BBC Scotland have another cowardly dig

[aweebluesoandso 290]

Don't forget all that depleted uranium used in our fight against 'insurgents' in the middle east. How to dispose of your nuclear waste: drop it on other countries.

 

The Americans are very good at recycling as demonstrated there

[D'Artagnan 173]

I disagree, our issues with the BBC were manageable prior to the club going into administration, from then on they rapidly went down hill. That of course coincided with the club being unable to defend itself properly. If we could sort our shit out at boardroom level we could begin defending ourselves again.

 

Dodds was fairy outspoken about EBTs and if they constituted cheating. He of course benefited from one.

Of the BBC Scotland football summarisers three have a clear Rangers connection; Dodds, Ferguson and Craig Paterson. I can only think of Murdo MacLoed and Willie Miller (both boyhood bluenoses of course...) as other regular ex-players contributing. The recent introduction of Kris Boyd and Michael Stewart to the midweek shows also suggests it isn't completely Tim-central everyday.

 

My issue on our tactics currently is that we can't win, we've no leverage here. Simply refusing to talk to the BBC doesn't stop them reporting on matches and events surrounding us, it simply means we don't get to put our side across. We can ban and complain all we like but it's not going to make a great deal of difference to them.

 

We forget that despite our lowly position we are still a force in this country. If you want to get better or fairer press then give them stories. One of the reasons the media are loathe to criticise Jack Irvine is he keeps filling their airtime and pages for them. I think at times we've a basic misunderstanding of how the media work. In most cases they won't bite the hand that feeds them.

 

Thats not my idea of engagement AMMS.

 

They are not continuing with this anti -Rangers crusade because we are not giving them stories - they are doing it because there is a serious anti-Rangers bias running through Pacific Quay. - and that is what requires to be addressed via engagement.

[amms 0]

Thats not my idea of engagement AMMS.

 

They are not continuing with this anti -Rangers crusade because we are not giving them stories - they are doing it because there is a serious anti-Rangers bias running through Pacific Quay. - and that is what requires to be addressed via engagement.

 

There's a technique in American politics called radical transparency. It basically means a politician admits publicly to all their misdemeanours, be they affairs, drug use, draft dodging, unpaid tax whatever. They do this before anyone ever finds out about them and they do it before they become well known. Studies have shown that counter-intuitively it actually helps to create trust with voters who believe the politician to be 'more honest' for having come clean without needing too.

Consultants spent millions of dollars analysing voter behaviour before realising this. Prior to that politicians spent time, money and energy hiding their murky past and newspapers spent millions looking for it.

 

Here's the thing, it's a game, all of it. The media dug into their back story because the hoped there would be something to find. You take that something and make it public then the media lose interest. It's not 'news' and that's the game they are in. They don't care about right or wrong, good or bad, deserving or undeserving, they care about filling space and airtime. It's a game and we can either play it or choose not to and complain when we keep losing.

 

There is a reason why the Easedales for example have been largely left entirely alone by the Scottish media and it isn't because they've no skeletons in their cupboards. You won't change any innate institutional bias at BBC Scotland overnight, but you can begin the process of correcting falsehoods and imbalance by starting to take part.

 

Although I disagreed with the analogy SA made up thread he was right in a way. If you go to war then you must be prepared to do what it takes to win and however unpalatable it might seem actually working with the people who control the news is the first step.

[MikeN63 0]

so what you're saying is that Rangers have a guilty past and we need to confess to that and then start a clean slate and start befriending the BBC, locally and through that improve our portrayal with them?

 

Unless we vote in Jack the Ripper as the next Rangers CEO I doubt there is much left in our cupboard to dredge up from out past, we can certainly make future headlines through stupidity, unguarded comments, but they're only present and future issues.

 

The BBC are using untruths to create weak news and that is unjustifiable in any rational argument, whoever you support and unless you have a lack of moral judgment. There are a number of spurious individuals within BBC Scotland who have an agenda against Rangers, I think through complaint and the current vulnerability of the BBC's position, we should protest against the misuse of their position.

 

I think that is a quicker avenue to repairing bridges with the BBC in Scotland. Finally; it is also not about the magnitude of the individual complaint it is the magnitude of the number of complainants.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Don't forget all that depleted uranium used in our fight against 'insurgents' in the middle east. How to dispose of your nuclear waste: drop it on other countries.

 

No safer place to get rid of it, bud; it's not as if any western media is going to go looking for it.

Also, noting your parenthesis, it's an odd word,:'insurgents', don't you think? Didn't they once upon a time used to be called 'The Resistance' or 'Partisans' ?

[amms 0]

so what you're saying is that Rangers have a guilty past and we need to confess to that and then start a clean slate and start befriending the BBC, locally and through that improve our portrayal with them?

 

Unless we vote in Jack the Ripper as the next Rangers CEO I doubt there is much left in our cupboard to dredge up from out past, we can certainly make future headlines through stupidity, unguarded comments, but they're only present and future issues.

 

The BBC are using untruths to create weak news and that is unjustifiable in any rational argument, whoever you support and unless you have a lack of moral judgment. There are a number of spurious individuals within BBC Scotland who have an agenda against Rangers, I think through complaint and the current vulnerability of the BBC's position, we should protest against the misuse of their position.

 

I think that is a quicker avenue to repairing bridges with the BBC in Scotland. Finally; it is also not about the magnitude of the individual complaint it is the magnitude of the number of complainants.

 

No, I'm not saying anything like that, the story was simply to illustrate the nature of the media.

 

At no time have I said people shouldn't complain when there's something to complain about. At the same time that alone will only get us so far. I also think you overplay the BBC being in a vulnerable position just now.

[calscot 0]

No safer place to get rid of it, bud; it's not as if any western media is going to go looking for it.

Also, noting your parenthesis, it's an odd word,:'insurgents', don't you think? Didn't they once upon a time used to be called 'The Resistance' or 'Partisans' ?

 

The Tims call them "freedom fighters" - it doesn't make the IRA any more romantic for me.

 

In fact you could call them "bad losers".

[D'Artagnan 173]

I think through complaint and the current vulnerability of the BBC's position, we should protest against the misuse of their position.

 

Gets my vote

[Juancornetto 1]

Mass licence fee deprivation is the only thing that will shake the BBC into doing anything about it's lunatic fringe at Pacific Quay.

[RANGERRAB 3,770]

Mass licence fee deprivation is the only thing that will shake the BBC into doing anything about it's lunatic fringe at Pacific Quay.

 

you & I are in total agreement on that one jc but I'd go further & scrap the licence fee altogether. Let BBC Scotland go out into the real business world for its revenue. Then it would be forced to produce accurate, impartial & properly researched broadcasts as it would dependent on viewing figures for revenue. The anti-Rangers pondlife it currently employs would need to seek alternative employment elsewhere if anyone would want them