Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jessie Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm far more interested in what the hospitals and

> children's homes have to say for themselves. BBC

> is a v easy target for right wing press and its

> followers.



Mmmmm. Another sacred cow which can,t be criticised without rasing the normal defensive hogwash? Rubbish, it failed miserably and almost systematically for years on the abuse and more recently by , at best, ignoring it. Not the only guilt party but so what.

it's all starting to sound a bit like the Cleveland Satanic Ring thingy to me now...apparently the main accuser has some form. An enquiry is needed for absolutely clarity and to punish any wromg doers but I feel there is the potential wiff of Conspiracy Theory plus all tories are scum about this if I am honest....
..of course the BBCs not at all left leaning (cough). Broadcasting completley unsubstantiated shit with huge political implications isn't that far from hacking personal phone lines. If I was McAlpine I'd be going for millions and Schofield should apologise on air to the PM

Sorry Quids, but it wasn't very clear. I hadn't heard about the This Morning thing with Philip Schofield, and when I looked at your link it didn't mention him, that's why I was confused.


Anyway, I agree that he should at very least make an apology (as should his show producers), very misguided!


RE The BBC, obviously big errors have been made, but I'm not sure where the political bias you talk about is. They have made a huge hash of this though, particularly after last week, I am very surprised that anything on this subject was allowed to air without the green light from the very top, which I suspect it never had.

He should have resigned.


It took him just over three minutes to find the list of names online and, as a so called professional, it appears he didn't actually do any further research into these allegations/rumours.


Question, why pay him more than ?15,000 a year on such evidence? A trainee would't have done any worse.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • For anyone interested in the conservation of birds, here's a reminder that It's the RSPB  bird survey this weekend. Anyone can take part and it's completely free. Just register on the RSPB website and download your bird identifier. It takes just one hour of your time to count the number and type of bird you see in your garden or local park. The more people taking part, the better we can track how well our birds are doing. It's a great activity to do with the kids and grandkids.
    • I would support bringing back some sort of sanction for not turning up (if it's not still in force).  But I think a sanction that reduces your ability to book in advance (say you go from 7 to 3 days advance) rather than a fine would be more effective and easier on the staff who work there.  It would also be more effective for rich people who might not care about paying the fines. Or you could just fine say the top 5 worst offenders in a month, which would probably take out those who had a genuine one-off emergency so couldn't turn up.
    • Just joined, thanks for organising and heads-up...
    • Whether a pool is overcrowded or not, the absence of the lifeguard is the critical factor here. To use this tragic anecdote as a reason to disregard valid points about accessibility is a reach too far and designed to emotionally blackmail anyone who disagrees with the status quo. At least some - not all - of the hours of operation ought to be for drop-ins as has been standard for decades. (Overcrowding is easily prevented with the use of wristbands and/or headcount at ticket desk, etc. - as was the case before Covid.) 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...