer appears to be solely interested in the disruption this group causes and how it may threaten the established order. The only scientific query the  presenter focused on was their crazy concept of making the UK "carbon free" by 2025. (Even the journalist finds this risible)

Other than this, in a quite shocking dereliction of journalistic enquiry the journalist simply fails to challenge the pseudo-science spouted out by this individual. Particularly, nowhere is the reduction of the planets population to just one billion by starvation and war in 60 years questioned.

I worry that this dereliction is in fact driven by BBC policy rather than simple editorial incompetence. I got the continual impression that the journalist was trying at every opportunity to align with the Extinction Rebellion founder. The scientific basis for the absurd claims went totally unchallenged. The silence implied agreement. It was in effect a discussion between two like minds. It was just one of them was more extreme than the other.

Like Festingers cult, where journalistic integrity came a distant second to editorial policy, I suspect the BBC deliberately ditched the hard (and vital) questions. To them it is better to flatter the crazies. Just as long as they more or less align with the BBC editorial policy on Climate Change.

While all cults are potentially dangerous this abomination called Extinction Rebellion makes Festingers flying saucer fools look positively benign. The social embrace from Extinction Rebellion (especially to the very young) is far more sinister, destructive and totalitarian in nature.

I fear that one day soon the followers of Extinction Rebellion may well find the "cause" has turned from a call to civil disobedience into a crushing deadly embrace that could easily cost them (and many others) their lives.

While Climate Change may well be a problem, it is NOT an end-of-days problem.

It is wholly irresponsible of an organisation like the BBC to sit back and give unchallenged airspace to (any) organisation that presents pseudo-science as fact. Even if the pseudo-science is more palatable to the BBC than asking the hard and verifiable questions.

We need a public broadcaster that is prepared to ask the hard questions. Even if the BBC themselves do not like the answers, and even if the questions go against BBC editorial policy.

Otherwise we simply have a propaganda channel.

The Devils Mark and the UKIP Witch.

As the General Election approaches we watch a comedic and vacuous contest between the main parties as they attempt to variously bribe, frighten or deceive the electorate into electing them.

The major parties need bogeymen. So whether it's the SNP, Plaid Cymru, UKIP or the Greens, you can bet the spin doctors are working overtime vilifying those who threaten their traditional voting base.

Generally the pompous self serving propaganda is more high farce than high politics.

But even so, a special and vile black propaganda is reserved for “racist” UKIP. While the other minor parties are disliked, UKIP is despised - and feared. Probably because it offers the biggest immediate threat to the status quo.

Racist. What a word!

A vile word speaking of Eugenics, pseudo science and demonic bigotry.

A word that today, is chanted, screamed and spat out. A vile word currently aimed at generally decent and politically virginal folk. Folk who generally wouldn't know how to be racist if they tried.

It is the modern day equivalent of the 17^th century Witch-Finder judgement of Witch! Witch! Witch!

A word of hate screamed with the aim of subjugating opposition and silencing dissent.

Most of the supporters of UKIP are blue collar working people. Folk who feel impelled to support UKIP because they feel disenfranchised by the ruling metropolitan elites. In some ways UKIP support is a mirror of the way working class Scots have rallied behind the SNP and abandoned a complacent, tired and irrelevant Scottish Labour Party.

But Racist!

The word racist, by such gross misrepresentation, loses its meaning. It is now a word that has become the property of anti-democratic bigots all the way from the upholstered boardrooms at the BBC down through to the vile spiteful losers that inhabit the sewer like recesses of the extreme left.

But the word racist screamed out by a hate filled zealot and aimed at a decent, kind and moral 80 year old pensioner is of course, still sadly undeniable. Just as terrified young girls in the 17^th century found that being tortured and then declared a witch was undeniable as well.

In the 17^th century a woman accused of witchcraft would be “Pricked”. Pricking involved drawing blood with a needle. If a place was found that either didn't bleed or had maybe become numb from the torment then the woman bore the “Devils Mark” and was clearly a witch.

It was a pathetically stupid way of determining guilt for a non crime.

Today's equivalent of pricking is the continual hostile interrogation. The perpetual attempts to put words into people's mouths. The sneering innuendo and trickery perpetrated on simple folk as they seek to explain their position. A media inquisition (led by the BBC) intent on building an ugly image, no matter how false.

Truly, like other political parties, UKIP policies need to be subjected to tight scrutiny and clear analysis but conducting a hate filled pogrom against their right to free-speech is simple mindless witch hunting.

There is no place for it in modern society.

Please Note:

Billothewisp is not a member of UKIP or any other political party. He knows nobody within UKIP. He has never had any direct contact with anyone within UKIP. He is unlikely to vote UKIP in the coming General Election. 

He does however believe in free speech. 

If such a travesty was perpetrated against the Lib-Dems or the Greens or even the Labour or Conservative parties, he would write the same.

Protesters told to Frack Off

The good people of Balcombe are law abiding and decent folk. Bearing in mind how much anti-fracking propaganda has been spewed out about the Balcombe drill site they are understandably somewhat nervous. But even they realise that the Cuadrilla test well is hardly the end of the world. It is by the way, not fracked. It is not even gas - they are drilling a test well for oil.

The good folk of Balcombe are, however getting truly p*ssed off with the anti-social self-indulgent tribe of technologically illiterate bigots who have descended upon them.

Below is an open letter from the Balcombe Parish Chairman to the buffoons.

(h/t to Bishop Hill here )

[quote]

...At a public meeting held last Friday evening [No Dash for Gas] sought to justify such actions on the grounds that the company that is drilling is acting illegally and that in consequence illegal actions to stop it are justified. This is quite simply not the case.  Like it or not, the drilling operation is entirely legal.  All the necessary permissions and permits have been sought and are in place.

• Thirdly the  group seeks to legitimize such actions by saying that whatever is done is in response to Balcombe residents’ call for help. This is just not true.

So here it is. Balcombe strongly opposes any actions which may be taken which involve civil trespass and/or illegal acts. And I further state this, if the No Dash for Gas group is coming here in the full knowledge that it intends to break the law then it should stay away. It is not wanted in Balcombe! It is duly uninvited.

Alison Stevenson

Chairman

Balcombe Parish Council

[unquote]

I just found the full letter.... it is HERE

Just about says it all really.

Saville McAlpine and the Secret 28

It would have been difficult for anyone to avoid the recent BBC controversies over the Saville cover up or the McAlpine slander.  But there is yet more that the BBC wishes to keep from your eyes.

This latest secrecy revolves around a 2006 editorial decision the BBC once bragged about in an in-house report. It is sadly just another shocking indictment of the arrogance of the BBC.
The 2006 editorial decision concerned removing the concept of even handedness on the reportage of climate change. The BBC declared that this decision was arrived at after consulting 28 "leading experts". However the BBC was rather coy about who exactly these "experts" were. Since then it has point blank refused provide any more information.

Climate Change, as you may have surmised, is one of the most important debates in living history. To remove the basic concept of even handedness from such a debate MUST have a verifiable and clear reasoning behind it. Instead the BBC is silent and is willing to go to court and spend a huge amount of licence payers money defending its position from a freedom of information request. (See Here) All this to simply defy a Welsh pensioner and his wife who wanted to know who these "experts" were.

You have to ask: What exactly does the BBC have to hide?

For obvious reasons, those who are not convinced by the climate change argument are smelling a rat and I don't blame them.

The only way people can be educated as to the effects of mass pollution is to allow the questions, however heretical, and allow fair dissent to the current mantra, even if that dissent contradicts current scientific knowledge.

Science, let alone democracy, is never served by denying debate. This current secretive BBC stance reduces their coverage of climate change to mere propaganda. Which is much more than a shame.

The uncaring, high handed and self serving ethos that IS the BBC has shown via the Saville affair, that children were and probably still are, unsafe in the hands of the BBC.

Similarly their bizarre trial by innuendo and deceit of a leading Tory shows that individuals cannot expect fair dealing from the BBC (I wonder how many lesser persons, without McAlpines resources have been ruined over the years by similar "investigations")

Now finally we have via the "Secret 28" the sordid display of the BBC apparently suppressing debate and taking a partisan position. Without any justification other than "Trust us - we are the BBC".

As every day passes, this self serving elitist bureaucracy get ever more corrupt, ever more divorced from the people who pay for it's excess.

With this latest, and so far low profile outrage, the BBC is seeking to hide from us the identity of those who helped it arrive at one of the most important editorial decisions of the last 50 years.

Such an arrogant secretive stance reveals the BBC as the enemy of fair scientific debate,  and so then, as the enemy of democracy itself.

This monster must be brought to heel.

BBC Whitewash: Matt or Gloss?

Dear Reader,

Tonight I am going to perform the magical feat of reviewing the BBC Savile documentary before it has even been broadcast. Why? It is on late and I have to go to work tomorrow!

Even so, am I jumping the gun? Being a little premature maybe?

Well, not as premature as this so called Panorama expose.

After all is this not all part of a C-R-I-M-I-N-A-L investigation?

It appears not. At least as far as this documentary is concerned.

This late night Panorama program cynically ensures the BBC can beat it's chest about Savile, without breaking the criminal investigation embargo. It concentrates on a side issue, the pulling of an earlier documentary about Savile. It is being broadcast late on, just as many people are going to bed so minimising the audience.

It is difficult to see this forthcoming Panorama broadcast can be anything other than a clever damage limitation exercise. The documentary can try and draw a little of the poison from the Savile affair and also get  pro BBC propaganda out even while the criminal investigation continues.

Here we have the BBC earnestly investigating the BBC. Then carefully orchestrating how and what is revealed.

No doubt there will be some tut tutting about a little corporate naughtiness, then they will grandly announce that there is nothing really rotten at the dear old auntie Beeb.

You know: Practices have been amended, lessons learned, staff re-trained etc. etc. Ra.. Ra.. Ra..

Of course it is likely that Savile was only the tip of the iceberg. Consequently  I expect email and data backups relating to other potential abusers are currently having a "deep clean" at dear old Beeb.

To me, it is difficult to see anything other than that the crimes of Savile were actively aided and abetted by BBC production and contract staff.  They must have known what went on. It was after all, done under their noses. It also appears to have been common knowledge in the BBC.

But still they rehired him. Again and again. Then quietly let it go on some more. For thirty years.

I am not a lawyer, but to me that sounds like a large number of BBC employees may be potentially "Accessories After The Fact" ( Wikipedia Here ) and possibly complicit in the crimes of Savile and others.

I would also expect that this superior "couldn't give a damn" attitude extended right to the top.

Simply, the BBC ruling elite just didn't care. Why should they?

The BBC regards itself as above the law. Normal rules that apply to the rest of us are suspended for the BBC. In many ways the BBC is a state within a state. Or at least as ruthlessly self centred as any large predatory corporation.

The BBC can and has broken governments. It has it's own poll tax. It is immune from competition and has a guaranteed multi billion income. So why should it care about some young girls, especially when some of their "stars" find them so enticing?

The BBC regulates what you see, like this documentary tonight. You would be naive to expect the truth.

Anyway later on, for those who can keep their eyes open, we will see how right or wrong I am.

Just one final thought:

We have all been appalled by the disgusting antics in News Corporation, but really for every criminal in News Corp it looks like the BBC probably has ten.

Will we be seeing any of them in court soon?

Dream on.

David Nutt, Drugs and Propaganda

Poor old David Nutt. There he was, on the BBC expecting a factually based scientific argument on the country's drugs and drug recovery schemes. All he got was a blinkered  opinionated journalist. All we got, as licence payers was a smokescreen that hid the vital arguments and data.

But for David Nutt, things went from bad to worse. He then was on a regional program and was confronted by someone who was simply uninterested on Nutts scientific studies or credentials and dismissed mere science as an also-ran. They preferred their own narrow viewpoint and were unwilling to bend, even when confronted with the facts.

A travesty for public information. But for the BBC it all made good television. Guardian Article Here

While alternative viewpoints are always useful, and must be heard, it is highly disturbing to find the BBC so in-thrall to such marginal and unverifyable viewpoints. They have just been hauled over the coals by an independant review. (Here). I expect the BBC will issue a myriad of weasel words, I doubt they will take any notice. they are far too self important for that.

It is a good thing that Murdoch has had his wings clipped. But I do fear that this is simply going to leave a triumphalist and self-centered BBC as an even uglier and opinionated organisation than it already is.

If the way they have treated Professor Nutt is anything to go by, we should not be expecting anything like scientifically accurate or informed commentary from the BBC. Just more self serving and sensationalist propaganda that they clearly prefer.

BBC: England Almost Unstruck

Regular visitors to this blog will know that Billothewisp has a very low opinion of the BBC. Especially the way the BBC has airbrushed England out of the political landscape of these shores.

The BBC's stance on the non existence of an English identity was initially explored in  This Early Post Of Mine.

As it is a year since I wrote about this, I thought I would revisit the BBC monolith. Lo and Behold! The BBC has partially relented.

Today on This Page you will find a reference to "Around England"

Of course while N. Ireland Politics, Welsh Politics and Scottish Politics all have detailed references to their own assemblies All the pitiful "Around England" entry boasts is a section on "Blogs around the Regions" Ugh.

Obviously the Great Good and Extremely Well Fed at the BBC are still wedded to Prescotts "Final Solution" to the West Lothian Question. They are fully on-board the concept of destroying England by dismembering it into some regionally antagonistic nightmare. The thought of having an area actually devoted to English politics is still a bridge too far.

I suppose this is progress. Even though it feels like we are all just trying to drag an rusty and obsolete old car up an steep incline. Maybe, one day, this festering travesty of a public service will actually fulfil its duty and really acknowledge an English identity and the existence of English political issues.

Until then, in this blog, England remains stuck out.

BBC: Whine Whine Whine

Good evening my sour faced little Englander friends. This morning Billothewisp had a nasty scare while driving to work. Just after I had turned on the radio, there was an awful whining noise. It modulated up and down. It would stop for a short while only to restart shortly later.

Cambelt shredded?
Breaks binding?

Perplexed I turned off the radio to try and identify the problem. But immediately I did this the noise stopped.

Puzzled, I turned the radio back on. There it was again!

Finally I realised this intermittent whinnying and whining was not my trusty Ford but a gaggle of overpaid and over fed BBC presenters moaning about they would have to suffer the indignity of reduced claret and caviare rations as the licence fee has been frozen.

Further more, they complained that the BBC would actually have to pay for the foreign broadcasting service. Funny that. I thought that sort of thing was what the licence fee was for. But never mind.

So what exactly was this collection of financially replete individuals whinging about? Evidently the BBC has been “bullied” into the freezing of an over-priced licence fee which could result in a real terms reduction of 16% (essentially due to inflation) over five years.

Hardly compares to what the lads at Redcar have had to put up with does it?
Or the Harrier pilots shortly to be given their P45's for that matter.

But personally Billothewisp was rather shocked at this attack on the BBC. If Billothewisp had been in charge I would guarantee that this freezing of the licence fee simply would not have happened.

Instead Billothewisp would have abolished the licence fee completely. The BBC would be financed directly by the treasury who would, one would hope, demand a level of financial rigour the BBC is blatantly unaware of.

Actually I would also probably also cut their budget by 40%, but that is just me and my nasty streak.

The arcane days of unaccountable gravy trains being able to raise their own particular poll tax should be over.

But OH my God can you think of the amount of whining that would raise?

We would all need ear defenders.

BBC to get even more money.

Companies are working short time and trying to survive.
People are having their wages frozen or even cut.
Front line services are going to have to live within their means.
The government is trying to cut £6 billion out of the overspend.
Even cabinet ministers have taken a 5% pay cut.

Yet the bloody BBC gets the OK to increase the licence fee. (see here) . No doubt they haven't got enough champagne or caviar in the cellar to keep the glitterati happy.

Really.
Honest to God.
What the hell is going on?.

When is anybody ever going to have the guts to stand up to these self serving elitist bastards in the BBC?

Oh Joy! BBC to get a kicking

Dear readers, you may have noticed that Billothewisp is hardly a fan of the that self serving corporate monster that many endearingly refer to as “The Beeb”

“The Beeb”.

Sounds nice doesn't it?

A little homely. Cuddly even.

A bit like referring to a Stalin as Uncle Joe or Kim Jong II as the Dear Leader.

It makes them sound, well, Oh so nice.

The ugly truth is that the BBC acts very much like a state within a state. It has its own tax raising power through the laughably outdated TV licence. It protects its patch with any weapon that comes to hand and it has not been slow on bending politics to its own will if need be (see this piece by Daniel Hannan)

Surely a public service broadcaster should be restricted to the same powers and controls as any other public service. But when have you ever come across say, the judiciary raising their own special tax?

Which other branch of the Civil Service pays £4.6 million to its top nine executives? What public service pays £834000 to its Chief Executive? That is the pay by the way. God knows what are the pension rights/severance pay/terminal bonus/pat-in-lieu etc. etc.

This thing is a monster and like all ugly self serving monoliths it threatens our very democracy.

So Billothewisp was very pleased to see this article which indicates that these self serving fat cats Civil Servants are going to be brought to heel.

I hope it is true.

I expect the BBC will whine bitch and threaten. I expect that there will attempts at intimidation and blackmail to prevent any curtailment of their privileged position.

We should expect various irrelevant revelations “In the National Interest” about who is sleeping with who etc. etc. especially concerning those trying to control the monster.

The BBC establishment must be faced down and the whole thing reformed.

Or we will all continue to be the losers, while paying for the champagne lifestyles of the self serving unaccountable elite that is the BBC.

So when is the English Debate?

Billothewisp eagerly watched the Great Good and Extremely Well Fed engage in their little televised tryst over running the country.

At the end, Billothewisp watched the nice Mr Dimble-Thingy proudly announce the other debates that will be taking place.

There will be one in Scotland, broadcast live (Rah Rah Hoo-Ray!)
The will be one in Wales broadcast live ( Yip Yiop Yo!)
There will be one in Northern Ireland broadcast live ( Rah rah hurrah!)

Billothewisp eagerly awaited the finale in this roll call of nations within these islands. With glowing eyes he stopped filing his teeth and wrung his furry little hands in expectation. He watched like an obedient child about to be rewarded with sweeties for being good and not complaining.

But then Mr Dimble-Dumble simply went on to the next item, telling us that UKIP and the Greens would have a small slot on the following news broadcast.

Billothewisp was puzzled. There was something missing. In fact it was more than a something. It was a whole nation. An Identity spanning 50 million souls.

Billothewisp scratched his head. Puzzled and confused he wondered about the missing nation. He watched the news in case it may appear there. All he got was a virtual repeat of the leaders debate and about 90 seconds of Nigel Farage. Even the Greens did not seem to make an appearance (or maybe they were so irrelevant he just didn't notice).

Still no mention of the missing nation.

Billothewisp racked his poor brain. He had vague memories that the missing nation was actually, quite famous. Funnily, he vaguely remembered it had a long history and a football team that didn't win much. It had a name. But what was that name?

Suddenly Billothewisp looked up with a start. Oh yes! Now he remembered. It was the word that was always to be avoided. The identity that must be denied and derided lest the Proles push past the crappy football team and seek their own governance under its name.

Billothewisp shuddered and gulped. With his heart racing he dared to speak it out loud.
“England” he said.
He furtively looked around him in case others had heard. But they were all too slam dunked by four cans each of Old Speckled Hen to notice.

Billothewisp had that old feeling of betrayal that swam up whenever he heard or mouthed the name of the non-country with its no-identity and no-representation and no-parliament and non-assembly.

He comforted himself with another Old Speckled Hen Suddenly the world was a little rosier. The sense of betrayal lessened. He replayed the Weasel words of the divine three and felt comforted. For the moment the loss of his non-nationhood receded from his thoughts. He went back to filing his teeth to jaunty little points.

But deep down, he knew that sooner or later, the issue of English sovereignty and identity would have to be addressed, however much the ruling elite wished to avoid it.

Billothewisp knew that one day, the nice Mr Dimble-Dumbly would have to add to his role call of national debates. That there would have to be a debate for the English on English issues.

Or there will be hell to pay.

Snog Marry Avoid

OK, I admit it. Its a fair cop.

I watch “Snog Marry Avoid”. I find it entertaining and mildly amusing.

There I've said it.

Now I will have to live with the shame.

It's on BBC 3 on Thursday night. Basically it takes two or three twenty-something women who have, to say the least, lost control of their urge to wear make-up.

The essence of the program revolves around giving each girl a make-under.

This involves wiping off the tango coloured fake tan, removing the bizarre piercings and generally turning them into natural English beauties.

It is entertaining and has a feel-good factor. But, while it is a valid piece of entertainment, should this be really be funded by a compulsory tax (aka the television licence) just to pad out the listings on underwatched BBC 3?

If there are places for programs like “Snog Marry Avoid” (and there are) why can these not be financed by either adverts or subscription?

Anyway, while I have to pay to keep the wealthy BBC elite in the style and comfort they have become accustomed to, I will continue to watch "Snog Marry Avoid".

In fact, if the glorious day ever comes where the BBC are brought to heel I will miss “Snog Marry Avoid”. But at least my basic freedom of choosing what pay to watch will be restored, and the BBC will be forced to return to true public service broadcasting.

I imagine the “Snog Marry Avoid” format would migrate to its proper place on a pay-to-view or advert supported channel.

Even then I would probably continue in my shame and watch and enjoy “Snog Marry Avoid”. It is just so, tackily good!

Fishy Economics at the BBC

So our grossly underpaid director general (£800K per annum) has announced savings of £600 million at the BBC. To achieve a saving which amounts to 20% of the BBC's annual poll tax income, two virtually unknown radio stations are to go. Half of the content of the BBC website is also to go.

I don't know if I am just confused by high finance but really, this does not sound like real cuts of £600 million to me.

Could it be that our magnificent BBC establishment are pulling the wool over our eyes?

The DG also proudly announced that 90p out of every pound will go to “content”.

A cynical little voice in my head makes me inquire as to whether this could be achieved by giving a few hidden pay rises to the already grossly overpaid luvvies.

Think about it.

The more it costs to produce “content” the less as a percentage is the cost of buildings and infrastructure. Hence by having a few more of the cognoscenti on £200K will soon make the BBC more "efficient".

To me, the whole dark self serving edifice of the BBC stinks of corruption. This cost cutting is just a devious little ruse to deflect criticism about the disgusting rises in the licence fee during a time of national crisis.

BBC Thief and Destroyer

I may be getting old and grey. But I still love artistic and technical innovation. Likewise I am always going to hate bloated corporate theft.

You may remember an earlier post praising the innovative radio station “Amazing Radio” Post Here

This small station only broadcasts unsigned musicians. The radio station is innovative and fresh, and so are the artists and the presenters. As with all things, some will be to your taste, other less so. That's what comes from innovation. It is a breathtakingly new approach. Especially when compared to the morally and artistically bankrupt self serving monoculture presented by the BBC.

You can find Amazing Radio on-line Here and also on DAB radio.

Now the ugly BBC has tried to steal the idea. (Guardian article here) This threatens the viability of Amazing radio.

This is not the first time this has happened.

In the broadcasting industry many small production companies have seen their niche overwhelmed by an intrusion by the BBC. The small companies have to make a profit. The BBC has money to burn. This arrogance has, at times, been so outrageous that even the supine BBC Trust has had to haul in the BBC. Although when it suites the BBC, the BBC Trust has simply been ignored. (see Guardian here)

The BBC was set up as a public service. But instead it now acts like the ugliest of corporate companies. It can snuff out any competitors by simply using its huge resources to destroy the competitors financial viability. It wealds massive political and economic control over our nation, where it should have none.

This ugly self serving monster must have its wings clipped. It is laughable to regard this demon as a public service. It is no longer under any form of impartial control and is acting like a state within a state.

The BBC is clearly an enemy of innovative companies like Amazing Radio. But today the mere presence of the BBC is now a major disincentive to new innovative production companies considering setting up in this country. They do not want to risk having their ideas poached by the monster in the wings.

It has now reached such a point that the self serving arrogance of the BBC, backed by its own compulsory poll tax, not only threatens independent innovation but threatens fair and diverse debate as well.

Today the BBC can only be regarded as an enemy of innovation and possibly of democracy itself.

It must be brought to account.

Amazing Radio

Even though it is Christmas day this has to be said.

Note: This has nothing to do with the amount of Old Speckled Hen that has been consumed.

Billothewisp has recieved a digital radio for Christmas and has had fun tuning it in while drinking his customary 10 litres of Old Speckled Hen before lunch ( a modest Neanderthal array of Chicken, Duck and assorted hamsters, puppies and fluffy kittens).

I found the usual shite BBC radio 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 closely followed by commercial "this" and commercial "that" all playing at least 2 toons per hour to interspace their interminable adverts for double glazing and constipation remedies.

Then I found it. I fell over. (nothing to do with the Old Speckled Hen I hasten to add).

It was, well, Amazing

A radio station called Amazing Radio in fact. (you can also listen to it on-line at the link)

Before you think this is some form of promo, I can assure you that BilloTheWisp has recieved no form of monetary, reciprocal, sexual or other favour, or any blackmail, bribery or threat to his person or property from the afore-said digital radio station known as "Amazing Radio" .

Neither has he been offered a peerage, or a seat on the board. Nor has he been given a baseball bat and the opportunity to spend five minutes in a small a room with Gordon Brown.

Amazing Radio works by playing the music of unsigned artists. It pays the bills by selling the music (they say 70% goes to the artist).

Imagine listening to the pure energy and power of the music off the first album of your favoutire band.

Remember the first time you heard that music. The tracks that stopped you dead. You had to ask you it was and then go out and buy the album yourself.

Amazing Radio is like that. Track after Track. OK some are just so-so but most are wonderful. But all have the raw energy and unbridled commitment of people who need to present their art.

That is it. A simple idea. No bloody Simon Cowells no rubbish politically correct self important shite like the BBC, just new fresh clean music.

But really, it is Amazing. Fantastic.

Now I need to get back to another bucket full of Old Speckled Hen and do some more listening to Amazing radio.
Merry Christmas
BilloTheWisp