« Previous | Main | Next »

The Glass Box.

Post categories:

Eddie Mair | 14:14 UK time, Monday, 3 November 2008

glassboxd.JPG

Be your own radio critic! Tell us here, frankly, what you thought of tonight's programme. In the PM office we meet every night at 1800 in the Glass Box you see above. Add your comment here.

Comments

  • 1. At 2:39pm on 03 Nov 2008, U11204129 wrote:

    When I'm 64 (tomorrow)

    My eyes are dim...

    Memories,
    Has this loon lost her memories

    But..

    But..

    When de Menezes was killed, weren't there a whole bunch of eye witnesses, interviewed on TV, saying they saw him vaulting the ticket barrier, running as if for his life, on the train in a high state of agitation, him wearing a Michelin jacket, something in his hand,. .etc, etc?

    Were they police plants (as this paranoid thought at the time?)

    Could we get Crime Watch on who the 'eck they were?

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 2:55pm on 03 Nov 2008, peej wrote:

    You could call the numbers' slot, Nils' Nightly Numbers, or possibly Nightmarish Numbers, or since the Today Programme has its God Slot, PM could have the Oh My God slot.

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 3:01pm on 03 Nov 2008, The Stainless Steel Cat wrote:

    pmleader (1):

    "weren't there a whole bunch of eye witnesses, interviewed on TV, saying they saw him vaulting the ticket barrier, running as if for his life,"

    I suspect that's a result of news programmes asking "if you were in the area, if you managed to catch the moment on your camera 'phone, text us and send us your pictures...". That inevitably leads to people who just want their 5 seconds of fame sending in "reports" which jibe with what they think people will want to hear.

    BBC News 24 does this, and frankly I expect better. Even with the ill-advised cuts to BBC news funding, they still have reporters and they're the ones I expect to do the reporting, not members of the public with no training or oversight.

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 3:11pm on 03 Nov 2008, U11204129 wrote:

    Talking of Crime Watch, do you remember Nick Campbell at the start of his illustrious....rabble rousing on a late night ITV show.

    And his untested 'Crime Watch' (Go on CW, put up a photo fit of one of your research staff and find out how many think s/he's the murdered from Dundee or the fraudster from Essex (or both) you've just been talking about)

    And the obsequiously arrogant Paul Gamboccini greasing his way through your radio life?

    And THEY are criticising Jonathon Ross? A bit like gooseberries calling a lemon sour)?

    Sharon Stone ...Basic Instinct...and the Telegraph (in a Mitth link) etc....moans about him talking about such events!
    Never mind Never mind the Buzzcocks

    Personally I think it's this one-many relationship between celebrities and their audience that makes them seem to varying degrees less than wholly acceptable.


    We are always cautious about such people, always somewhere in the backs of our minds suspicious of them, permanently trying them for some lust or another, for money, for power, for the pride of fame.




    PS What has happened to the G8 Africa plan??

    I know what's happened to the 7/7 bombers and the guy they shot to terrify everyone.

    And, boy do I know about the Olympic bid thing.

    But Gordon's plan to bring prosperity (rather, I hope, than the absence of starvation) to Africa, where is it?

    We SHOULD be told... and (be told how, so that we) know how to ASK

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 3:37pm on 03 Nov 2008, Chris Ghoti wrote:

    pmL and SSC, wasn't at least one of those 'he vaulted the barrier and ran for his life' type reports discredited within a day or so as having said by someone who was down on the platform and therefore couldn't have seen it? And the 'he was wearing a padded jacket even though it was the hottest day of the year' ones fell apart the moment that what he was actually wearing was reported in the papers? I remember noting at the time that there seemed to have been a lot of utterly unreliable report, which was rapidly being discredited, though I can't recall exact details. I think I was slightly surprised about the vaulting the barrier thing, because I think that was claimed by a policeman at some point...

    I can't have seen any of these putative 'eye-witness' accounts, because I don't have a haunted fish-tank and don't watch news on one at all.

    I *do* know that I first heard about the incident on the radio while driving across London, and my thought when I heard the initial story was 'Oh no, now they've shot someone and I *bet* it turns out he was innocent!' and that this was the consensus opinion at the party I was at that evening: outrage that he had been killed. So it must have started to sound a bit dodgy quite early on: not one single person I talked with (and we were less than three miles from where it had happened and presumably ought to have been in a panic-stricken tizzy) believed that he would turn out to have been a terrorist, or if he had been a terrorist sympathiser that he would turn out to have had a bomb. (Though those of us who'd got anything to do with the trade felt rather sorry for the actual killers, because we were fairly sure they must have been told he was an immediate danger or they wouldn't have over-reacted so horribly. Seven rounds to the head is six more than anyone needs to expend in order to kill...)

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 3:56pm on 03 Nov 2008, U11204129 wrote:

    5

    I think this communal feeling, at the very time, that he was innocent, is/was because the perpetrators ARE public servants. 'Our' agent, sadly.

    So we knew.

    And we know that 'our' agents are not above decimations*** or shooting a few people to prove how tough they are.


    Yes. we knew, just like those who thought shooting a few people was just what the situation needed, knew.

    Or like us all who know we're keeping Africa starving whilst we eat beans grown there.

    As another poster on another thread says, there's a God spot on Today.

    We, s/he suggests, could have an 'Oh my God' spot on PM (tracking the collapse of capitalism. (I 'ope))

    The number dying from preventable diseases each week, that week, could be a Friday (nitemare) highlight.

    Something for the weekend for us all.




    ***Try Malaya for starters. Anyone ever charged?

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 4:23pm on 03 Nov 2008, U11204129 wrote:

    You and Yours is reporting the new home grabbing tactics by the banks.

    And Channel 4 is telling us how credit card debt can result in home repossession.

    (Was getting the baby an new bonnet during both items, so not 100 percent offay, so could we have the definitive PM coverage, please. It sounds heinous**)

    In part, so like the subprime repossession scandals in America!

    And the way the banks etc there overstated the value of their mortgage backed assets.

    House prices were going up, so with a nice high repayment failure rate, and hence a repossession rate, banks etc had found a way of getting all that house equity.

    So the mortgage backed securities were more valuable the more likely it was that the BANKS would own the (inflating) houses.

    The interest hikes in 2005 helped the repossession rate.

    But suddenly India and China and oil Islam looked like the imminent threat.

    So the 10-15 year perspective when those repossossed houses (during what had become a house price crash) would realise their worth, was 'too far off, man!

    'Hold on tight, we need to cap India and China and oil Islam with a first rate slump before ever your housing investments come good.

    Currently they're worthless'

    'Oh, yes, so they are! Silly us'

    And if house prices are falling 12 percent a year here, why are these debt companies so keen to repossess?

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 4:41pm on 03 Nov 2008, Piper wrote:

    SSC@3

    By your own admission, your arguement is based on what you "suspect".

    As for your statement, "...not members of the public with no training or oversight." I wonder SSC, is it possible you're being a little hard in your blanket assessment of "members of the public"?

    I recall a rumpus last week involving, amongst others the BBC, Mr Ross and a Mr Brand. If what I've read and heard about this particular multi-faceted problem is correct, a BBC programme was broadcast notwithstanding the control, overview and certified compliance of the programme by some very senior BBC personnel who were trained and had a specific duty, we're told, to prevent such incidents.

    Training and a Job-Title don't always result in expected or, hoped-for results.

    How much worse could members of the public have fared here?

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 5:10pm on 03 Nov 2008, David_McNickle wrote:

    pmL 6, God is perfect. No spots on him.

    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 5:53pm on 03 Nov 2008, Chris Ghoti wrote:

    DMcN @ 9, or on the dice He plays with.

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 5:53pm on 03 Nov 2008, MissFenella wrote:

    Suggestions for Ed and Nil's Bit:

    Whoops Economy

    Dude, I lost my Bank

    Nil's and Ed's Magical Kingdom of Mysterious Numbers and Fluctuating Monies of Doom

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 5:57pm on 03 Nov 2008, nikki noodle wrote:

    (5) Chris - you are so near!!

    There are eyewitness accounts (and video evidence) of both the vaulting of the barrier, and a guy wearing a padded jacket...

    ...but both were non-uniform 'police'.

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 6:00pm on 03 Nov 2008, David_McNickle wrote:

    C_G 10, As God invented dice, his need no spots.

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 6:01pm on 03 Nov 2008, The Stainless Steel Cat wrote:

    Piper (8):

    I'm sure there are many members of the public who are articulate, accurate and honest witnesses, but surely I'm not alone in wanting news related to me by professionals?

    If you are saying that those two who were over-mentioned last week didn't behave professionally, then I wouldn't disagree.

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 6:04pm on 03 Nov 2008, David_McNickle wrote:

    SSC 14, Don't forget that he stopped to pick up a newspaper.

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 6:24pm on 03 Nov 2008, annasee wrote:

    I heard the Nils'n'Eddie Show tonight (hey wasn't there someone called Nelson Eddy once?) and particularly liked Eddie's almost imperceptible pause in the "because we can't be ...bothered" part of the explanation of why it wasn't a competition.

    Were you perhaps self-editing out the word "faffed"?

    If Jonathan Ross had had your subtlety, he wouldn't be in the trouble he's in now!

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 6:42pm on 03 Nov 2008, Chris Ghoti wrote:

    annasee @ 16, one at least of the two people who coined 'bonk' as the euphemism it now is, was a friend of Jonathan Ross. I suppose he is too important for euphemism these days... silly little boy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 7:33pm on 03 Nov 2008, Charlie wrote:


    I thought the practice of a person being "Drummed-out" had ceased.

    Clearly, not...

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7706239.stm

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 8:57pm on 03 Nov 2008, justfloating wrote:

    Your interview about the Donald Trump's scar on the landscape was right to the point.

    Why we give over land, especially that land, so that individuals can make profits I do not understand. There is enough land for him to sculpture into a exclusive palace elsewhere.

    All for 800 Jobs. Do we assume these are high paid jobs, no they will be brought in. These are mainly seasonal low paid. So will not support local families. Will it detract from St Andrews? What loss will that incur?

    It is not like he has a good track record of associating with successful projects! His antics are well covered.


    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 9:18pm on 03 Nov 2008, RJMolesworth wrote:

    Piper, SSC, et al

    Quote from Transparency International web site.

    “Stemming corruption requires strong oversight through parliaments, law enforcement, independent media and a vibrant civil society,” said Labelle. “When these institutions are weak, corruption spirals out of control with horrendous consequences for ordinary people, and for justice and equality in societies more broadly.”



    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 9:33pm on 03 Nov 2008, U11204129 wrote:

    The trail

    'Is the ANC majority too big? Find out later'

    The interview

    Well, nothing to do with the above.

    The ANC majority is not big enough.

    It needs the support, it seems, of privileged white land owners (an Impossibility of course) 'cos the policies of land redistribution and economic redistribution have ground to a halt.

    Because the whites (the economic losers) have prevented it, with their friends abroad helping.

    Some posters on this blog regularly used to explain why whites should have the top jobs, best land etc there.

    If you dig deep enough into William Gumede's writings, you'd know he blames the US and UK for not paying up for land redistribution compensations in southern Africa, which they promised to pay.

    That is what exacerbated the situation in Zimbabwe, according to him.




    From your interview you'd think he's pleased the ANC had split.

    But not if the new party fails to support land redistribution and an egalitarian tax system.

    It's phonney none of those lefties left in the ANC were given the prestigious Oxbridge accolades Gumede got isn't it!!!!


    Here's a bone for anti - ANC whites to gnaw.

    The view that AIDS was caused by poverty was widely disparaged. But it was a plea to get us to recognise that so many of Africa's problems would be solved by world equality.

    I'll give you a list of OUR problems it would solve too. Climate change, Inequality (trivially), Market failures.

    Enough said?

    Yes, except you can reckon this split is the first step towards virtual civil war if Zimbabwe is anything to go by. And why? 'Cos the break away parties get their support from London and Washington by disavowing central socialist policies. That, and the funding and help they get from ex-colonials and neo-colonials, makes them look like traitors to the incumbents.

    C'mon PM you can do better than that. What about the land grab (Brit led) in Mozambique? The failure to redistribute the diamond and gold wealth? The appalling work distribution?

    What WOULD Obama say about you?

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 10:52pm on 03 Nov 2008, Rheedem_Anwheep wrote:

    Re. pmLeader's post #1

    The Met themselves put out this disinformation.

    From the IPCC report "Stockwell 2"
    para 16.10.27

    About 23:37hrs 22 July 2005, the MPS issued the final press release for that day in the following terms:".....The man who was shot was under police observation because he had emerged from a house that was itself under observation because it was linked to the investigation of yesterday’s incidents, Surveillance officers then followed him to the station. His clothing and behaviour at the station added to their suspicions."

    Google "ipcc stockwell" and read both reports. Compare them with what's coming out at the inquest. It's an education.

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 10:54pm on 03 Nov 2008, Sid wrote:

    Enough said?


    Yes.


    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 10:59pm on 03 Nov 2008, nigdee wrote:

    For Nils' money segment title, to misquote dear old Harold Wilson - "My pound in your pocket!"

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 00:14am on 04 Nov 2008, justfloating wrote:

    I have just seen that the BBC must be having a short news day. They are back hammering on children.

    It seems that they have got data saying a Derby kid has been taken from his parents under grounds that include obesity.

    I am obese. No not marginally, I am on the way to being clinically obese

    It is sad though, I must be delusional because I thought I did two walks this weekend of 8 and 7 miles over the moors. I also have low blood pressure and have not used the NHS for 20+ years. My waist is only 34 and is less than my grandfather who lived to 82. In the old calliper method I can pinch only half an inch.

    The problem is the BMI scale is not relevant to obesity. It under, AND over, estimates many people. How can height be the only relevant factor?

    What I would like is for someone to take the NHS/social services to court. I would gladly be a exhibit for them and help fight this mental torture of children.

    OK, care for the individuals, but make sure they are real problems. Not just a figment of an cheap and medically debunked measurement scheme.

    I copied a post off CBBC recently showing the feelings of children. Someone on the thread answered not to believe statistics. But if you are to be removed from your parents for statistics then they are to be feared.

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 08:09am on 04 Nov 2008, Mromelette wrote:

    How about 'Nils on Yields'? (Or lack of on this current market)........

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 10:06am on 04 Nov 2008, Fearless Fred wrote:

    How about "Numerology with Nils"?

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 10:10am on 04 Nov 2008, Gillianian wrote:

    Justfloating (18) I too am disappointed about the news of the Golf Course in Aberdeenshire.
    Most of the jobs will go to construction workers, so it will only be temporary work.
    It's a very fragile area of dunes, and important in terms of its ecology, as well as being a beautiful off-the-beaten-track haven.
    I wonder what the fish farmer's next move will be, and if he will be subjected to a Compulsory Purchase Order?

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 10:28am on 04 Nov 2008, Sid wrote:

    justfloating (25):

    "Being overweight would not be the determining factor in taking any child in to local authority care" - according to the BBC.

    No mention of BMI.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/derbyshire/7707165.stm




    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 10:43am on 04 Nov 2008, David_McNickle wrote:

    Gill 28, I agree and I'm an American. Why can't Trump stay at home and spend his money there? On a haircut for one.

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 11:18am on 04 Nov 2008, justfloating wrote:

    (29) Sid - Other than the fact, that is how the survey was conducted. Weight and height.

    But it does not matter in this case. The fear of BMI is in the children's minds. As shown by the BBC message board. It is the fear that is doing the damage. I was a reject from birth. But used properly, my BMI tracked nicely at the same place for most of my life. That is it correct usage. They are percentile curves not limits to "normal" humanity.

    To put it bluntly there are NHS authorities that refuse treatment on BMI numbers. They are obviously giving help depending on genetic background therefore they must be supporting the concept of a perfect race. Just think of all the backgrounds, genetic traits and genetic occurrences that would be unable to abide by their rules of being "normal".

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.