Not ticking boxes
Sometimes this blog offers analysis. Sometimes, the inside track on a story.
Frequently, the perspective of a detached observer on political events. (For the avoidance of doubt, I am that detached observer.)
Today, for a change, I intend, mostly, to stand back and let the comments emerge entirely from you, the readers.
The topic? My own dear employer, the BBC. Specifically, the report suggesting that the Corporation should respond more consistently to post-devolution political life in the UK.
In passing, I would commend you to read the excellent insight offered by Professor Anthony King who has scrutinised output for the BBC Trust.
His report is trenchant, thorough and, above all, firmly grounded in practice rather than theory.
Depth and value
He finds much to commend: impartiality at the core of the BBC; a definite desire to represent the citizens of the UK to each other.
However, he finds much that falls short: too many instances where stories that affect England, primarily or solely, are offered to a UK audienc without sufficient qualification.
As a participant, I particularly like his assertion that reform should not be a box-ticking exercise, a response to political correctness.
Rather, stories can gain greater depth and value from reflecting the varied circumstances of the nations within the United Kingdom.
More on that later in the programme, but first, your views . . .
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~17~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
It does get a bit tiresome when the newsreader states that 'knife crime is up by x %' or 'people are eating more biscuits', or house prices are going down the tubes' - 'in England' why don't they take the bother to find out how the figures are in the rest of the UK to whom they are broadcasting? Is it laziness? Are the figures not available? Don't they think we would be interested? Is the Kingdom not United?
How would viewers or listeners in england react if the tables were turned?
Complain about this comment
I agree with post number 1.
I know more about crime statistics within England then I do in my own country. England does not represent the rest of the United Kingdom and it is quite disgraceful because this is where Britain becomes another word of calling England.
Complain about this comment
The UK media has yet to wake up to the fact that, in an age of personalised content and multi-channel, multi-platform news, 'broadcasting' has little meaning.
If I were living in Scotland I would not want a diet of mainly English news, but then again I probably wouldn't want a diet of purely Scottish news either.
The answer? Digitally delivered, viewer edited, news - oh, and with a MUCH heavier amount of international, non-UK, content. Let viewers choose. It can be done.
Complain about this comment
This comment has been referred to the moderators. Explain.
Looks like everyone here is singing from the same hymn book. If I could add my own little verse....
I'm not happy about the whole "Britain" thing. I'd rather there was an independent Scotland.
But if we're not to have that (yet, patience my dear), then let's have a Britain. Not a "England, oh, sorry, didn't see you there Jock, I mean err Britain".
Like poster 1 said, I don't want to hear English statistics in a news report about Britain. I want to hear British statistics.
Last time I actually watched the "UK" news, there was an 8 minute (I timed it, sad I know) report on how the school exams were going to change things in schools, and what it would mean for our children.
'Course, it doesn't mean sod all for our children (note, I don't actually have any, I was referring in the 3rd person to Scottish children en masse). It was talking about English children. I don't even think the changes affect Welsh or NI kids.
So why was it in the UK news? Because the English don't have their own news, each region of England gets their own little news whilst we're getting the Scottish news.
And there's the problem. In theory, we can actually get news relevant to the entire nation on the Scottish news bit. We just have to wait till after the UK news.
The English can't. They have to either have a england-wide news article on their local news bit (which would seem daft), or it has to go into the UK-wide one, meaning us in Scotland get 8 minutes of totally irrelevant news about some education reform in England.
We need a separate news system to England. Not only for our benefit, but for the English, the Welsh and the Irish as well.
We also need more programs aimed at Scotland, not England.
It's a little ridiculous when children on the east coast are more likely to understand cockney-slang than Glasgow slang, because they never see people from Scotland on the telly.
Like many things in the UK, Scotland and England need to part ways on this and have their own news, and maybe even their own TV full stop.
Complain about this comment
I have a simple request. Change the name of this blog to something with more gravitas. How about Brian Taylor's Scotland?
Blether (meaning to talk foolishly at length) sends out the wrong message about Scotland and Scottish politics. It makes Scottish people seem like silly, simple folk.
Complain about this comment
"impartiality at the core of the BBC"
There may be impartiality at the core of the BBC but there certainly is not, and never has been, impartiality in your blog.
Even a passing glance at previous topics proves this as, day after day, people point out your obvious Unionist bias.
Complain about this comment
See your country disappear - Watch the BBC National News.
But its not just news. As one, the people of Scotland rise up and cry "Give us Live Coverage of England Matches,The FA Cup Preliminary Round and Eastenders. Devastate the schedules when it's an English Bank Holiday, and plow ahead as usual when Scotland is out the back green with the barbie and a few tins"
We need more devolution in our broadcasting and that must start with that hoary old chestnut the "Scottish Six" (Local, National and International News broadcast FROM SCOTLAND by Scots)
I've had a quick flick through some of Anthony Clare's report. Resurrect Nationwide as "NationSwide" ? Nope, didn't push the buttons then, wouldn't now, no matter how many skateboarding ducks appeared.
He does note (as I do) With Interest the relative popularity of Good Morning Scotland in comparison with R4's Today (And also presumably Newsdrive compared to the honeyed tones of Oor Eddie on PM ?) I remember in the dark mists of time before Breakfast TV, the Beeb did a trial run by sticking a camera in the ceiling of the GMS Studio.
So Why not go the full hog and have a "Full Scottish Breakfast" as well instead of Sofa-Chats with London-Based Celebs and let that poor wee girl get back to reading the Traffic news instead of popping up every half hour with "the news from where you are".
Yes, I want to know about the other nations that we share this island with and our Scots-Celtic brothers across on the other island to the left. I want to know about Europe and the rest of the world.
Do I want to see extensive coverage of Camden Market going up in flames ? No.
Do I want wall-to-wall London Mayoral Elections ? No.
I DO want to know why Diesel costs 25p a litre more north of the Highland Line than it does South of the Border. Don't see Bill Turnbull asking that one in the morning.
Broadcasting is a "reserved issue". Should it be ? We may not want to see ourseils as ithers see us, but it might be nice to see ourseils first.
Complain about this comment
U9461192, sure, the chap over in Lewis could make that justifiable complaint. But perhaps that's what his local news is for.
The UK-level news should be presenting reasonable aggregates of data from the various regions, with comparison and analysis: a UK level aggregate of, say, crime rates is okay without qualification, especially if it's backed up by some more detailed analysis (e.g., "knife crime has fallen by X% in the last 12 months; the largest drop was reported by Scottish police forces, with Y%", etc etc.).
The discussion of the BBC has nothing to do with independence for Scotland. It has everything to do with sensibly aggregating the available data for the news programmes, and offering those aggregates at the correct level of media output (regional, national, etc).
The best thing for the media to do is to represent each easily identifiable chunk of the UK to all others. This means that London gets to see inside the Scottish parliament more regularly. So does Wales. And vice-versa. Scotland should get more information on what's happening within London, etc etc.
The solution for the media services is to make the UK aware of what the UK currently is; the only real gripe I'm aware of across England, Scotland, Wales, and Nothern Ireland, is that the BBC is disproportionately London-centric.
Complain about this comment
I often feel that the handover between national news and the "regional" news is a "let's go over to the colonies for news" segment.
Reporting Scotland might as well be Reporting Andorra in the way it represents Scotland as a provincial, insignificant nation. Thanks to this news programme, I've learned this year that the tallest horse in the UK is in Falkirk and that if any reporter ever leaves the Sunday Post, they'll get a job on Reporting Scotland.
BBC Scotland's budget slashed. Decreasing coverage of Scottish sport. An all time low of Scottish programmes.
Until we have a separate broadcasting network, the Unionist, Labour cronies will control the airwaves and therefore will control the representation and, more accurately, misrepresentations of our culture.
Complain about this comment
U934587345… whatever, embodies so much of what is wrong with modern Scotland. Meekly accepting substandard quality has been so drummed into the national consciousness that s/he cant even see it.
No other nation on earth would sit by and hear the domestic news of another nation and just accept it.
The continued sarcastic use of ‘aye’ shows how cringingly embarrassed they are of their own culture. It really is a sad symptom of the British state’s affect on our national character. Yes of course there’s a Sports Scotland. Why on earth shouldn’t there be?
Yes we do want international news, but not through the prism of London telling us what to think. The imbedded shame is beyond words and betrays so much of your loathing.
Complain about this comment
As I said in post 3 above, it CAN be done. We could allow people to filter their own news content by topic for their own delivered news. It would take ingenuity, but it is possible. Either that or we could have regional 'versions' of the main broadcast UK news (Scottish editors would take what they wanted from all UK output, add Scottish news and release the result on a BBC Scotland digital channel. As an Englishman I might even watch it myself occasionally for a different point of view `on events shaping my life).
However what I suspect the Nats amongst you here want is "NO ENGLISH NEWS! EVER! ON ANY SCOTTISH TV SCREEN" - and that, is of course bonkers. But predictable.
Complain about this comment
Impartiality?
The BBC has forgotten the meaning of the word.
Complain about this comment
Our national broadcaster in Scotland must accept some responsibility for the sad state of affairs where our national sport (football) has no highlights coverage on the day when matches are played. Highlights on a commercial channel at around 11pm two days later is of little use to school children. Also when did the England rugby team last play a match which had no live coverage on any channel at all, either free to air or subscription. I suspect not since television coverage began. It happened to Scotland at the weekend!
Complain about this comment
Would English viewers enjoy a scottish based media? I think not...... as some of the comments on the "have your say" page today illustrate. various coments today around " I don't care about what is happenign in Scotland" and persistant comments around "whinging Scots" are common on that page today, but what they seem unable to grasp is that most scots are interested in the UK issues, but it the complete irrelevance of some reporting that is the problem UK does not mean England. For example, the BBC continues to ask questions on "Have your say" on the NHS and it is all about the English and Welsh NHS as Health is a devolved matter.
As previous posters on this Blog have pointed out the FMQ's and PMQ's shows major discrepancies between the coverage.
GMS is the best broadcasting for Scots at the moment, but there is room for improvement on that too.
Complain about this comment
It's simple. On the 'Six' or 'Ten' when a story relating to any part of the UK is shown (for items such as laws, statistics, etc) have a flag(s) in the corner of the screen showing where it relates to. It will then be obvious to all.
More seriously, there is an obvious imbalance in News programmes. English 'regional' news programmes have a different focal point than Sottish 'National' news. For instance the latter have to cover entire devolved items such as Health, Education and Policing. For England this gets covered in the 'Six'/'Ten' by UK 'National' News. There is an imbalance of time, but is there also an imbalance of funding as well? Not sure how to ever resolve this without following the GMS model which works pretty well.
Complain about this comment
A wee word on behalf of the broadcasters. I mean the footsoldiers not the policy makers. A national and international news programme from Scotland would find it very hard to avoid taking almost all world news and most UK news from BBC London. Unless, and it would never happen, they employ a worldwide team of journalists. So it becomes a news selection issue, ie, cut out the English statistics and inner-city crime stuff and substitute Scottish information. Cutting back and forward is difficult - look at the crass switch from Newsnight to Newsnicht.
Purely Scottish stuff, on the other hand, would be sorely stretched to fill the time, and deprive us of the wider view of the world. To make it really good - and it could be done - would involve massive expense, and, possibly, a "Scottish" licence fee on top.
We have barely a handful of decent broadcasters here, and dozens who palpably lack the gravitas and authority to hold a programme together. Very hand-knitted, to be unkind.
But all the infuriating instances cited here still hold good. Like most Scots, I want to yell at the screen at least once in every news broadcast. And don't start me on the weather!
My view? Forget the Scottish Six, educate BBC London as to what constitutes national news - half the news editors are Scots, by the way - and improve what we have.
When I'm outwith Scotland, I really miss the Scottish news, especially the football. But BBC News is very valuable when overseas, and despite everything, still widely respected. "The London view" however annoying at times is still very relevant to most of us, most of the time. I think we would miss it.
Complain about this comment
Can I recommend the news channel France 24.
It provides fresh (french) perspective on world events which to a jandiced eye appears unbiased.
A world view from a different city (not London).
It's available on free-to-air sat, even in the north of scotland.
As for Scottish and local news - we are as others note,- doomed to a diet of sparse and often poor (broadcasting) fare.
A 'Scottish 6' would be great - but I'd never get home in time to see it.
If the quality of governance/ democracy is linked to the quality of broadcasting - does that not explain why Labour have governed Scotland, for do long - and so badly.
Complain about this comment
Now I realise that the nationalists will not want to hear this, but the population of Scotland is tiny in proportion to the population of the whole UK, as is Wales who no doubt have similar complaints about news coverage. England on the other hand is very large. "National" news will therefore inevitably contain more "English" than "Scottish" news. The complaint by areas of England outside the South East is, to my eyes at least, harder to deflect. After all, in population terms, cities like Manchester and Liverpool are as badly served by "national" news coverage as say Glasgow or Edinburgh.
The expansion of regional news is a good idea, but it should not replace the national broadcast. Having sat through a good many Scottish news programmes, the lack of news about Shetland or Orkney is just as annoying, if you happen to live in Shetland or Orkney. The usual suspects on here will just use this report to bang the same old drum. The world doesn't stop at Gretna.
Complain about this comment
MalcolmW2:
Like I said on my earlier post. England does not represent the rest of the United Kingdom.
England may be the majority but they should never dominate anything.
Britain became a new way to call England because of this. England dominates and then people reffer to England as Britain
Complain about this comment
RE: #19 Malcolm W2
"The World Doesn't Stop At Gretna".
Is that Coming North or Going South ?
Because when I sit and stare uncomprehendingly at my TV wondering why I am being offered the English FA Cup for my delight on BBC Scotland of a Saturday or Sunday afternoon, or why I am listening to the inane and nearly racist ramblings of Brian "You would never guess that he was a Hooker for 20 years" Moore "analysing" the Rugby, I wonder if the BBC knows where the border is ?
Or are we actually Just Another Region of England ? Can you imagine the cry if Greater London was treated to Dundee Utd vs Rangers [in a game that was stolen some time back]
[Aside - Apologies from my last post. Of course I knew it was Tony King and not Anthony Clare. Can I tounge-in-cheekily plead a Psychiatrical Slip ?]
Complain about this comment
I dont understand why we cant have a TV version of Newsdrive and Good Morning Scotland, It is indepth ,international and includes issues about the rest of the UK .
Scottish newspapers are also an example of Scottish news reporting .The Press and Journal,The Herald and the Scotsman cover Scots news,Uk News and world news .so to say that it is impossible for Scots to produce there own news programme is nonsense.
Complain about this comment
Just a wee addendum: The real news issue, which should concern us all because it affects our real lives more directly, is the demise of Scottish local newspapers. Grotesquely mismanaged by accountants and admen, rather than real "newspaper people," they have almost ceased to exist in some areas, except as a home for unchallenged PR handouts, mainly from advertisers seeking a bit more for their money.
Journalist jobs have been axed and the art of court and council reporting lost, probably forever because there are no seniors left to train recruits.
Most good TV reporters began in local newspapers. The supply is drying up.
Complain about this comment
Brigadierjohn. Listen to Good Morning Scotland on Radio Scotland and you'll find excellent coverage of national and international news, including relevant news from England. I don't see why it would be so hard to do the same on television.
As for your comments about the standard of Scottish broadcasting, I'd say you are a huge sufferer of the scottish cringe. Give BBC Scotland the responsibility and I'm sure they will produce excellent news coverage.
Complain about this comment
As one for whom this is an all time personal 'pet topic', I feel limited by time and space alone in expressing the number of ways in which our media coverage is so badly 'skewed' towards the South-East.
It surely cannot be disputed that Scotland has the rich sources, subject matter and expertise to make many more fascinating and thought-provoking programmes, not just for the 'home market' but for distribution south of the Border and internationally - although I get the serious impression that London's broadcasting executives would be hard pushed to believe it.
We've heard the arguments many times, like that at #19, above, that our viewing diet should remain tilted in favour of 'the viewing majority'.
The all-too-familiar result is that, while a fascinating and well-researched programme made from a Scottish perspective will never see the light of day 'down South', we are fed a constant diet of 'easy-to-digest' television based on such intellectual pursuits as decorating, car boot sales or shopping - alongside all the 'unmissible' soap-opera sagas and 'classic' British repeats.
Personally, I find it less than feasible that each of the 'English regions' can fill their local opt-out news programmes with as much diversity as we have to pack into our own wee slot for the whole of Scotland!
Then there is the continual peddling of UK politics and voting preferences on our screens as if, for example, the Tories were enjoying a popular resurgence north of the Border.
As if!
Where does it all end!!??
Complain about this comment
I am not sure what worth a report from oneself saying that one is imnpartial has any real credibility. And the immediate evidence is that there are quite a few people in the BBC News squad who are bit definitely not able to remain impartial. Just look at Kirsty Wark, Jeremy Paxman and Gordon Brewer for starters. They might think that they are being 'challenging' but far too often for comfort end up pursuing a line that seems more related to their personal politics, friendships and beliefs than it is to rooting out the facts and truth of the matter in hand.
My biggest gripe with BBC News is that the Corporation has slowly but surely eroded it so that it now has far too much in common with light entertainment than it does with serious journalism. Breakfast news is a bloody joke. The main news output seems obsessed with celebrity status and the Westminster clique. Some political reporters come across as though they are part of the story. The BBC should give some thought to actually honouring the pledges that is gave on news content before its Royal Charter was renewed.
Like any large beauracracy, the BBC's productivity/output reflects the needs of its "Head Office" personnel. This report on its news output is probably going to prove to be another great waste of time. To ensure that the output preoperly reflects the demographics of the country, the BBC's own structure and the allocation of responsibility and authority will have to be radically changed to empower those who are best placed to produce good quality news output relevant to their viewers.
That aint gonna happen any time soon as the BBC, UK government and the greater establishment have no appetite for giving the people what they are told that they are paying their licence fee for.
I used to be aggresively in favour of the BBC and the licence payer system. There was a time when it truly represented the best value for money that you could imagine. Those days are long gone and I would not shed a tear if the BBC was cut loose and left to fund its determined effort to dumb down the news from money received from anywhere other than the public purse.
There is very little for anyone working in BBC News to be happy about. Collectively, you are letting down the licence payers on a monumental scale.
Complain about this comment
"The London view" however annoying at times is still very relevant to most of us, most of the time. I think we would miss it."
-Brigadierjohn
I'm sorry Brigadierjohn, the "London view" is not relevant to me and I certainly would not miss it. I suspect a great many in Scotland feel the exact same. I would appreciate a view that would be more in tune with my own upbringing and education. I certainly do not view the rest of the world through a London metrocentric prism. Failing that, I would much prefer an internationalist view that isn't clouded by any preconceived notions.
Complain about this comment
Thomas-Porter,
I think once again you may have missed the point of my post. The weighting of news coverage is not against Scotland, it is South East centric because of population mass. If "national" news was produced for Scotland, it would be Borders/Glasgow/Edinburgh centric for the same reason. The people on Shetland / Orkney / Outer Hebs would be airing the same "grievances" about exclusion as you do now. I am sure they have little interest in the latest crime figures from anywhere!
Like it or not, the BBC will understandably report on matters of interest to the largest number of viewers, no matter if it is UK or Scottish based. Turning this debate into another cry for independence because of unfair English bias is absurd. Digital / satelite broadcasts, with plenty of regional choice, should resolve these complaints suerly?
Complain about this comment
Britain became a new way to call England because of this. England dominates and then people reffer to England as Britain
Good work there. A two sentence paragraph. Keep them coming.
Anyway, to your point. But this suits the nationalists. Anytime the old days of Empire come up it's always how the English did this or the English did that. Not the British. Not us. Not the Scots. We were unwilling participants in the quest for world domination. That'll be why armies the world over have Scots pipe bands instead of Irish or Cumberland pipe bands then. Inspired by a friendly twinning exchange visit back in the 1700's and 1800's perhaps.
So any excesses from old days of empire are conveniently lumped on the English. Even to the point of blaming the English for the whole thing. Except for the good bits. They were all Scottish. So, on independence we want our share of the Falklands.
The worst thing about the BBC is that it is so clearly funded by the establishment and that nobody dare break rank. Where were/are the Panorama exposes even while Gordon Brown and the Labour party are rigging the unemployment figures by hiding people on incapacity benefit or in dead-end pointless degree courses and New Deal initiatives. Or rigging the inflation figures to justify historically low interest rates thus encouraging the great British muppetry to remortgage their house and buy themselves the brand new car their exalted status as call-centre employee or NHS box-ticker so richly deserve?
When they did pluck up enough courage over Iraq the BBC allowed themselves to be totally done over on a minor point of detail by the government rather than skewering the government with the fact that their weapons expert reckoned there was no basis at all to go into Iraq. But Labour managed to turn it into some pedantic point about who said what when and, by no doubt threatening to pull funding entirely, had the BBC governor grovelling all over the shop.
Come to that where is the SNP administration in Scotland on exposing such under-handedness?
The BBC isn't just letting down Scotland. It is the puppet of the government and it's letting us all down.
Complain about this comment
MalcolmW2:
"Turning this debate into another cry for independence because of unfair English bias is absurd."
I never mentioned Independence.
I simply said that England does not represent the rest of the United Kingdom.
Complain about this comment
Because when I sit and stare uncomprehendingly at my TV wondering why I am being offered the English FA Cup for my delight on BBC Scotland of a Saturday or Sunday afternoon, or why I am listening to the inane and nearly racist ramblings of Brian "You would never guess that he was a Hooker for 20 years" Moore "analysing" the Rugby, I wonder if the BBC knows where the border is ?
I'm sure they show the Scotland rugby matches too for the six nations don't they? And yes, Brian Moore is a national embarrassment. But that may be because he's the only semi-articulate rugby pundit prepared to work for the small amount of money the BBC pay. I s'pose he looks on it as free PR for his after-dinner speech circuit or motivational speech seminars. Like Kirsty 'talking head' Wark.
Would you really want to have your revenge on England by forcing them to watch Scottish premiership football? That's just cruel. Motherwell 'v' Falkirk. Mmmm, one to savour. I think the entire UK had enough of Scottish football when we all sat through the semi-finals and finals of the UEFA Cup. Mmmm, here come Rangers again with their familiar 6-3-1 formation - I wonder how that will go against Zenith St Petersbug?
Well it certainly saw off Fiorentina.
Never has the 'Beautiful game' been so violated.
Plus the post-match riot.
Actually I think they showed an old-firm match down south a few years (say five) ago. I'd have thought that would be quite popular.
Complain about this comment
Personally, I find it less than feasible that each of the 'English regions' can fill their local opt-out news programmes with as much diversity as we have to pack into our own wee slot for the whole of Scotland!
I'd guess that the Midlands for example has at least the same population as the whole of Scotland. Five million people. Big deal. Birmingham, Coventry, Wolverhampton and the surrounding countryside will have that kind of population.
Don't hear them whining about wanting an entire news channel.
You confuse geographical area with population. The news is made by people not by land mass.
Complain about this comment
The one that annoys me is when you go to BBC I and type in 160 the screen shows UK Regional News in there is all the English Regions and lumped in with them is Scotland and Wales THEY ARE NOT REGIONS OF THE UK BUT TWO OF THE COUNTRIES WHICH MAKE UP GREAT BRITAIN.
Complain about this comment
As for Andrew Marr agreeing to appear on the same screen as Gordon Brown every Sunday I could puke.
Regular as clockwork the Maximum Leader phones up the BBC, reminds them who pays the piper, and then settles down for a choreographed 30 minute monologue telling us all what a fabulous job he's doing. Marr doesn't even pretend to ask any difficult questions. Castro would be proud.
The BBC should simply refuse to allow itself to be misused in this way. Nope, sorry Gordon, we're doing Madonna this Sunday. Next Sunday? Nope, we've got Ronan Keating.
Or at least have David Cameron on at the same time to put Brown back in his box when he comes up with some new rigged statistic to claim what a great job he's doing.
Complain about this comment
Congratulations to the poster earlier who seemed to say that Scotland should not have its own adequate news coverage, as it may lead to independence, or even debate on that subject!
On a different note I wish to agree with U9461192 on the narrow point that the BBC has been toothless sinces its run in with the UK government over Iraq and it now does little other than report what "the (New Labour) establishment" wants.
Complain about this comment
I'd say you are a huge sufferer of the scottish cringe
There is no such thing as the 'Scottish cringe'. It is simply a made-up condition used as a pejorative by beetroot-faced, phlegm-spitting nationalists. People who are so full of themselves and their self-proclaimed inflated position in the universe that they cannot conceive why other Scots aren't as bulgy-eyed about the place as they are.
There's no cure. But they tend to die young from high blood-pressure. So it's a cure of a sort. For the rest of us at least.
Complain about this comment
Comparisons with GMS are fair and reasonable. They do a very professional job with what they've got. But "international" news on GMS tends to be a Scottish voice reading out edited material sourced from BBC London, with an occasional bit of comment or "colour" added in. BBC correspondents abroad also do "Scottish angle" stories on request as part of their contract. All very interesting of course, but not always the important angle. And radio is cheap by comparison.
I think the bottom line, which is always money, is that there would be enormous duplication of effort within the BBC.
Also, Scotland, like it or not, is less than 10% of the BBC audience for news and other programming. The BBC News is watched all over the world. And just as we are interested to some degree in crime rates in New York and Nazi demos in Berlin, the rest of the world is interested in London as a barometer of the UK. Wrong and infuriating it may be to all of us, but still true.
I'm certainly not a BBC apologist and I share the wrath of the critics, but we could spend zillions on this and still have people say: "It's not the BBC News" before clicking the satellite to BBC London.
If we Scots want to pay, big-time, for this, then it's entirely possible. But it can't be funded out of the licence fee, which, by the way, is funded by the other 90-odd per cent of the BBC audience. Let's mend what we've got.
As for the Scottish cringe, that is an entirely independent, made-in-Scotland production that I will never watch.
Complain about this comment
The continued sarcastic use of ?aye? shows how cringingly embarrassed they are of their own culture.
No it doesn't. It's a caricature of a couple of bulging-eyed, strawberry-nosed nationalists winding themselves up into another blood-vessel popping moment over nothing.
Of their endless search to contrive further humiliation and/or injury to the great Scottish nation. You know the sort. Whatever good happens is the result of brilliant Scots. Anything bad is caused by rapacious locusts from England. Or their agents. Or their influence.
Four legs good. Two legs bad.
Complain about this comment
#33 lionaliaba:
I cannot help but think your complaint is a touch pedantic. Scotland is a "Region" of the UK, and also under the list of EU Regions. Perhaps you should be grateful that Scotland is listed as a region in one complete unit. My English wife objects strongly to England being broken down into a series of regions, rather than acknowledged as a nation in its own right. Everytime she hears the phrase, "Nations and Regions of the UK" on the BBC she complains. I have to say that I can see her point. Even the EU doesn't seem to recognise England as a nation, breaking it up into sections. I wonder why?
Complain about this comment
I don't think this a Scotland-England thing. I think it is a London-rest of the UK thing and I say that as someone who works in London and lives about 35 miles away in Hampshire.
Yes, wall to wall coverage of the London mayoral elections is tedious. So is anything else which is London/SE England-centric. For example, if you are from Liverpool you soon discern an anti-Liverpool sentiment in the media....
But do you really want to lose programmes like Today and PM in Scotland? They are really very good, even with their SE bias. Surely the best thing would be to have everything - ie you can watch BBC London - or BBC Scotland or BBC NI if you're so inclined - something I can do on my cable TV and I suspect it's possible with other forms of digital TV. As none of us will have analogue soon, we'll have that option.
Now if you want to whinge about something whinge about England having God Save the Queen played before its football matches. What's that about? It's the BRITISH national anthem!
Complain about this comment
#32 U946..
In simplistic terms, one might accept the theory that news stories will be in proportion to population, as opposed to geography.
Consider, however, a story involving submarines on the Clyde, another relating to a Buchan fishing community, yet another about the Edinburgh Fringe, and another about a rescued climber in the Cairngorms.
That is just a sample of what can be reported in Scotland in one evening. There have been times when two or more of the main UK stories have been in Scotland simultaneously, and regularly see report after curtailed or rushed report patently squeezed into our limited regional slot.
Are you seriously suggesting that, because the West Midlands has a similar population, there must be as many front-line events happening there as across the diversity of Scotland?
I have to question your grasp of the bigger picture.
I have no doubt either that the distinct perspective of the Scottish viewer will continue to receive scant consideration from those believe that 'Scottish programmes' should be strictly limited in accordance with our 'parochial minority' status with the London-centric UK.
Complain about this comment
Most of the previous posters have concentrated on the News, but what about some of the other programmes? 'Monarch' at one point had secondary starting after P6; another drama had us doing GCSEs. As for Countryfile - they send folk up to report on things Landward have done and done better! Why cannot Landward feed info into Countryfile? And Beechgrove Garden add Scottish perspective to Gardener's World? Then we have our Scottish correspondents- busy reporting on something which our Reporting Scotland could do perfectly well and save money, particularly as they are sitting there to move their much more knowledgeable reporter into exactly the same slot to do their version a few minutes later. Eorpa gives us more info and analyses it better than London centric stuff and we are reading the translation!! Oh and the kid's holiday programmes based on English holidays, including week long Whitsun half-terms and week long things in February. Are they ever in school? Our kids are going back before the holiday programmes start!(Incidentally what's this about a half day on Friday in one of the Lothians? In all my schooldays and teaching days, we never had that! Nor did the kids more recently and here today!) Come on folks, I am sure many of you can cite far more examples of Southern ignorance of things Scottish in programmes other than NEWS!
Oh and the creeping in now of UK=England! Noticed it?
Complain about this comment
Hellywobs 41 - I too really object to God Save the Queen being played at England matches...and I'm English. It really is very very pompous!
That aside, I'm fascinated by the "Scottish Cringe". I'd not heard of it before and I assume that the Nats have copied it from Australia where the "Cultural Cringe" is used to convey the embarrassment felt by more delicate minded Australians that most of their countrymen prefer to watch "Wallabies Wrestling in Mud" to Grand Opera.
What's the Scottish angle though and why does Brigadierjohn get accused of suffering from it so much? Is it because he's one of the few people on these blogs who appears to be able to count? I don't think that Scots have anything to be embarrassed about (except perhaps the weather), so why has this apparant "cringe" been invented to describe anyone who has realised that there are some other folk between Melrose and Calais?
Can I be the first to propose an annual Edinburgh Cringe Festival.
Complain about this comment
The English Broadcasting Corporation lost its B**** with the Iraq sexed up dossier row and has never recovered them.
The coverage of Scottish affairs before that was bad enough, but after the EBC just blindly followed the New Labour press releases verbatim. As most of these are centered on Westminster it is little wonder we hardly get a mention.
The EBC impartial! you are having a laugh.
The EBC fair and even handed, you are having an even bigger laugh.
If you want an example you only need to look at Campbells interview with Darling, then the interview with John Swinnie. I thought Campbell was going to swoon with delight when Darling spoke. He then interrupted Swinnie more in the first three minutes than he had in the total interview with Darling.
Is the EBC worth the license fee, absolutely not.
Complain about this comment
Well done for stepping back on this one Mr Taylor, although I suspect that had you played it any other way, either defending or prosecuting the BBC critics on one side or another would have been down upon you like the proverbial square heavy thing used generally in construction.
As someone who is pro-independence, let us first dispense with the idea that this argument should either (i) concern independence, or (ii) be delineated as a purely English v Scottish affair. As already mentioned, there are many other areas in the UK, including within England, that are just as badly done by (or possible even worse as their complaints are easier to dismiss as them being part of the English national news). This concerns London against everyone else, I feel.
I personally would like to see a Scottish take on international affairs, with more analysis by us as Scots on how it affects us both directly and indirectly (playing on the national conscious, etc). I am sure it would not be massively difficult to gain access to the information at a base, factual level and angle it through an Edinburgh prism (although an excellent point was made earler about the lack of care someone in Orkney would have about housing markets in Edinburgh), but I leave the details to those more expert than I and agree to bide by their conclusions.
The other point which I'm not sure has been directly addressed yet is the origin of reporting. If something is happening in Liverpool, lets have the local branch of the BBC there reporting it, as opposed to national broadcasters asking the questions like the puppet masters. The BBC do do this to an extent already, but I would still rather have a cut to the local newstation and let them handle it, then cut back to the national news. By doing that, the only time the national broadcasters would be talking would be when something which does affect us all (call-up in a war, for example) is shown. Such would be my suggestion, unsure if it is viable.
With regards to the attacks on the BBC, I would advise those who prosecute to have a look at other news channels around the world. I am not aware of the quality of France24, but cast your eye on Fox news or Al-Jazeera (particularly their reporting of the Zimbabwe situation), and I let you draw your own conclusions. I personally think the BBC is doing an excellent job - keep it up chaps. I do hope you don't get dissolved when Scotland goes independent (that last comment was a joke - this is not a debate on independence!)
Eoin
P.S. The Scottish national cringe is a label applied mostly by those who are pro-independence (but not always) to those who think Scotland should remain in the UK (but not always) that they are in some way ashamed of their culture, of being Scottish; the accent, the kilts, tartan, the culture more generally (allow me to mention the lack of knowledge a lot of Scots display towards their own indigenous language, Scots Gaelic). I don't know whether it really exists (outside the disdain for Gaelic of course) but it would be somewhat pitiful if it did, I suppose.
Complain about this comment
Can I also offer my condolences regarding the English being forced to play God Save the Queen (apologies if you love it and stand to attention whenever you hear it) but can I also point out the xenophobic dirge that Scotland plays before its games (again, apologies if you think it is the best thing since sliced bread). I have a love-hate relationship with Flower of Scotland - I think it's poor, but whenever it comes on I do go all misty-eyed and get the adrenaline surge.
Complain about this comment
#43 brought up the weather;not me. As a cartographer I CRINGE when I view the weather map used by the BBC which diminishes the relative area of Scotland by 33%. and expands the south coast of England by 42%. Is this wishful thinking? (figures are approximations; I do have a life)
Complain about this comment
It all seems terribly simple to me, cut the UK up into bits; Scotland, Wales, Nth. Ireland, Cornwall, Sussex, Kent, Oxfordshire, Northumberland, Cumbria, London, etc.
Send out some of the reporters to cover local news coverage in each area...
Send out the rest of the reporters to cover 'U.K wide' and International issues.
Before broadcast, cut and paste the relevant regional news and send it out.
Cor blimey, the T.V already has regional broadcasting! The technology is already in place!
Easy peesy. Maybe they should make me the BBC director! But nope, they'll spend millions trying to work that out.
p.s the Scottish Cringe is justified, as a former) resident of Lanarkshire but now a resident of Aberdeenshire I understand more than others the complete lacklustre enthusiasm of many Scots with regards to Scotland (or indeed life and the universe in general).
Complain about this comment
A radical suggestion - Some of your contributors could actually read the evidence (which you helpfully gave the link to), before spouting forth.
W2 - The Cardiff researchers recognised that population would mean more English news would appear - but in fact, the over representation is massively greater than population would suggest.
The BBC is bad, but I find ITN and Channel 4 News much worse. Channel 4 have just reported that following the 42 day Bill passing the Commons that the Home Secretary would need a recommendation from the DPP to use it - not in Scotland, where the the Lord Advocate's recommendation would be needed.
I don't accuse the broadcasters of deliberate bias, simply ignorance, laziness and incompetence.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
No 50
Expression is not only"not well formed", but suggests that we drink Irish or North American whiskey, instead of Scotch whisky. You have an intrusive "e".
Complain about this comment
If the Beeb really is impartial, can we the licence fee poll tax payers see the Balen report please?
Complain about this comment
I heard a report today that the BBC would never allow a Scottish 6 as they would not want to be seen as being responsible for the break up of Britain.
Who accused them of this?
I see this as;
They wish to circumvent our Scottish democracy, hide the truth, obliterate us with the propaganda of a foreign nation and ultimately;
Prevent our Freedom!!!
Complain about this comment
Poor old Auntie Beeb she’s taking a right old pasting, personally I don’t think the problem is so much with the BBC as with the environment the BBC has to operate in, with the majority of the BBC’s audience being in England how can they do anything other than have the majority of their content aimed towards the majority of their audience. I know that is no solace for those of us who reside north of the border (just where does that border begin) but compared with the service I get from ITV or Sky regarding all things Scottish, frankly I can’t complain.
Complain about this comment
I think in this debate we should all thank Brian for allowing the comments on this blog.
While a lot of the comments, including mine, have not been complimentary to the BBC Brian has allowed them stand. This uncensored forum may allow the ivory towers that the place men and women of the BBC inhabit, a wider view of what their conscripted followers(people with no democratic choice over whether they buy a license fee or not if they want a TV in the UK) actually think about their organization. No luvvies or air kisses here.
Complain about this comment
BBC
Impartiality
Kirsty Wark
Need I say more?
Complain about this comment
Brian,
As someone who would prefer to watch Sky News, but cannot because Virgin Media decided to pick a fight with Sky, I could not care less whether there was a "Scottish Six" or not. Its only saving grace would be the possible demise of "Reporting Scotland".
However, as the BBC now mentions that some items and figures are relevant only to England (see yesterday's report on failing schools). I would hope that a "Scottish Six" would report items and figures only relevant to Scotland such as knife crime in Scotland runs at at a higher rate than that in England. Surely a much more important issue than whether there is a "Scottish Six". The same applies to drugs abuse, ect, ect.
In essence, the "Scottish Six" is a non-issue except to those with axes to grind. Our country (Scotland) has far more serious issues to address than the possible existence of a news programme.
Best Wishes,
William.
Complain about this comment
Brian
Just watching EBC news 24 - no mention of this report on it. Not surprised really - too busy on English news and sport.
Personally I resent paying the tv licence. It's a tax frankly. We get no proper representation or value for it (and you know better than most I'm sure just how dependent on the bosses in London BBC Scotland is for hand outs).
The licence fee amounts to extortion, one day we will be free of it.
Complain about this comment
William
"Our country (Scotland) has far more serious issues to address than the possible existence of a news programme."
Of course it does, but as citizens we can't address the issues if we don't have the information, or worse - have a distorted view because media news portrays English matters as if they apply to the UK as a whole.
Complain about this comment
Truly impartial BBC Scotland;
How about an all new Scottish made 6 O'clock news program called;
"Scotland's Road To Freedom"
IX
I
???
This could help redress some of the unbalanced media coverage presented to us at the moment and for the last 300 years.
Complain about this comment
Are you seriously suggesting that, because the West Midlands has a similar population, there must be as many front-line events happening there as across the diversity of Scotland?
Yes I am. Climber rescued on the Cairgorms? Some kid pulled out of a flooded quarry/canal. Local fishing village? Local carpet factory. Edinburgh Fringe? Birmingham Rep.
5 million people will generate the same amount of news (give or take) whether in the West Midlands or Scotland.
Just because the backdrop is some hills or the sea doesn't change the likelihood of anything particularly newsworthy happening. Are you seriously suggesting Scotland's five million should get a 24 hour channel to itself because it's got a bigger back garden than Birmingham?
Complain about this comment
Just watching EBC news 24 - no mention of this report on it. Not surprised really - too busy on English news and sport.
No mention of any other Blog on BBC news 24 either I bet. That's why they have blogs. So folk can mouth off in obscurity. Not that they'd take any notice if you wrote to them directly either of course.
Complain about this comment
As someone who lives outside the UK my local cable company carries BBC World Service TV and BBC North America. Watching BBC World Service TV you would believe that the UK is a mythical country somewhere in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean(at least that seems to be the perspective when they do the weather report) BBC World Service TV does not report on happenings anywhere in the UK, not even the weather, unless there has been a major national disaster. They have something they call Dateline London, where they get a bunch of, mostly foreign London based journalists to talk about their take on things happening in the UK. Happenings which the BBC have not reported on in the first place and are therefore absolutely meaningless. I got absolutely livid when they gave us a blow by blow account of the last French elections but absolutely nothing on the Holyrood Elections. When I wrote to them about it they replied rather disdainfully that they were not catering for UK Expats. I hadn't actually told them I was an expat, that was the inference they made because I was interested in events in Scotland. I find that my best sources of Scottish news are BBC Radio Scotland which I get over the internet and the best comedy show of the week, Holyrood TV at First Minister Questions.
Complain about this comment
I see this as;
They wish to circumvent our Scottish democracy, hide the truth, obliterate us with the propaganda of a foreign nation and ultimately;
Prevent our Freedom!!!
Aye! FREEDOM!!!
I'll just go and pop Braveheart on again.
Complain about this comment
Personally I resent paying the tv licence. It's a tax frankly. We get no proper representation or value for it (and you know better than most I'm sure just how dependent on the bosses in London BBC Scotland is for hand outs).
The licence fee amounts to extortion, one day we will be free of it.
It's a tax in England too you know. And I too would be glad to be free of it. Impartial reporting? Unbiased coverage? Yeah, and pigs will fly out my ass.
A hot-bed of sandal-wearing, guardian reading, bearded socialists.
Complain about this comment
but suggests that we drink Irish ...whiskey
If only you did you might learn how it was properly made. Repeat after me...distil three times not two. Didn't you pay attention when the Irish were teaching you how to make it? And the pipes. Tsk, why not just stick a spring in the bellows like the Irish inventors did instead of huffing and puffing and giving yourself an infarction?
Really.
Complain about this comment
I'm in Scotland and I disagree with the idea of 100% control to Scottish broadcasting. Why? BBC Scotland is, for all intents and purposes, BBC Glasgow. Glasgow is just as bad as London when it comes to being ignorant to events going on elsewhere, sorry if that upsets people but that's the way it is. Watch Reporting "Scotland" and 50%+ of the stories are either Glasgow or the west coast somewhere, it's pathetic. Reporting Glasgow picks up on any tiny little piece of not-news that's vaguely relevant to Scotland, 99% of which is absolute drivel and filler. So what if schoolchildren are reading Harry Potter in Pitcairn Island or somebody in Canada eats haggis? I don't care, that's not news. BBC Scotland barely has enough relevant newsworthy material to fill 30 minutes, I don't know why they expect London to let them have a whole hour time slot to play with. Most of the "news" items seem to involve Alex Salmond moaning about Westminster anyway.
All that's bad enough not to mention BBC One's schedules being constantly wiped clean of quality programming in favour of The Old Firm (there you go, Glasgow again... wake me up when you see an Edinburgh based team on TV, or any other Scottish team for that matter) getting a boring 0-0 draw against some Eastern European side nobody's ever heard of. All other BBC regions carry the original schedule of actual programmes worth watching, I do like my football but would it not hurt them to put it on BBC2 or one of the Freeview channels? I don't have Sky so I can't just switch to an English BBC feed to avoid it as others who have Sky apparently can.
All of the above is coming from a Scottish person. I totally disagree with more broadcasting control for Scotland. Scotland is a bad place to watch TV in general unless you have Freeview at the very least.
Complain about this comment
For the pedants!
Whisky is used in Canada and Scotland
Whiskey is used in Ireland and the USA
Triple distillation in pot stills was used in Scotland whilst all sorts of cereal junk was used and when distillation techniques were rural.
There is or was at least 1 distillery using triple still in Scotland and Bushmills, to all intents and purposes, is a displaced Scotch distillery, just a wee hop over to the Mull of Kintyre. The only other distilleries, legal that is, are in Dundalk, a recent implant, and the SW near Cork where Coffey and pot stills are used.
I would be willing to educate you further but that would cost you money.
Hey I have just had a wee wheez; we could get a subsidy from the devolved Education budget of Northern Ireland. They seem to be due for loads of wonga soon and I ma sure they wouldn't miss the odd mill or two?
Complain about this comment
Oh and I forgot, the Irish didn't invent distillation, the Arabs did.
Complain about this comment
alcohol
alambic
gettit?
Complain about this comment
LoL
"Yeah, and pigs will fly out my ass."
But what's that flying out your mouth?
Complain about this comment
Can swiftly see this descending into the usual independence tinged argument between those who think they 'win' if they can stick determinedly to their guns and not blink first. In any case, at least some good points have been made; let me re-iterate the one concerning the fact that even if it were BBC Glasgow/Edinburgh, there would still be those in Scotland grumbling that the news never focused upon where they were.
But another, much more important (in my view) point; perhaps the fact that people are not all that interested in television news is because so many people get their news from the internet. I certainly do - I recall a comment calling for viewer-orientated news. Take a look a the BBC website.
And when the BBC is considered through the prism of internet, suddenly it answers a lot of gripes, in my view anyway. Scotland doesn't just get its own homepage, it is subdivided into 6 different areas, has its own politics page, blog and even a fully functioning and very comprehensive Gaelic website. Weather, Sport, anything and everything, all linked to outside sites as well. So while this blog does concern the TV as the medium, remember it is not the only one, and there are (possibly more important) other options to get your information from the BBC.
U9... - while I agree with your comment regarding the population making the same amount of news, I think you have missed the point about this item not appearing on the news - it is not simply a blog, but a newsworthy item. Although I disagree with the original statement - I watched news at ten and there was a large segment on this.
And to whomever wrote something along the lines of BBC - Impartiality - Kirsty Wark - need I say more - in separate lines, the simple answer is yes. That is, if you want anyone to actually agree with you instead of smiply scrolling past. This happens too often on these forums (sorry to pick on an individual comment, but it is just a representation of more things). Can we have some reasons for why these opinions are out there, please - it would make my day.
Regards
Complain about this comment
I make no apology for believing that the only solution to this is yet again independence. The only way Scotland will have a media that properly serves its interests is with a wholly independent one. I would hope it would provide an objectivity about UK, EU and world affairs that the BBC sorely lacks. I can't believe when I watch BBC how much of a London-centric personality-less stuffed shirt the whole thing is. The Presenters are like something out of the Victorian era and there's this constant feeling IMO that really don't realise how irrelevant England ultimately is. It's dire and out of date like the Union itself. I'm sure we could cherry-pick the best that comes from down south to keep the Anglophiles happy but an independent media it must be.
Complain about this comment
Letter to Points of View, The BBC. Dated 26th August 1996 (the English bank holiday weekend). Published to the scot.general newsgroup 26th August 1996.
11+ years for the penny to drop?
Incidentally the conspiracy I hinted at in the post was revealed as fact in John Birt's biography in 2002.
Letter begins:
Today, the "UK" programmes are all different because England is on holiday. The children across the road from me, however, were in school (a state primary)
Tomorrow the schools in England go back after the summer break and Children's BBC restarts throughout the "UK" The Scottish schools have been back for two weeks - what had they to watch when they return home from school?
Tonight on the "UK" BBC news there was an article about the Notting Hill carnival. Nothing about the Edinburgh Festival, the world's largest arts festival. There was also an article about the English cricket team.
Tonight on the "UK" BBC news there was an article about the "national" curriculum and standards. "National" in this context means England and Wales (since when were England and Wales a nation?), but the story is shown in Scotland.
Last week English and Welsh exam results were announced and this news was broadcast to Scotland. Were the Scottish exam results broadcast to England so that people in England could compare the two systems and learn from the differences? Of course not!
I resent stories applicable to the whole of England and none of Scotland being broadcast to me in Scotland. I'm just not interested and I don't think most other Scots are either. Has the BBC ever undertaken a survey to find out what people in Scotland think of getting stories that have no relevance or interest to them?
This treatment of Scotland as an unimportant region and broadcasting
inappropriate programmes and news is unacceptable. I call on the BBC to
devolve its news service. This would mean giving the Scottish news 25 mins of time instead of 5, binning the current "UK" news and allowing Scottish TV and English regions to fill the extra 20 mins by buying in national and international stories from the BBC in London. Thus most English regions would probably carry today's international stories and the "National" Curriculum stories, whereas the Scottish news would carry the international stories and fill the English-specific slot about the national curriculum with something actually relevant to the viewers.
There is widespread talk on the Internet of the London bias in the BBC and it is attracting a lot of negative publicity for the BBC, indeed there is one site I believe which is gathering evidence of anti-Scottish collaboration within the BBC in London - particularly with regard to recent high level changes which resulted in the Gaelic learners' programme "Speaking our Language" being withdrawn from the Learning Zone.
Your motto is "And nation shall speak unto nation". It would be great if the Scottish and English nations could speak to one another on more equal terms.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"Impartiality" for the BBC in Scotland is often another word for blandness or ignorance. Because of the political debate over Scotland's future, and over Scotland's nationhood, the BBC often feels safer staying away from Scotland's past. History writing in Scotland has never been better or more prolific, yet the coverage of Scottish history on the BBC is abysmal - cheap, populist and poor if it happens at all.
The UK BBC meanwhile tries to force the history of all parts of the UK into a British mould, when the word "Britain" in its modern political context was only really invented in the seventeenth century. The BBC seriously proposed Elizabeth I as a "Great Briton" when she wouldn't even have recognised the term "Briton". Look at the BBC "British" history homepage - Normans (the story behind the battle of Hastings); Middle Ages (from Magna Carta ...); Tudors (an era of change and triumph from Henry VIII's reformation). All these refer exclusively to English history. Although Northern Ireland gets a mention under "recent history" there is no mention on the BBC history homepage of Scotland or Wales, and no other mention of Ireland.
This isn't a matter of pedantry - our history is key to understanding our present, key to appreciating how we became who we are. Scotland's very existence in history is ignorred because it's too difficult for UK BBC's default English perspective and BBC Scotland finds it too hot politically to deal with at any serious level.
Complain about this comment
I am afraid that I cannot find that it is satisfactory for an organization such as the BBC to provide a network news service which is confusing and muddled and therefore inadequately informative.
Having lived in England, I believe that I understand why it is as it is. It is as it is because it comes from England. As we are only too well aware, to the English generally England is Britain. Mostly they do not know much about the bits of the UK that are not England, and that is perfectly satisfactory so far as they are concerned. The dissenting Scottish view is merely what one has to expect from "our chippy little Jocks", as the author of a recent article in the Sunday Telegraph referred to us.
News emanating from English-based media may be brushed up from time to time when subjected to the kind of scrutiny and criticism that it is receiving from the Celtic periphery at present, but it is always going to be only a matter of time before it slips back to being what it cannot help being: English, Anglo-centric, inevitably vague about and innately bored with anything north of Hadrian's wall, the whereabouts of which you would no doubt find your average southerner to be vague about and uninterested in also.
What to do about this? Change the English? Into what, pray? Forget it. They are as they are and always will be. Divorce? I would vote for that. In the meantime, the BBC and other broadcasters should see to it that all news and current-affairs programmes that are to be seen on television in Scotland and heard on radio in Scotland are produced in and broadcast from Scotland. As this is plainly not about to happen, we should have at least the Scottish Six general-news television programme that has been much discussed. It would be something for the confused to turn to for clarification of all the muddled-headed misinformation and disinformation that will continue to be inflicted on us from the insular little country to the south of us.
Complain about this comment
Lots of good stuff in here, I would agree with previous posters about the GMS format being a good example of how to blend Scottish, UK and international news. Generally it manages to avoid the 'dorito eating seagull' type of story that Reporting Scotland and yes YOU the BBC Scotland website seem to think constitutes news. It also doesn't seem overly central belt-biased (unlike Reporting Scotland).
Now that the format is sorted out, what about the quality of the presenters? Previous posters have mentioned the issue of presenters of suitable gravitas being an issue up here (one might say the same for our politicians). Gary Robertson is the bane of my mornings. Stop wittering on about Morning Extra Gary, I'm in work when it's on, I tune in to hear the news from a reliable [sic] source, not talk show magazine guff at 8 in the morning. And as for interview technique, it's enough to make me tune into Today. Humphries-lite, badly executed.
I also agree with previous comments on the the fact that the internet provides the best way for users to select what they want to find out about - as long as the quality of online reporting is decent, which on the Scottish news pages can occasionally be questionable. Or maybe there isn't enough news up here after all - so the space gets filled with an aberdonian seagull story.
Complain about this comment
Re: 77, Brigodee John
No need to descend to the Telegraph's level. Gross generalisations don't help. I'm sure htere are plenty of people in Carlisle and Newcastle who could find Hadrian's Wall and comment on what happens on the northern side of it.
Complain about this comment
When I was a kid I got used to kids programs on the Telly being scheduled round English school holidays.
As I grew up I got used to (when Scotland had a major News story) seeing a London based journalist do a piece on the 6 O'clock news and moments later, a Scottish based journalist delivering exactly the same piece on Reporting Scotland.
The argument against a Scottish 6 seems principally to be that we could not afford to have journalists all over the world giving a Scottish take on things.
The fact that we could take most of our "foreign" feeds from already based BBC journalists and only introduce and use journalists with a Scottish sensitivity when we could afford and thought it necessary seems to have escaped their intellectual ken.
I've seen the London/Scottish journalist thing happen in the last couple of weeks so the London Knows best attitude still prevails.
I'm a Scot, I believe that Scots in general have a different world view from (london Centred) English types. I pay my license fee. I would like to see the world view of the people who live in Scotland reflected in and upon on National broadcasts.
I'm not holding my breath!
Complain about this comment
Firstly let me say that I completely agree that there are certain major problems with UK wide broadcasting at the moment, which don't just affect Scotland, but which people up here are acutely aware of.
Notably those are issues with coverage of local issues and timetabling, both of which I feel could be fixed with a little extra flexibility and common sense on the part of the editorial teams.
I think BBC news has improved massively in its coverage of Sport across the country and, given that we already have Reporting Scotland, we get a fair bit of football and other Scottish sports coverage. Politics however is not given very detailed analysis.
I don't think however that a Scottish 6 is in any way a sensible answer to anything. Duplicating the production of all news, and probably cutting back on how much Scottish people are informed of what is going on in the rest of the country isn't a great idea. It would also lead to an even bigger decrease in the amount of coverage issues in Scotland get to everyone else further increasing the misinformation problems that are currently an issue. But seriously though, how is it cost effective to the taxpayer for Scotland to send an extra reporter out to every location, a Scottish Iraq correspondent and a Scottish Washington correspondent etc etc. Its either that or we would have to time every news report around the national news so that we could get the reports after everyone else, something that would annoy all of the correspondents who would no doubt see it as stupidly pointless.
Just fix what we've got, don't make more problems.
As a side gripe about one other thing in news that really really annoys me though, is when Reporting Scotland re-reports on something that we've just heard about on the national news. I get that if there's a big accident in Glasgow we need to talk about it, but quite often they don't even bother to put a new angle on it, just regurgitating the same report, 5 minutes of explanation about what happened that we've already heard. As well, the Scottish 6:30 news is a joke, they struggle every day to find meaningful content to fill it, and so half of their show is always full of "Mrs Mcmurtries wee dug got stuck up a tree today". Combined with pointless things like the Reporting Scotland people doing the headlines at the end, unlike everywhere else in the country, there seems to be a stupid amount of "lets make Scottish news seem important for importances sake" going on.
Lets fix BBC news and have proper coverage of the whole of the UK, so that everyone sees their issues raised on the news and everyone gets a broad overview of whats going on in different parts of the country.
Then lets fix Reporting Scotlands 6:30 news show so that its not a joke pretending to be so much bigger than it is, and return it to providing quality coverage (in 15 minutes if thats all the content their is) thats actually something to be proud of rather than embarassed about.
Complain about this comment
'Alex Salmond said news about English law and education was often presented as if it affected the whole of the UK'
No just 85%..
There is no BBC England channel. Therefore how do the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish suggest we in England hear the stories that do affect a large proportion of us. I could understand your concerns if you didn't receive news reports about your local areas but you do... much in the same way that I receive local news reports regarding my region (which may be geographically smaller than Scotland but not by population. I could then complain about this as firstly it is debatable my county (my local area) is even in Anglia and we are often forced to listen to coastal news and other news that definitely does not affect me in the centre of england.
It is impossible for the BBC to please all of the people all of the time. I cannot understand why money was spent and a year wasted to conduct yet another review, which only serves to fuel separatist agendas and create divides between the different peoples of this great union. Review after Review after Review and yet none of them actually seem to tell us anything that wasn't already blatantly obvious or wholly irrelevant. I could understand your concerns if you were unable to access Scottish/Welsh/Northern Irish news but whenever I visit my family in Belfast I see for myself that they do receive local broadcasts. Is this not enough... if not, why not? Everyone seems to feel hard done by at the moment... no wonder the country is going down the pan. We should be working to save what has taken many many years to build and defend, not using any excuse we can to drive a wedge between 'us' and 'them'.
Besides, the people who are complaining on here clearly have access to the internet where local news reports can be found with relative ease.
Complain about this comment
Good posts.
It isn't just about impartiality. The BBC is in actual fact anti-Scottish which is why when Sweet Sixteen, the Ken Loach film set in Greenock was broadcast only two or three years ago the BBC put non-optional subtitles on it which was in effect treating Scots like foreigners. When John Leslie first applied for Blue Peter only as far back as 1989 he was rejected and told he was "too Scottish". Just two of the many many slights against Scotland by an institution paid for by Scots. So why bother forcing the issue. Why wait to be thrown a few scraps. We should push for devolved broadcasting with a view to making the transition to independent broadcasting seamless.
As a aside. I complained to the BBC about Glenn Campbell's treatment of Swinney and noticed his treatment of Alex Salmond was much different the following week. I presume other complaints must have been made. But it really is ridiculous than in 2008 we have to fight in such a way. Why waste our energies changing an intransient broadcasting culture that will never give us equitable and culturally reflective broadcasting.
Complain about this comment
It's not just broadcasting on TV. It's the internet as well.
And another thing, why do we have to be called UK in terms of internet addresses. The UK is not a country, it's a "union" of 4 countries.
Every other country has its own .co. , apart for the individual countries which form Britain.
And, another think, when people from other lands see UK, they automatically think "England", which just shows how each country in the UK is presented to the rest of the world.
Things need to change.
Complain about this comment
To be fair it is difficult to balance the reportage but the BBC and the other broadcasters aren't making any attempt to do so.
The idea of the BBC being metrocentric, i.e. London centered, is spot on and a real problem. Most areas of England are just about as badly treated as Scotland, Wales and N.I. The world does not begin and end in London.
Scotland needs its own independent news service to properly reflect national and international news from a Scottish perspective. Centralised news is like the union itself, it can't work when one component makes up 85% of the whole.
The following taken from the 'On This Day' History section on todays BBC website demonstrates the problem perfectly,
'1701: The Act of Settlement ensures a Protestant succession in England by passing the throne to Hanover.' The Union of the Crowns in 1603 just never happened then?
Load gun, aim at foot, pull trigger.
Complain about this comment
The BBC has had a longstanding policy of ignoring calls for better coverage of all parts of the UK.
They have totally failed to counter the still widely-held belief amongst most Americans that Scotland is a region of England.
You'd think the use of "land" on the end of the word "Scotland" might be just a little clue that it's a country in its own right - but then I remembered we're talking about the place that gave us "Disneyland" and "La La Land"!!
Complain about this comment
Brian,
In response to oldnat@59.
Television news is only one of the media through which we get our information about what is happening in Scotland.
There are Scottish newspapers, national and local, Radio - BBC is excellent for this - and websites, ect. I could go on.
However, to harp on about the necessity of a "Scottish Six" in order to find out what is happening in the country, and get an unbiased view is stretching it a bit.
It is way down the list of priorities, if it is indeed a priority, Scotland has to face.
Drugs, alcohol, education, social provison, health, care of the elderly, environment, and affordable housing are more important than this non-issue.
Best Wishes,
William.
Complain about this comment
News on BBC Scotland for 1 hour every evening. What bliss!!
10 minutes of news from outside Scotland; 10 minutes of tortoises in Union street and thieving seagulls, leaving 40 minutes for the main purpose of Reporting Scotland - Rangers and Celtic. Wonderful.
I wonder of many of the bloggers who are keen to see all of the output from SBC to be sourced in Scotland have thought of the likely income to be generated from a Scotland only licence fee ( it would have to be, because an advert source of funds would lead to more STV and I do not see many of your bloggers mentioning STV as the ideal Scottish TV source of news).
One could well see the BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra being and early casualty, for instance.
Complain about this comment
I think what bothers me most is that even the Scottish news items that make it into the UK news are clearly aimed at an English audience.
Everything is qualified with an explanation of how this works differently in Scotland, or how Scottish people feel differently about that. It's condescending and it's offensive.
Complain about this comment
76 Scotak
Just one last go to stir the pot before leaving it to the pedants. I would really welcome more on Scottish History on TV...although I recall that there have been a number of very good programmes over the years (There were loads when I was kid presented by Magnus Magnusson).
I suspect though that a thorough investigation would be wildly unpopular as it would inevitably have to probe cherished myths of oppression and impoverishment. It would be interesting to see, for example, the question of political change and land clearances placed in the context of what was happening elswhere in Britain and Europe. For instance, why is the fate of a crofter evicted from his land by his former feudal master and forced to take up fishing or emigrate...so very different from the English tenant smallholder thrown off his land during Enclosure and left with no option but to migrate to hellish industrial towns and sleep ten to a room over the weaving machines?
It would be interesting to see the history of Scotland analysed through an economic prism that compares a sparsely populated large area suffering from a high proportion of relatively unproductive land in a cold climate...with a more densely populated land with relatively large amounts of good soil in a warmer climate.
It would be interesting to see an analysis of the effects of political reform on the development of Scotland. For instance, why was it that the feudal model died out in England in the 14th Century (probably the progenitor of our democracy), while it clung on in Scotland until the 18th Century...practiced by the very claymore waving folk that the nationalists find to romantic and inspiring.
A sober look at Scottish history could do much to challenge deeply held beliefs and filter out the genuine grievances (and there are some) from the vague notions of oppression...and that is why it will never happen. The idea that life's misfortunes are not solely imports from South of the Border would be too much to bear for some.
Those same people are on this blog. They will never be happy until the news consists of an angry, red-haired man presenting the fatstock prices, up to his oxters in heather.
As I mentioned earlier, I don't like the National Anthem being played at English sports fixtures for exactly the same reasons...that it is incorrect and pointlessly inflammatory to the other home nations. Independence however would though give us the chance to belt out the long suppressed 3rd verse about "rebellious Scots" and "confounding their knaveish plans". It's no more derogatory than Flower of Scotland after all.
Having lit the blue touch paper...I shall now retire.
Complain about this comment
Brigadierjohn, you are usually good at describing the symptoms, but never seem to ask what the illness is.
Have you ever read a Scottish newspaper or listened to Good Morning Scotland or Newsdrive? Has it occurred to you that the US presidential election campaign, the unpelasant events in Zimbabwe and the typhoon in Burma did not actually take place in London?
An integrated, normal BBC TV news operation in Scotland would take the reports of BBC correspondents in Washington, Africa, or wherever and tie them together with a presenter. Like, er, they do in London, and like, er, they do on Newsdrive. We pay for those reporters, and they are the added value of the BBC news, not the London newsreader.
This is how to avoid the "crass switch" from Newsnight to Newsnicht, and the cheapo five minute tag-on 'local' Scottish news with cardboard sets and second rate presenters.
Would putting a proper TV news broadcast like this together in Glasgow cost some money? A little, but certainly not as much as the unspent licence fee (or TV poll tax) that is sent across the border every year.
As for your comment that "We have barely a handful of decent broadcasters here...", well, where are Kirsty Wark and Eddie Mair these days? Er, working where the money and the jobs are....London. Now why is that again? Because the BBC spends our money in London...
The underlying political reality here is that unionists (I have the feeling that would include you, Brigadierjohn) support the idea of big important news "coming" from London (like, er, those US elections, Zimbabwe, Burma...) and like the Scottish news looking cheap, parochial and irrelevant.
You don't have to be a media studies student to figure out why this would be the case. Their fear is that normalised Scottish TV news with a coherent global outlook might give the impression to the viewing public that Scotland was a normal country with a coherent global outlook. That would never do...would it?
Complain about this comment
LoL
"They will never be happy until the news consists of an angry, red-haired man presenting the fatstock prices, up to his oxters in heather."
As opposed to a fat man in braces with his strides tucked into his socks, a knotted hankie on his head, a bad accent accentuated by a rediculous speech impediment preaching the benefits of our glorious union!
Complain about this comment
#90 Anglophone
History is what we Scots do.
Its at the root of our heritage, what makes us what we are.
I don't know a single patriotic Scot who is not aware of his or her history, nor for that matter, anyone whose sense of patriotism is not significantly reinforced the more familiar they become with history.
Contrary to how some would portray it, there is no 'Brigadoon' version of Scots history especially for nationalists.
Our history is a living thing, part of our present and future.
It is not a dossier that has been 'sexed up' to present a Scotland that is more heroic, 'tartanised' or especially hard done by, but based on generations of accepted research by dedicted and able historians.
Most people I know live by the truth of history as thus accepted, and would rather know the truth of history than any bogus version of events.
And one reason why we don't lump our own past in with similar events elsewhere is that events occur for specific reasons in different circumstances, therefore any 'generalisation' of such circumstances would only do injustice to the truth.
One thing I can say is that Scotland's history is and continues to be well sifted and aired.
So, while there there will always be those who seek to put their own spin on it, we are unlikely to discover any new 'skeletons in the closet'.
Complain about this comment
Brian,
Having thrown out 'the idiot box in the corner' years ago, I am unable to comment on BBC Scotland TV output, but that has allowed me to become a constant daily radio listener and I post because of what I consider to be the significant downgrading of news and current affairs on Radio Scotland ('RS') over the years and, most particularly, in recent weeks.
You would not need to listen very much to get the clear impression that RS is intent on becoming a sports and, more importantly, a football station. What has happened, you ask?
Consider this:
Most if not all dedicated newsreaders have ben removed from their frontline posts, it seems. Hosts for programmes such as GMS, Scotland Live and Newsdrive now act as newsreaders as well. And guess what? - from six in the morning to 12 midnight, there is a dedicated sportscaster for every news bulletin!!
Then, there has apparently been some kind of sea change in the sporting activities of the country, as the sports report on Scotland Live has just been extended from 2 mins to 15 mins - I make that about a 650% increase in time allocation - all at the expense of news and current affairs.
In addition, The Beechgrove Potting Shed has been moved from its Sunday lunchtime slot to make way for what? - yet another sports programme hosted by the grossly over-exposed Messrs Cowan and Cosgrove.
And then, last year, we were given the quite ridiculous situation where ALL broadcasting on 810MW was jettisoned to FM in order to provide whole day commentary on a friendly cricket match between two countries, neither of which was Scotland!!
If that is not enough to raise very serious questions about what is going on at RS, then the point made by another poster also applies - and that is the loss of the quite good Sunday morning news programme which has been replaced by what has become a standard RS theme, that is journalists talking to other journalists about what other journalists are writing about in newspapers!! And you get double value on that theme on the sports side where an existing 'journalists love-in' on a Monday night has now been extended by a similar programme on a Saturday afternoon!
It's quite clear to me that there has been a shift of budgets in favour of sports coverage on RS and against news and current affairs. And this situation becomes even more worrying when the sports coverage seems to be beholden to a certain Glasgow 'red-top' and a number of 'so-called journalists' who seem to be predominate on key programmes.
There is much much more that could be said but the evident down-grading of news and current affairs on RS has been, IMHO, quite shameful.
Complain about this comment
#61
Yes I am.
Diversity of demographic circumstances is much more likely to produce news and news-worthy events than having the same population squeezed into an area the size of Edinburgh.
Just look at the equvalent examples you give:
The Cairngorms becomes 'a local quarry'; the fishing industry, a carpet shop; and the entire Festival Fringe is equated to a single theatre!
Had you given a West Midlands counterpart to the Clyde submarine story, what would it be?
Kid gets splashed in freak paddling pool incident?
I believe news in general, but 24-hour news in particular, should cover stories across the entire broadcast area, including smaller and more f'ar-flung' communites, which would allow these parts to connect with and be recognised by the service - as opposed to the over-centralised and endlessly repetitive set-up we have been so tediously presented with to date.
Complain about this comment
Anglophone - #90
The problem with God Save the Queen (well, actually it was written as God Save The King but since we don't currently have a King...) is the fact that it purports to be the national anthem of the UK and yet has that infamous third verse "God grant that Marshall Wade, May by thy mighty aid, victory bring, May he sedition hush, and like a torrent rush, Rebellious Scots to crush,"
Is it fitting for the National Anthem of one Nation (ie, the UK) to condemn one of the constituent parts of that Nation (ie Scotland)?
Granted, if God save the Queen/King had been the English National Anthem prior to the formation of the UK then this could be excused as an unfortunate holdover from a past age but, it was written somewhere around 1740.
At least Flower of Scotland works under the guise of one Country having a go at another one, since Scotland and England were separate countries at the period of time it refers to (if not actually when it was written). Not much of a differentiation but at least it is one.
To be honest, both are pretty dreadful although both can be equally stirring when sung by 60,000+ sports fans at venues up and down the land. It is also preferable to the situation that used to exist when God Save the Queen was the only anthem played at international sporting events between two of the Home Nations.
Still, maybe Billy Connolly had a point when he suggested it be scrapped and replaced with the theme from the archers...
Complain about this comment
93 "and one reason why we don't lump our own past with similar events elsewhere is that events occur for specific reasons in different circumstances, therefore any generalisation of such circumstances would only do injustice to the truth."
Dougie - isn't that the same way thing as "not letting the facts get in the way of a good story?".
The idea that Scottish History is somehow insulated from events elsewhere is preposterous. How can you divorce the effects of say John Knox on the development of protestantism (and it lengthy clash with catholicism) without seeing it in the context of the wider development of Lutherism in Germany? How can you view the "Clearances" without taking in the wider socio-economic trends bought about by the Agricultural Revolution and the nascent Industrial Revolution? How can you view the industrial history of Scotland over the past 20 years without considering the global influences?
People who start to believe their version of history as "the truth" are taking the road to bigotry and intolerance...a sort Al McQueda! I say this as someone who is equally sceptical about the many myths in English history. It's just that our myths aren't always couched in suffering and betrayal which tends to make them less toxic for subsequent generations.
Anyway...this was a debate about TV. How about the recent BBC series "Coast". I thought that the Scottish section was covered beautifully and in proprtion to its length. The English, Welsh and Irish sections were well done too...and I don't recall the outcry over the series' Scottish presenter.
I think that the BBC, rightly, goes out of its way to emphsise the whole country in its programming. It really stands little chance of pleasing everyone in its news broadcasts. One mans vital news is anothers celebrity irrelevance...one mans vital news is anothers parochialism. You can't please all the people all the time.
Complain about this comment
How can the BBC (and other UK wide media groups) represent Scotland and its constitutional question impartially, if the natural career progression of the reporters/journalists leads to London?
Complain about this comment
95 Dougie
At last we agree. Rolling 24 hour news is tedious and repetitive and probably only appeals to goldfish and insomniacs. Given the number of BBC journalists around the country it would be good if they would contribute pieces on important regional/national news to intersperse with the "big" items. It would certainly be more interesting than watching endless dissections of the Clinton/Obama run-off which, while important, surely doesn't require quite so much in-depth coverage compared to national news.
Complain about this comment
The problems arise because the BBC news shows need to function as an english national news, because england is split into regions and has no national news. By contrast, the stories on devolved scottish issues are shoved onto reporting scotland. The effect of this is twofold: scottish viewers are given alot of information about english affairs, but english views are told nothing about what in devolved scotland (or wales or NI).
Why can't the news be split? The first section could start with headlines of international and UK-wide affairs (e.g. defence) and cover them, and the end half could be about devolved issues like health or crime. This section could make explicit policy differences between the nations. This would lead naturally into the local news shows.
Complain about this comment
I am Scottish and have lived and worked in England for nearly two years now. My Scottish colleagues here all refer to the BBC as the EBC. Fortunately I have access to Scottish TV and can get the "National News" followed by the Scottish News. Thank goodness for the latter, because if I had to rely on the National news keeping me up todate on either Scottish, Welsh or Irish affairs then I would be bereft. But its the simple things that get my goat. The weather forecast for example-some readers refer to us as the NORTH. Recently it was House Prices in the UK are plummeting,,and during the floods-"UK in Flood Alert". This was in East Anglia! Radio is not much better, presenters often refer to the UK when they are discussing England. I reckon Radio 4 is the best as far as real UK news and affairs is concerned.
Complain about this comment
I'm clearly an atypical scot in that I don't like sport. One of the things that irritates me about Reporting Scotland (in contrast to many of the comments I read here) is the tendency to think sport is the most important thing there is. I remember things like when the lead story was the resignation of the Celtic finance director. I'm waiting for the day when they lead with the exclusive that Ranger's second junior boot boy has a cold. The second major sin is puffing another programme as if it were a news story (I used to play 'spot the frontline scotland story'). If they produce a national bulletin with these priorities then I'll be watching news 24 I'm afraid.
Complain about this comment
It is very interesting to see all the comments about where the news should come from and about the preferred content.
I would take issue with what seems a more important lack of journalistic standards. There has recently been more than one story on the BBC website about interesting events e.g. the last parade of veterans of the 51st Highland Brigade in Perth on Sunday 6th June. No information on the time of events was included or linked to so how could I show my appreciation of the dedication of members of this unit?
Complain about this comment
Personally, I feel this report has been a long time coming and I hope it changes something.
In Scotland, people have no idea what issues are develoved and what issues are reserved, so making sense of the news is nigh on impossible unless politics happens to be your thing.
I'm a researcher and I frequently have to explain to friends and family members the differences between Scottish policy and that of the rest of the UK. These people are not in the dark because they don't keep up with the news - it is because the news does not deliver information to them in a clear enough format.
People in Scotland are currently paying to be misinformed through the license fee. This is an absolute scandal and CANNOT continue. In the years since devolution, Scotland has become a very different place to England politically, yet the full extent of the country's progress is not known to the majority of the Scottish people.
Regarding the subject of a Scottish 6, I have been told by many (who should know better) that they believe there would not be enough to report on, as "nothing really happens" in Scotland. Now, watch Reporting Scotland (sorry Brian) and you might be fooled into thinking that this is the case. But the fact is the stories are there - they just need to be picked up and reported on - as showcased by BBC Radio Scotland daily.
The Republic of Ireland's RTE news is a good example of how the Scottish 6 might look. It has Irish news first, UK second and far, far more European news than we get from the current national.
I know that BBC Scotland wants the Scottish 6 - it's convincing BBC London that's the hard part. We've been here before but there is a stronger case for it now. BBC Scotland needs to put the "best television studio in the world" to better use, because what it produces just now doesn't cut the mustard.
Complain about this comment
#97 Anglophone
I would refrain from jumping to such huge assumptions.
"The idea that Scottish history is somehow insulated from events elsewhere" is quite clearly a spectre of your own making, and bears no resemblance to anything I've said.
Equally, "not letting the facts get in the way of a good story" is worn-out old cynicism that, again, attempts to turn my explanation through 180 degrees!
On the contrary, I think it is the specious 'linking' of events with the perceived 'similarities' of others elsewhere that is deeply flawed.
At the same time, most cultures and peoples have their own 'mythology', which is something quite distinct from "factual history", and generally accepted to be fanciful, but which that people is quite entitled to hold on to.
I don't think we need to believe in or rely on a particular "version" of history, being quite comfortable with a full and broad range of documented and accepted historical accounts.
You talk about sustaining the "facts" but being wary of the "truth". If that is an invitation to debate the perceived differences between these two entities, you are own your own on that one.
If you are seeking to 'debunk' a 'version' of Scottish history, frankly, you will have to do a whole lot more than setting up your own false assumptions just to knock them down.
Apart from anything else, moreover, there is more than enough material for discussion in this thread subject without turning it into a sanitised repackaging of Scottish history.
Complain about this comment
105 - Dougie - calm down
You stick with your mythology if it makes you happier as you're clearly not up to responding to hypotheses (not assumptions as you claim).
Let's drop it. but do remember, you were the one grumbling about the lack of history programmes featuring Scottish History...which goes to prove my original point that it's a no-go area for people who've already made up their mind.
Anger, mistruct, uncertainty. My work here is now complete. Farewell Earthlings
Complain about this comment
It's not just the regional news share that needs to be looked at, but also the general content.
Let's have more news about science and technology (e.g. space station, shuttle missions). I know these are not "British" projects, but the English media should not ignore them. They are great achievements.
I would much rather hear reports about progress and good news, rather than the daily coverage of crimes, politics, and football.
Lets have more good news, and report it first, and less of the other nonsense.
There was a story on the news the other day about trainee sedge cutters in Norfolk, and they actually had a live camera crew there to talk to them. How totally irrelevant to Scotland, and the rest of Britain.
Complain about this comment
This BBC Trust report has, I believe, only added further confirmation to what, I suspect, many of us have long felt about British broadcasting in general - that its coverage of life outside London and the 'home counties' is poor and, at best, cliched.
To be fair, I would cautiously suggest that, if anything, the BBC should be congratulated for recognising and publicly exposing these perceived deficiencies, and would add that, as far as Scottish content goes, the BBC is by no means the worst offender, and has even been responsible for a good few of the higher-quality Scottish programmes produced.
Perhaps ironically, sport is frequently an area in which some of the worst 'crimes' of biased broadcasting regularly take place - and what better illustration than the typical and present coverage of the European (football) Championship?
Whether it be this tournament or the World Cup, I know of few people who are not regularly sickened by the 'fans with microphones' approach of the English commentators - as if broadcasting not only to England, but to diehard England fans.
Were England actually in the tournament, they would typically be mentioned before, during and after every game.
This time, during their absence, we are instead treated to "what if ..?" or "how ironic is it that England never made it??" during the analysis of every game.
Perhaps those living outside Scotland (or Wales, or NI) are blissfully unaware of the extent to which this chronic jingoism regularly spoils enjoyment of the viewing experience?
Either way, it makes a complete sham of the licence fee.
Complain about this comment
#91 Minceandmealie:
I'm taken aback by the tone and content of your post. I agree with much of what you say, I have said that a Scottish News is perfectly feasible, at a price, but pointed out some practical difficulties.
True, I don't rate many Scots presenters. But you're also right in that anyone who's any good goes to London. The bottom line here is that the media wants its best people covering its major news in a manner that interests the bulk of the people (of the UK). It's about market share and economics, not bowler hat versus kilt.
Yes, until convinced otherwise, I do support the union. But I feel it's unworthy of you to suggest my views on an issue of practicality and professionalism are influenced by this. I detect a wee trend here for people to twist this around, to become a nationalist, rather than national, issue. You disappoint me.
Look, the BBC needs sorted out, in a manner that delivers good quality broadcasting to everyone in these islands, with fairness and relevance buit in. A mini-BBC in Glasgow, duplicating a big percentage of London's output, might well please many Scots. But I'll bet the broadcasters' style and choice of topic will still infuriate the thousands who will never accept that it reflects "their" Scotland.
If someone tells Jock Tamson that we're a' his bairns, he'll want a DNA test. It's the way we are. Deal with it.
Complain about this comment
#106 Anglophone
Despite my apparent tone, please don't read anger into it.
Debating historical hypotheses can be stimulating and rewarding. It's just that I think we're all familiar with the cliches, there was nothing particularly original about yours, and it was pretty obvious where they were heading.
No offence meant or taken, but I think the depth of Scottish history should be a lot better understood by our southern neighbours before they start offering advice on our own perception of it.
Now, on with the broadcasting debate!
Complain about this comment
like me brian the bbc in scotland could not spell impartiality if it was held up in front of them on a prompt board. yet again on holyrood live today your so called "expert "was a unionist, can you not get a hold of any other "experts"? has there ever been an expert on holyrood live that was not a unionist expert/ journalist? i don't profess to having watched every last programme may be i've just been unlucky but i thought i should ask! same goes for newspaper reviews on GMS and radio scotland in general. impartiality went out the window long ago
Complain about this comment
Having been brought up in an English region (near Liverpool in NW England which has a larger pop'n and GNP than Scotland by the way), lived and studied in Wales for 3 yrs and Oxford for 1 year, worked in small Commonwealth island states for 5 yrs, in London for 4.5 yrs and in Edinburgh for approaching 16 yrs perhaps I can make an input here.
I am a self confessed news junkie from Look North (with good old Stuart Hall!) in my childhood through the fantastic World Service when I was away and more recently BBC London and now of course BBC Scotland.
I have many gripes but overall and by global standards the BBC News is extraordinairily good quality. Many national broadcasting stations in the Commonwealth (and perhaps beyond) relay BBC news as a scheduled programme. Likewise many of their newspapers draw heavily on UK media and agencies for editorial.
Any talk of creating a stand alone SBC is a complete non-starter if one wants to maintain quality of output. You only need to go to other countries to see how good the BBC and the UK newspapers are. Take New Zealand for instance, even larger than Scotland and even more thinly populated but the broadcast and print media cannot deliver the services we expect here and have to draw heavily on international, mainly UK, Australian and USA, sources.
Now, I am continually frustrated by the BBC's poor attention to detail in stating whether they are referring to the UK or its constituent nations, to vox pops and examples being drawn disproportionately from the SE of England, etc, etc. There is no excuse for this at all and I for one want to know what is going on in all 4 nations and for the opportunity to compare and contrast. That should not be difficult to achieve and could transform the situation almost overnight. An exciting opportunity for the broadcasters one would think! Altho' since journalists are notoriously lazy and a high proportion of news is regurgitated press releases, this will require some work!!!
I confess that I don't listen to BBC Radio Scotland which I find too inward looking but to Radio 4 and the World Service. For a Scottish slant I get The Scotsman and the Scottish edition of The Times. Between these and BBC TV News programmes I get a good balance. Oh and Newsnight Scotland can be brilliant and too short on a good news day and dull and drawn out when there's nothing much happening and I would prefer to be hearing from BBC London. This I think proves that news should be cosen on merit not on political boundaries. Arguably a Scottish Six could pull everything together but Reporting Scotland can be a real yawn and is definately west Scotlandcentric (but then that is I suppose where most Scots live!!).
At the end of the day 11 out of 12 of us don't live in Scotland and England has for centuries been the most populous and dominant economic, political and military power in these islands. And London the greatest city in Europe (or arguably the World). There is no escaping this whether we are a united kingdom or a balkanised archipeligo. The point was made earlier that there is no BBC England proividing a forum for discussing English matters and because England is such a large component of the UK it is really not possible to disentangle English and UK affairs. The UK is an assymetric state and that reality cannot be ignored. The answer though is not to balkanise the BBC but to make it better and more intelligent.
I don't doubt it can be done but I'm not yet sure it will be done but hey, here's hoping...!
Complain about this comment
'There was a story on the news the other day about trainee sedge cutters in Norfolk, and they actually had a live camera crew there to talk to them. How totally irrelevant to Scotland, and the rest of Britain.'
Why is it irrelevant to anyone outwith Norfolk? Please explain. I found it interesting for one. Is something interesting only if it happens in your back yard?
'Perhaps those living outside Scotland (or Wales, or NI) are blissfully unaware of the extent to which this chronic jingoism regularly spoils enjoyment of the viewing experience?'
I'm not sure the Scots are on very safe ground here. Scottish commentaters are totally Scotcentric and jingoistic to the English ear and the 'anyone but England' mindset is to put it politely just plain unneighbourly!
Complain about this comment
If you want an example of why we are totally against the English Broadcasting Corporation todays lunchtime news would show you.
The amount of time spent on Rooneys wedding and what it must have cost to send people to cover a black car driving at speed in Italy.
Riveting stuff I do not think so.
Are we in Scotland getting value for our compulsory tax to watch this drivel, absolutely not.
Complain about this comment
Had you given a West Midlands counterpart to the Clyde submarine story, what would it be?
Kid gets splashed in freak paddling pool incident?
If we're be honest they're about as newsworthy. 'Submarine in Clyde' is hardly big news is it? Unless it's a Russian sub. That's where we keep our submarines. Now if your point is 'Submarine crashes into pleasure boat in Clyde' the that would be news. Or submarine inexplicably spotted at Falkirk Castle that would be news. But 'Submarine in Clyde' is no more news than 'Plane spotted at Birmingham airport - latest'.
Like I said. News does not consist of wandering around the back-yard photographing everyday things. Just because you have a submarine facility doesn't make it 'news'. If there's an accident then it might make the news. And if the RAF pile one of their planes into the Midlands that'll be news too. But not as newsworthy as if the Royal Navy manage to ramraid Gas Street Basin in a sub.
Complain about this comment
Wayne Rooney's wedding coverage.
Really this is irrelevant to the issue! I guess you'll find celebrity weddings will be covered by media from across the World whatever boundaries you might draw in the sand. Not my cup of tea either.
But then Reporting Scotland had wall to wall coverage of the recent death of a famous Glasgow football personality. No disrespect but it was totally overdone.
Complain about this comment
It's nothing to do with England 'naturally' dominating. It's everything to do with a London-centric clique foisting their view on us all while spending our licence fee. Scotland pays 9% of the licence fee and only gets 3% back in spending. If Scotland were in receipt of this then she could make better more representative programmes as a matter of course. Until this is addressed then Scotland has no hope of matching the output of England. But when it does eventually have an independent media lets not attempt to emulate the English media and the BBC. Lets develop our own media in a more organic fashion as it were because the BBC and the English media aren't the quality so many would have you believe. And I speak as someone with extremely high connections in the English media and as someone who lives abroad I think far too many overestimate how good or even how reputable the BBC for example is. The personality-less Bill Turnbull, supposedly a Scot himself, and his ex-Public school cohorts and their wide eyed unworldly ignorance epitomise the blandness of the BBC for me. Paxman and the rest reflect just how much of a Oxbridge-centric anachronism it is too. I know that's a rather class based analysis, the type of analysis I would wish to avoid but sadly such a treatment is inescapable as it's rammed down the collective Scottish throat as much as the WC in '66 is.
Complain about this comment
This time, during their absence, we are instead treated to "what if ..?" or "how ironic is it that England never made it??" during the analysis of every game.
I can assure you that most English people can't stand this approach either. It is excruciatingly embarrassing. England aren't there because they're not good enough. So far, from the games I've seen, only Greece looked worse than England. But playing like that won them the trophy last time so I guess they were hoping lightning would strike twice.
The quality of football from the others - even Switzerland - is far superior to when Rooney, Lampard and God forbid, Terry, start giving it 'Three Lions on My Chest'. So even though I'd like England to do well. Hell I'd like them to qualify for a start, I can assure you that most English people are not so disillusioned or myopic as Mark Lawransen et al either.
So yet again it's not a slight against Scotland. It's an insult to everybodies intelligence. It's a UK-wide insult. We don't want to pay for this toilet either.
But no governing party is going to put 'Abolish licence fee and sell off BBC' in it's manifesto. Because they know the BBC will be handy for telling us what to think in their turn. And since we know this is ever-so-slightly about an independent Scotland not paying for London-centric news I predict right now that an independent Scotland will have a state sponsored broadcaster telling you all how to think too. And declaring itself 'unbiased' and 'respected around the world' too. Like Pravda and Radio Tirana used to.
Complain about this comment
I know that's a rather class based analysis, the type of analysis I would wish to avoid
Why? You never seek to avoid it at any other opportunity? Some public schoolboy must have been really mean to you on the bus one time.
but sadly such a treatment is inescapable as it's rammed down the collective Scottish throat as much as the WC in '66 is.
I'd have slightly more compassion if every other Sunday there wasn't an opportunity in 'The Scotsman' to buy a video of Scotland's 'famous' victory over England at Wembley in 1967 (was it?). Way-hay. We're great. Look at us, 'Unofficial World Champions'.
And it wasn't even the World Cup. Can you imagine how unbearable the Scots would be too if they'd won it? Seriously.
And as for hubris. Remember 'We're on the march with Ally's army.....' At least England waited till after they'd won the cup for a victory parade. Scotland had one before they left.
They don't do it just to wind you up you konw. It's not about rubbing Scotland's nose in it. There's just precious little else to reflect on in the English (or British) trophy cabinet.
Complain about this comment
Yeh, quite right just imagine if Scotland actually won the World Cup even the most ardent Scotland suppporters would wish it'd never happened after a while.........!
Anyway, it's a myth that 1966 is rammed down anyone's throats. All of us should celebrate a British team's victory, it's just neighbourly and good manners; there's no need for churlishness by any of us.
Anyway, I read the King report and sport was excluded from the remit. A pity, I'd like to know whether the 1966 story stands up to examination!
Complain about this comment
I usually support Brazil if Scotland does not make it into the World Cup.
:-)
Complain about this comment
Brian
Thank you for the opportunity to voice an opinion.
As a contributor from Yorkshire, can I make the point that WE feel exactly the same about the BBC.
It seems to us that the bias is not towards England, but to the South East of England in general, and London in particular. Just look what happens when half a flake of snow falls on the House of Commons terrace!!!
Having heard the news from Westminster today, most people on other blogs feel Nick Robinson's reporting on the David Davis resignation proves the case - comment based around a completely London-centric viewpoint.
Mind you, the regional news programme in these parts is known as 'Look Leeds' - so I suppose everything is relative!!
As for the football, there must only be my Scottish friends watching - I haven't met anyone down here who has seen a game yet... although maybe that proves the point about us English!!!
Complain about this comment
I usually support Brazil if Scotland does not make it into the World Cup.
:-)
Saves you buying a Scotland top every four years I suppose.
On the upside we've got Martin O'Neill doing the half-time analysis at the moment. On the down-side we've got Alan 'Mascara' Hansen. You want to complain about rubbish England reportage? What, in the name of all that is holy, is this man doing on TV week in, week out?
Has he got some 'dirt' on the producers and/or Gary Linneker? I certainly hope so because any other excuse is unforgiveable. The man is an abomination to reporting and comment. He's Scotland's revenge for Brian Moore.
Complain about this comment
Dearie me, I see the usual suspects are accentuating the negative and eliminating the positive.......completely.
Complain about this comment
I'll echo the comments about the preponderance of football and the lack of science stories. For example, why wasn't the i-LIMB winning a major award given more coverage?
Complain about this comment
1966 is rammed down our throats. Every chance to show Hurst's goal is never missed. But that pales to the wholly risible culture of arrogance that permeates English football. John Motson is one of many who comments endlessly on any players links with the EPL. He introduces every player by their link to the EPL including Scottish players. It's insulting and unprofessional and proves that the BBC is an old boys club and network because so many inside jokes are tolerated and people like him are venerated. We have to suffer the endlessly patronsing commentaries by English commentators on Scotland games with all the "oh aren't they doing well these plucky Scots" and all the negativity that goes with it.
Rationally these are just more reasons to become independent because no other country would tolerate this but my point is that we do have reasons to be annoyed. We aren't just moaning for the sake of it and if many Ingerlunders had the sensitivity and empathy to see our point of view they wouldn't be either so surprised or angry when we are indifferent to the England team. I draw the line at supporting the opposition unless I reach a tipping point when they are being treated the same way as Scotland by the commentators but I completely understand why some Scots do routinely cheer England's oposition.
Complain about this comment
1966 is rammed down our throats alright. By Scottish nationalists.
Complain about this comment
. We have to suffer the endlessly patronsing commentaries by English commentators on Scotland games with all the "oh aren't they doing well these plucky Scots" and all the negativity that goes with it.
I think you'll find that's just the great natural British (or possibly human) emotion to favour the underdog. Which in football matches between Scotland and most nations will mean that Scotland, by virtue of its small population, is effectively the underdog. Just as when Scotland play, say, the Faroes (remember that - oh how we laughed) most neutrals will favour the Faroes.
Rationally these are just more reasons to become independent
You find it patronising being supported as underdogs when you play football against bigger nations like Italy or France or Germany and so you want independence? There'll be another reason along in a minute for you to get upset and claim independence over.
Rationally? I think you're over-egging it there. Or being very loose with the definition of 'rationally'.
We aren't just moaning for the sake of it
Of course not. You're moaning because you love it. Rolling around in a self-created miasma of despond, imagining that every action ever taken by the English, ever, is calculated snub to Scotland. Because England and the English have nothing better to do. And even suggesting England have better things to do is interpreted as a snub.
'Whadya mean better things to do? Are we not good enough? You never think about us. You never consider our feelings.'
Engaging in conversation with a nationalist is like arguing with a pre-menstrual woman spoiling for a fight. There's nothing you can say that won't be twisted or wilfully misinterpreted. Or any opportunity to bring up some minor misdemeneur from the past to excuse why they're mad at you. Nothing.
England won the world cup in 1966. Get over it. Better still, win it yourself. And do you know what? The people of England would be delighted. Hurrah. British team wins world cup. We're not all rubbish.
But you'd probably find that patronising too.
Complain about this comment
Could we also replace "This Week" :)
Complain about this comment
if many Ingerlunders had the sensitivity and empathy to see our point of view they wouldn't be either so surprised or angry when we are indifferent to the England team.
I admit to being surprised and disappointed and even shocked by the visceral hatred that so many Scots seem to have for their English neighbours. I'd always assumed it was a bit tongue-in-cheek but there is definitely a significant percentage of the Scottish population that loathe and detest England and the English and I hadn't fully appreciated that until I moved here (Scotland) six years ago.
I really thought it was just good-natured banter but living here I see that it is genuine hatred. To think we left New York in the aftermath of 9/11 and another show of unthinking hatred to come to this. It's quite frankly depressing to be on the same planet as so much ingrained, unthinking, irrational unjustified hatred.
Whatever floats your boat I guess.
Oh, aye and FREEDOM!!!!
Complain about this comment
I was thinking a re-run of Barbapapa would be a nice change :)
Complain about this comment
LoL
"Whom would you have me welease?"
Complain about this comment
I do not belive we should make significant change to BBC news output. The main thing is to accurately reflect the news, especially where this contains statistics. If only this were emulated by the rest of the media.
So, for example, on 10 June, the BBc reported 'Almost one in five secondary schools in England have been given a "no excuses" warning to improve their GCSE exam results or face closure. ' whereas the Guardian reported, 'Ed Balls, the schools secretary, will reveal today that up to 270 schools will be closed in the next three years for underperformance and replaced with academies and a new generation of trust schools.' The BBC accurately reported that this concerned English schools, while the Guardian made it sound as though it were British schools.
Complain about this comment
On 13 June, U9461192 wrote 'Engaging in conversation with a nationalist is like arguing with a pre-menstrual woman spoiling for a fight.'
I complained about this comment on the grounds of sexism and harassment of women. Both complaints were rejected by the moderator.
I find this unacceptable. These blogs should not incite sexist hatred.
Complain about this comment
Scottish Nationalists are responsible for programmes like 'They think it's all over'? I don't think so. And it was a Scots Nat Mp who caused a stir amongst Unionists no doubt when he said a few years ago we should support England.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Scottish Nationalists are responsible for programmes like 'They think it's all over'? I don't think so.
What? What's 'They think it's all over' got to do with anything? Oh,no. It's not another deliberate snub to the uncrowned footballing champions of the world is it?
God save us.
Do really you think the English sit around in their bunker thinking 'We need a new gameshow but we'll have to come up with a title that'll annoy Bluelaw. Any ideas chaps?'
And it was a Scots Nat Mp who caused a stir amongst Unionists no doubt when he said a few years ago we should support England.
I think it was Alex Salmond's slippery Labour clone, Jack McConnell. Wasn't it? And so what? Is he not entitled to his opinion? Or do you think he sat down and thought 'I know, I'll really annoy Bluelaw by suggesting he support England. He'll hate that.'
I have a couple of kids like that. Anything goes wrong or they don't like your decision and it's all 'You always do this'. 'You never do that'.
Yes son, me and your mum lie in bed for half an hour every morning thinking how we can make your life miserable in new and exciting ways. We choreograph our entire lives around how to make you miserable. We set little traps for you just so you can get more unhappy. Because we have nothing better to do with our lives.
Okay, he's eight so he doesn't get the bigger picture. But Scottish nationalists need to grow up. The sun does not get up in the morning just for you (or Scotland).
Complain about this comment
#137
It was Andrew Wilson, then the SNP's finance spokesman, who, quite broad-mindedly, urged us as a nation to support England when Scotland were out of a tournament.
Jack McConnell's position (on a seperate occasion) was that he would not support England, quite rightly because he was under no obligation to do so.
Both individual and perfectly principled positions.
It is not just some nationailists who need to grow up!
Complain about this comment
Yours are the excuses of a bully.
Scottish Nationalists are grown up. We want to take responsibility for our country like mature adults.
I have every right as a licence fee payer to point out when others are being represented disproportionately more than I am and indeed when my concerns are victim to bias.
I don't actually think many English people realise how deluded they are about 66 and the rest of it. Do the Germans obsess over 1990? Do the French culturally obsess over 1998? Even the Danes, do they obsess over 1992? You'll find that they don't.
Complain about this comment
Yours are the excuses of a bully.
You what? England commentators go on (and on and on) about 1966 and that makes them bullies? And anybody who suggests that while it's a bit annoying it's hardly the end of the world is making excuses for bullies?
Talk about making a career out of being a 'victim'.
I don't actually think many English people realise how deluded they are about 66 and the rest of it.
Well outside of the loony football commentators I don't think you'll find that 1966 crosses most English folks minds more than once every two years when it's brought up by them commentators again as England limp through another qualifying campaign with the unrealistic weight of expectations of the BBC commentary team on their shoulders. I think most English observers know we haven't got a chance of winning the World Cup unless we string three or four miracle performances together and the Brazilians/Germans/French/Croats/whoever play their reserve team out of complacency. Fat Chance.
Do the Germans obsess over 1990?
They've won it three times haven't they? It's no big deal for them.
Do the French culturally obsess over 1998?
Funnily enough I have a boxed bottle of 1998 champagne with the tri-colour all over it. So I'm not sure about that. They did win the European Cup as well in 1990 didn't they? I do think they're a bit pleased with themselves.
Even the Danes, do they obsess over 1992? You'll find that they don't.
Funnily enough neither do the English. It's only when these tournaments come on TV that they wheel out the 'When are we going to have another trophy like 1966' rent-a-gobs. It certainly never crosses my mind. And I was born in 1966. Before the final since you ask. So England have won the football and rugby world cup in my lifetime. Not that I go on about it.
Did I ever tell you that England won the world cup in ....
But just as Archie Gemmill's goal is never off the TV whenever there's a Scottish qualifying tournament you have to accept that Scotland are/would be no better if they'd won the cup. Like I said before, every other weekend you too can buy the 'Greatest match in Scotland's history' from 'The Scotsman'. Way-hay. We beat England. That should have been our world Cup.
Have you ever heard Denis Law been interviewed about 1966? Aye, we'd have won the cup that year. If we hadn't failed to qualify. We used to beat England all the time back then. If we'd only not failed to qualify and then been magicked into the final without the distraction of playing North Korea or Romania or Germany then we'd have won that world cup. And if we'd just had England to play in the final then we'd have won. No problem. And the man is absolutely serious.
You think England are bad? This man represents the mentality of a nation that won a match against England a year later and reckons they were 'robbed' of the world cup. What would the Scots be like if you'd actually won the thing?
Really?
Bullying? I don't think so.
Complain about this comment
Post #134
Simple thing to do Perciba is not read postings by U9461192, having read a number of them I’ve regrettably decided to ignore all future comments by U9461192 as they have an unrelenting and monotonous tone of unrealistic negativity, criticism, sarcasm and anger. I’ve come to the conclusion from this evidence that whoever is writing these comments has some form of self-esteem problem and chooses to compensate for it by making continuous barbed and critical comments about everyone and everything, the tone of these comments say much more about the person making them than they say about those they make them against.
Complain about this comment
It was Andrew Wilson, then the SNP's finance spokesman, who, quite broad-mindedly, urged us as a nation to support England when Scotland were out of a tournament.
Jack McConnell's position (on a seperate occasion) was that he would not support England, quite rightly because he was under no obligation to do so.
If you say so. Hard to get bothered about who these people support really.
It is not just some nationailists who need to grow up!
Quite right. That Jack McConnell should grow up too.
Complain about this comment
Was this blog about television, or something? Remind me.
Listen, all you frothing Nats - you're embarrassing me. U9461... is winding you all up and you are playing right into his hands. He probably has 20 English mates laughing their heads off. "What can we post next that will get the wild Jocks jumping up and down?"
You do not have a monopoly, far less a majority, of Scots opinion on your side. So, like I said, stop embarrassing the rest of us.
Complain about this comment
This discussion results from a report which confirms beyond all doubt the inherent and dominating bias of the major UK broadcaster towards the views and interests of the south of England - a position that is scarcely excusable and entirely unacceptable, but represents only the tip of the iceberg as far as British broadcasters failing the interests of our distinct nations and regions is concerned.
The track record abuse of broadcasting privilege by English commentators is legendary, with football commentators and presenters remaining foremost amongst the worst offenders.
Is it somehow unreasonable to expect an international festival of football, or any sport, to be presented with a degree of unbiased parity and professional maturity - as opposed to the relentless jingoism these highly-paid but highly childish commentators who cannot help but flaunt their badge of indignant hurt that their Great Nation has won nothing for over 40 years, and even has failed to make this tournament - bemoaning that 'injustice' before, during and after every game to the nth degree, and the disgust of a great many viewers?
On this (nominally) Scottish blog, the fact that those who seek to defend the continuation of such openly abominable bias - and to portray the legitimate and broad Scottish perspective as being 'paranoid' or otherwise risible - appear to have more than a little in common with the offenders in question, and refuse to accept the findings of the report or its implications for the Scottish viewer - speaks volumes
Complain about this comment
I?ve come to the conclusion from this evidence that whoever is writing these comments has some form of self-esteem problem and chooses to compensate for it by making continuous barbed and critical comments about everyone and everything,
Bwahahahaha. I've got self-esteem issues? This in response to my posts replying to all these nationalists wandering about giving it 'Oh, the English are bullying me'. 'Oh, the English don't care about us'. 'Oh the BBC is London-centric'. 'Boo-hoo, the BBC is run by public school toffs.' 'It's not fair. England won the world cup and now they won't shut up.'
And I'm the one with self-esteem issues?
Really?
Complain about this comment
He probably has 20 English mates laughing their heads off. "What can we post next that will get the wild Jocks jumping up and down?"
What a nice mental image. Would you lie some woad with that outfit Sir? The reality is far more mundane I'm afraid.
You do not have a monopoly, far less a majority, of Scots opinion on your side. So, like I said, stop embarrassing the rest of us.
Well that is rather my point BrigadierJohn. They're not in the slightest bit embarrassed. They cannot see the other side of the argument and any Scot who dares to advance the other side will be dismissed as suffering from the 'Scottish cringe'. The same blind devotion they decry in BBC commentators and England football fanatics is the same face they look at every morning in the mirror. And they cannot see that. It's astonishing.
When I try and point out that England and the English aren't all like that I'll get as much comprehension as when you try and tell them all Scots don't think the same way as them. Nope. They all talk to their Nat pals and post to each other on their Nat blogspots and Nat websites and wind each other up into a constant frenzy of victimhood and ire. It can't be good for their blood-pressure. It's the equivalent of reading the Daily Mail.
Ooops. I used the word 'equivalent'. That's bound to get them upset.
Complain about this comment
Dougie-Dubh: A selective viewing and listening filter is something we can all activate when annoyed by TV commentators. Sure, Motson and his like made references to the English game when speaking of the clubs of some of the Euro 08 players.
But, did you switch off when they referred to, for example, van Bronckhorst, Sionko, Gatusso, Boruc, etc., and their connections to Scotland?
Bias and racial slights can be found anywhere if you spend your life determinedly seeking them out. And you are one determined guy!
Complain about this comment
Looks like another two-day wait for an unexplained rejection email. I was trying to explain, quite gently, to Dougie-Dubh that the English commentators - who undoubtedly made unnecessary references to the England team and the English league - also referred repeatedly to the Scottish connections of such as van Bronckhorst, Sionko, Gatusso and Boruc.
Obviously that doesn't count.
Complain about this comment
who undoubtedly made unnecessary references to the England team and the English league - also referred repeatedly to the Scottish connections of such as van Bronckhorst, Sionko, Gatusso and Boruc.
Obviously that doesn't count.
They also referred to the club sides of many of the non-British league players too. 'This player plays for the local clubside FC Saltzburg' or whatever. I only noticed because, to be honest, I'd never heard of half the players or their local clubs. What else would they talk about in a slack period or a substitution?
Here's Jens Lehmann. But we can't tell you which club side he plays for or the bulging-eyed Nats will blow a tube. And here's Henrik Larrsen, we can mention Celtic because that's in Scotland and that'll make Bluelaw happy.
They're going to be so disappointed if Scotland votes against independence. You'd need a heart of stone not to laugh at the possibility.
Complain about this comment
Speaking of independence referendums.
Come on Ireland. Cast off (y)our chains...
Come the day and come the hour
Come the power and the glory
We have come to answer
Our Country's call
From the four proud provinces of Ireland
Ireland, Ireland
Together standing tall
Shoulder to shoulder
We'll answer Ireland's call
I'm so proud I could weep.
Complain about this comment
So, let's take stock.
We already have a unionist press, systematically denying equal parity to the nationalist viewpoint.
We have a London-centric broadcast media dominating the agenda for our viewing and listening diet.
Now, here, we have every posted opinion filtered through the relentlessly jaundiced and anglo-centric perspective of U9461192.
How clear it is becoming that we are a small, backward nation of paranoid and small-minded juveniles, just queuing up to be cut off at the knees by his unassailable wisdom and crushing logic.
One can only conclude that the BBC Trust was wholly mistaken in its suggestion of an alleged bias in broadcasting content, and submit one's latest humble offering in the consoling expectation that it will shortly reappear in abstract italics as the subject of a tediously trotted-out rebuttal.
Complain about this comment
Now, here, we have every posted opinion filtered through the relentlessly jaundiced and anglo-centric perspective of U9461192.
UK-centric old chap.
How clear it is becoming that we are a small, backward nation of paranoid and small-minded juveniles, just queuing up to be cut off at the knees by his unassailable wisdom and crushing logic.
Oh, don't do your fellow Scots down so. It's only the nationalists on here that I would characterise in that way.
One can only conclude that the BBC Trust was wholly mistaken in its suggestion of an alleged bias in broadcasting content, and submit one's latest humble offering in the consoling expectation that it will shortly reappear in abstract italics as the subject of a tediously trotted-out rebuttal.
I'll tell you how to do the italics if you ask nicely. And the bold.
Yeah. BBC Trust. They'll have been directed to confirm alleged bias as the government exerts its influence in an effort to appease the noisy nationalists. You know, a bit like the independent inquiry into Iraq found the government not guilty of any misinformation.
Tedious. Really. You Nats are so rude when you're losing.
Complain about this comment
Nothing if not predictable, eh?
Actually, it might be your interpretation that we're losing ... Is that the illusion you hope to effect by challenging every post single-handedly?
I don't actually recall losing anything in a logic-based debate - not to you at any rate.
A glance at any of this blog's threads should give an fair indication of who's in tune with the majority, and who is actually just a very noisy minority.
143#
20 English mates?
No mates at all might be closer to the mark.
No Scottish ones anyway.
Unless we count you as 1/2, eh?
Complain about this comment
Why would we want to be in Union with the likes of you U?
Complain about this comment
Is that the illusion you hope to effect by challenging every post single-handedly?
It just seems so wrong to let so much unadulterated drivel go unchallenged. It might give you Nats the impression that yours is a rational and reasonable state of mind. Not that Nationalism per ce is not reasonable. Just the lengths y'all go to to take offence. You know, complaining about football commentator from the UK pointing out the club sides of Euro-footballers for example. And getting cross because they point out English-based players.
How boggle-eyed irrational is that? Really?
I don't actually recall losing anything in a logic-based debate - not to you at any rate.
I believe that's what psychologists call 'denial'.
20 English mates?
No mates at all might be closer to the mark.
No Scottish ones anyway.
Certainly no mates of your ilk. I generally shun fools but I'm a bit bored so I'm making an exception.
Still not figured out how to do the italics? It makes the argument much easier to follow for third parties. Not that there's too many second parties here let alone third parties.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
You all should ignore U9461192.
They are nothing more then a person who is against all Nationalists. (same Nats who will hand the SNP Government till we are Independent)
Usual points U9461192 makes...
"All you want is the oil money..."
"You Nats are all anti-english admitt it..."
"You are all greedy Nats..."
Complain about this comment
Brian
What time is the Scotland- Argentina rugby match on BBC telly tomorrow night ?
Complain about this comment
The BBC has a remit to provide coverage for the whole of the UK. The network news fails miserably to give balanced reporting of British domestic news. The output is almost totally English and often focussed on the southeast of England. It is conceded that the BBC has a very difficult task in post-devolution Britain as different laws and policies prevail in he various parts of the UK. However, the fact that non-English issues are hardly ever covered is unacceptable to those on the fringes of the UK. Reasons for the above have been offered in these columns and include the following: England has around 85% of the population and would therefore be expected to dominate the news; the news editors are incompetent and do not appreciate the many differences between England and the rest of the UK; or they simply do not care about non-English events. I will leave Brian, our expert analyst, to determine why domestic news coverage is almost totally dominated by England.
The answer in the short term is for Scotland to have its own news/current affairs programme for an hour each evening. This programme should be modelled on the Radio Scotland GMS and Newsdrive editions. The Radio Scotland programmes offer in-depth analysis and unlike the BBC TV network news provide relevant issues for the Scottish population.
Sport is covered on BBC network news and like sport in general on the BBC, is characterised by a blinkered approach to any topic that is not English. An English perspective dominated coverage of the last England-Scotland rugby game at Twickenham. I like commentators and analysts to be passionate about their sport and would not object to English bias if the output was targeted solely at an English audience but not at a network audience which must suffer enough when England trounce us without a one-sided analysis of the game. It is this English bias which promotes an anti English sentiment among the Gaelic countries. Yes the BBC is to blame.
The weather forecast after the BBC news sums up the problem. The landmass of Scotland has been shrunk and the south of England has been enlarged. Countries with massive landmasses like Canada, Russia, China ands the USA are able to portray weather maps without such distortion. The employment of weather presenters who have a malfunction of the deltoids which prevents them reaching above Watford is an irritation not only for Scots but those in the north of England.
One sad aspect of the above is the supine response of almost all Scots. Do the Scots want to continue with a second rate service or do they simply switch off? Do you have a solution Brian?
Brian has a great deal of clout in the BBC. I would ask that he orchestrates one or all of the following: a BBC network news bulletin which covers domestic news from only the Celtic nations, coverage of the next England–Scotland rugby match with the imbalance in the proportional coverage and emphasis given to Scotland that was afforded to England last time and a weather report with the size of the southeast of England reduced and Scotland and the north of England enhanced. It would be interesting to monitor the response of those who reside by the side of the Thames.
Complain about this comment
In April the breakfast show did the now common spring story about how spring is early, using this year as a example of the hawthorn flowering in April.
When I look out my window in Glasgow not only is it not flowering but its just going in to leaf not until May did my hawthorn flower along with the hawthorn in this area.
The fact is we are a different country and it has to be reflected in our news service the bbc have to stop this nonsense of not recognising the nations Scotland and Wales have regions they are not regions, And England has to be officially recognized as a distinctive entity and not seen as the uk .
i can't say what Mr B taylor personal views are regarding Independence or the union,
but in away thats not the point, him and his Presenters and journalists friends should be ashamed of them self that they are willing partners in such a rotten system .No democracy heroes in Scottish journalism
Complain about this comment
I would have:-
18:00 to 18:25 UK and International news
18:25 to 18:45 News for the 4 Nations
18:45 to 19:00 Regional News
or there abouts.
This would perhaps improve the Scottish News, so its not Central Belt minded too.
Complain about this comment
Interesting posts largely. Yet again the only realistic solution is independence.
Complain about this comment
Brian:
it is nice that you are mentioning the bbc [your employer]....
i think that the bbc trust IS right--about it suggestions..
Complain about this comment
A message from 'the English': We would also like to know what is going on in the rest of the UK and how statistics etc. stack up for each of the four countries.
There are not only English employees working for the BBC, you only have to listen to news broadcasts/weather reports/etc. to understand what I mean.
I think the problem is, since devolution, the BBC are behind the times with their UK reporting. In future I think they should state the facts/figures for England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales.
Complain about this comment
Bluelaw:
"Scottish Nationalists are grown up. We want to take responsibility for our country like mature adults."
Err, I don't think so. Nationalism means governing your own country; Alex Salmond can't wait to hand over to Brussells. Check out his election manefesto.
Be afraid, be very afraid!
Complain about this comment
Helenzzz:
The majority of Scottish Nationalists are more then happy to re-apply back into Europe.
Europe is not something we have a problem with.
Complain about this comment
The usual scaremongering about the EU. The EU is nothing to be scared of. And if you as a Unionist are genuinely scared of it then why not petition to withdraw from it.
Complain about this comment
bluelaw:
I never said I was a Unionist. I merely pointed out that Nationalism means governing your own country and making decisions that are right for your country.
And, I have already signed a petition to come out of the EU.
Complain about this comment
On the EU subject;
After we win an Independence referendum I wouldn't want to think that we would throw our new found independence away to Europe without thought.
I would think it wise that we also have a referendum on EU membership and that it is not a foregone conclusion. The implications of both sides of this arguement should be well explained. The model, Norway seems to be doing well outside the EU!
We have never been asked as a country about Europe.
I don't think it is as big an issue as being a member of the all dominating UK, however following the European attitude (lets just do it anyway) to the Irish referendum, the only one, I would be very hesitant about voting yes for that.
In fact right now I would vote no.
Crucialy though, don't we deserve to be asked?
Complain about this comment
rog_rocks:
I agree, I think all member countries should be asked if they want in or out of the EU. However, Alex Salmond embraces Europe with open arms (see his election manefesto), so a vote for the so called Nationalists means a vote for the EU, whether you like it or not. Scotland will therefore never be independent.
Well done to Ireland for being honest about the way they feel.
Complain about this comment
In actual fact the EU is irrelevant to the principle of Scottish independence. Scotland could and would flourish within or outwith the EU.
Complain about this comment
Unionists aren't in a position to talk about freedom considering what they have inflicted upon Scotland. Their self righteousness regarding the EU is risible.
Complain about this comment
Bluelaw; I would say not as relevant, and I do agree that as compared to the current situation we would flourish within or outwith the EU, however would you not agree that you and I and Helenzzz and all other Scottish Citizens should have their say?
That is democracy after all.
Complain about this comment
So that Unionists can yet again spoil Scotland's position as an independent European nation? So that Unionists can thwart Scotland's rightful place as part of an EU superpower negotiating from within for Scotland's interests? So that Scotland can have no say in the legislation, like Norway and Switzerland, that it will have to adopt anyway? Apart from renegotiating the CFP where Scottish interests were sacrificed by our so-called representatives at Westminster (so much for this extra clout as part of the UK in the EU) Scotland should be in the EU. Unless the EU fails to give Scotland acceptable terms I see no reason why we should stay out. And for Unionists to crow about a referendum on this or indeed Euro membership, having done everything to stop an independence referendum in the first place would really take the biscuit IMO.
Complain about this comment
LoL, hope your not calling me a unionist? After Independence it would be nothing to do with Westminster. Am not saying we should or shouldn't, just that is up to Scotland, not just any one person, including your good self :)
The European Union is another Union afterall.
Complain about this comment
Ok, so you're not a Unionist. If Scotland is to appraise it's position in Europe then I want it to be done with a proper consideration of what is at stake away from the poison of the blindly Europhobic Anglo-centric media. I would wish for a European conversation as it were.
Complain about this comment
Bluelaw:
I don't want to sound in anyway disrespectful, but most English people do not care one way or the other if Scotland stays in or out of the Union. The only people who seem to care are the UK government, who are made up mostly of Scots (especially the higher ranking ones). They are the ones who lose out, not us.
So, good luck to Scotland whichever way you decide. But remember, being out of the UK union means you will jump further in to the EU; Alex Salmond has made that very clear in his election manifesto. Scotland will end up being run by people who were never elected in the first place. As I remember it, Scotland embraced the current UK government with open arms. There were more votes (per capita) from Scotland for Nu Labour than anywhere else in the UK. Therefore it is not only our fault (the English) the present government are useless, but at least they were elected democratically, from the four countries of the UK.
Complain about this comment
Helenzzz:
#170
Your post here is scaremongering.
The SNP are Pro-European but they are after Independence in many areas of the European Union that would still make them more 'free' then our current relations.
I like the term 'In Europe but not run in Europe'
Your post #177
The UK Government is not made up mostly of Scots.
There are 4 out of 21/23 Ministers who are Scots and of course Labour would still be in power if they had no Scottish MP's.
Most Nationalists also have the attitude that the United Kingdom would be in the European Union anyway. Scotland should at least represent herself in the European Union rather then rely on the incredibly poor representation we receive from Britain.
"So, good luck to Scotland whichever way you decide. But remember, being out of the UK union means you will jump further in to the EU."
Scaremongering.
Complain about this comment
Thomas_Porter:
Just like many other people who contribute to Brian's debates, we no longer take you seriously, and will have no further debates with you.
I think someone else suggested you should get professional help; and I second that thought.
One final note: the main decision makers in the UK government are Scottish, and have been for the past 11 years. They include former ministers such as Tony Blair and John Reid. One of your former posts stated that these ministers are no longer allowed to be Scottish because you wouldn't allow them to be; and that they are now classed as British, not Scottish. British means being either English, Scottish or Welsh. They are cetainly not English or Welsh.
Complain about this comment
Here is the problem in a nutshell (from the BBC's own sport pages):
Jamie Murray's likely Wimbledon mixed doubles partner, Liezel Huber, wants the Scot to treat 'em mean when he faces female opponents:
"He's a bit nice to them, a proper Englishman. I try to encourage him not to be nice to girls."
The BBC perpetutes the problem by publishing comments like that instead of telling us why Huber as not corrected by their journalist and what her response was after being corrected. Instead the BBC compounds her error and reinforces the error. Is it any wonder people are sick to death of this?
Complain about this comment
this is about the trustees report to the bbc, it's not about the eu or the Scot's members of the british Government. And like most of us have known for years the bbc are gulity as charged no ifs or buts about it
Complain about this comment
Helenzzz. I disagree that English people don't generally care whether Scotland stays in the UK judging by the vitriolic nature of English posters on the subject for example. Though they profess indifference on the matter it's obviously an affront to many English people that Scotland may ajudge its future lying elsewhere than in union with England.
You say it would make no difference to England either way. In this you're mistaken. Our oil has propped up England's economy for decades and Scotland has allowed Britain to remain a credible entity at the UN and elsewhere. Scotland leaving Union will raise more than domestic constitutional questions for England.
And finally, I don't care whether English people care about us or not. I don't want to be disrespectful but England really isn't that important a country anymore and it's high time Scotland reformed its relations with many other European countries, old links subsumed by Empire are there to be reconstituted. I want to remain friends with England, agree that at independence we should continue a social union and retain the Queen in the interim as head of state but I really do believe Scotland's fortunes lie far away from its relationship with England.
Complain about this comment
Helenzzz:
I am pointing out you are scaremongering.
The United Kingdom will be apart of the European Union, no matter what Labour or the Conservatives say.
and yet you attempt to imply that by voting for an Independent Scotland then for some reason we will jump 'further' in the European Union.
Well, since the UK main Parties are actually Pro-European (even the Conservatives to an extent) then explain why an Independent Scotland would be further involved with the European Union.
It does sound like you are scaremongering and you began the personal insults which shows how pathetic you are.
Complain about this comment
Just heard some idiot on Radio Scotland asking Tim Henman if "Scottish people" could win a tennis Grand Slam!
As if there is some innate genetic defect that would prevent Scots - or any other nationality - winning at the highest level of sport.
Give me strength.
Complain about this comment
Bluelaw # 182:
We really don't care - honestly! In fact, it would be great if the two countries were suddenly divided by the sea.
I wonder where you will turn when all 'your' oil runs out. The EU won't be too happy about that.
Apart from quite recently, Scotland got back all 'your' oil money and more from the rest of the UK. Before that we propped you up for years. Remember, oil was less than £12.00 a barrel not too long ago.
You can carry on pretending though.
Sweet dreams ;-))))
Complain about this comment
Where will England turn once Scotland's oil isn't available? No more funding Westminster's financial blackholes with Scotland's oil. England will be forced to raise taxes and all those international capital flows London relies on will no longer regard London as an attractive location. England has no manufacturing base to speak of nor any real resources. I doubt the EU will help you considering you already enjoy an unfair rebate yet remain on key policy issues typically perfidious? Perhaps you could join the queue behind all those developing nations at the IMF. I worry for England I really do.
Nonsense@England propping us up. In 1997 the then Tory Treasury Spokesman William Waldegreave was forced to admit after the SNP had written to the Treasury over a period of months regarding oil revenues that Scotland had been sending a surplus to Westminster the previous 16 years and endured a minor defecit only one of those years. As I said before over the course of the last 30 years Scotland has sent 250 billion to Westminster and has received only a pittance back. It's preposterous and absurd and a lie to try to maintain that England has ever subsidised Scotland.
You're the one who is deluded here, not I.
Complain about this comment
bluelaw:
The economy of the London metropolitan area alone generates approximately 30% of the UK's GDP (or an estimated 355 billion pounds in 2006.).
Let's see,
Scotland has sent 250 billion to the treasury over the last 30 years;
London Metropolitan area alone sent 355 billion in ONE YEAR.
Hhmmm.....
Complain about this comment
Lol. London does not send £355 billion or a near equivalent each year to the Exchequer in tax revenues. And if London did and Scotland was such a drain then why would Westminster resist every call from the SNP to make Scotland fiscally independent and spend only the revenue that she raises. The answer is because there are huge shortfalls in the revenues sent to Westminster and because successive Govts are committed or rather have to commit to a "low" income tax regime so any spending shortfalls they fill with Scottish oil revenues. We subsidise London and the English economy.
Complain about this comment
bluelaw:
Gosh, I didn't know Wikipedia tells lies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_London
London is a major centre for international business and commerce and is one of three "command centres" for the global economy (along with New York City and Tokyo).[1] London is the world's second largest financial centre after New York and has the 6th largest city economy in the world after Tokyo, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Paris.[2] As Europe's second largest city economy, year-by-year London generates approximately 20% of the UK's GDP[3] (or $446 billion in 2005); while the economy of the London metropolitan area (the largest in Europe)[4] generates approximately 30% of UK's GDP (or an estimated $669 billion in 2005.)[5]
Still, you know best ;-)))))
Complain about this comment
bluelaw:
"...why would Westminster resist every call from the SNP to make Scotland fiscally independent and spend only the revenue that she raises..."
Because Gordon Brown, just like Tony Blair, can't stand the thought of losing control over their own country - Scotland. Their problem, not England's.
Wakey, Wakey, and start smelling the coffee.
Complain about this comment
For a start Wikipedia and indeed the article you've pasted flags up claims that need citations and therefore cannot be considered absolute proof. And what you refer to is the size of the Greater London economy as a whole not what it sends to Westminster in the form of tax revenues.
Tony Blair never described himself as a Scot and could barely conceal his contempt for Scotland throughtout his PMship. Gordon Brown has done everything he can to distance himself from being considered a Scot as this affects his standing with the English electorate. They are both Unionists and Career politicians and certainly do nothing for Scotland.
The reason Scotland isn't granted fiscal autonomy is because London and England rely so heavily on Scottish oil revenues for their spending commitments. They would have been rid of Scotland long ago at least in financial terms if they were subsidising her as heavily as people like yourself claim.
Complain about this comment
bluelaw:
Unfortunately, it is not that easy to be rid of Scotland. Your own King James VI took you in to the Union, and signed away Scotland's Independence. There were no wars relating to this, it was a peaceful, amicable decision by your own king, who then became King James I of England and also remained James VI of Scotland.
Not England's fault, we were never that keen on the idea either.
One final point, the UKs Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform website clearly shows London's income (and the rest of the UK's); so if you need further proof of how much income London and the rest of England generates, I suggest you try here:
http://www.berr.gov.uk
England has never been depenant on Scotland, or ever will be.
Complain about this comment
I refuse to waste any more time arguing on an issue so settled IMO.
Complain about this comment
bluelaw:
I guess you've checked out the UKs Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform website, and I fully understand how the truth may hurt.
Complain about this comment
Look, I was trying to be polite and withdraw from a (non) argument with someone who is clearly and wilfully a financial illiterate. What you should do is research how much of the revenue generated by England is actually spent as tax revenues by Westminster. You'll find it's far less as a proportion of income generated which is precisely why Scottish oil revenues proves so useful to them in filling in the spending gaps. London generates huge incomes but these aren't returned in the form of tax revenues to the Treasury. If you can't grasp this concept then I am sorry to say but you're a lost cause.
And I hope you and all the other English posters are writing to your MPs demanding Scotland be cut loose financially if you're so convinced Scotland is a drain on England's resources. I mean none of us should be sentimental about these things should we now.
Complain about this comment
Helenzzz
[I]"England has never been dependent on Scotland, or ever will be"[/I]
It is widely accepted that Scotland has probably contributed more to the modern world than any other country of comparable size.
We are often reminded how so many Scots played key roles in the British Empire.
Scotland was the foremost military recruitment ground, and much of what became the "Empire" was won by the actions of Scottish regiments.
During modern conflicts, these crucual roles have continued and, per head of population, more Scots have been involved in many such conflicts than any other nationality.
Are you suggesting that Scotland has contributed little to the much-vaunted union??
Either way, your purported justification of such an anglocentric and London-dominated union is not one that carries much appeal for the other nations of the UK.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that London is not a major powerhouse economy - but that is in its capacity as a key financial hub.
It also has millions of a population, and zero natural resources - so therefore is very dependent on external supply and, quite simply, could not survive as a stand-alone economy.
Scotland, by major contrast, is awash with natural resources and potential, with a very manageable and resourceful population - as well as being an attractive country in which to live.
Our economy is evidently grossly squeezed under the union, but as an independent nation, we could be one of the wealthiest economies in Europe, and more than likely one of the envies of the world.
The people of Scotland must consider what is best for us and our future generations - not what is best for London.
However super-rich London is, it is clearly not working for us, and the only real potential for our future lies with Independence.
Complain about this comment
Helenzzz:
"England has never been dependent on Scotland, or ever will be."
It was actually during the 1970's when the British Economy was on the edges of being bankrupt that Scottish Oil was used to save the country.
You can't re-write history.
Also, Scotland generates far more of an income that can be spread between 5 million.
England does not generate that same kind of level that can be spread between over 50 million.
Quite a difference there is there not?
250 billion would have a bigger inpact within Scotland then England anyway.
Complain about this comment
Is there some point to comparing Scotland with England to prove either is better or worse off than the other financially, socially or politically? If there is then I fail to see it. Either vote for independence because you believe in it or don't and leave it at that. Half the arguments in here continue because one side or the other just have to have the last word.
Complain about this comment
#198
You may have a point there.
England has too often been over-rated as a place, and, with so many unfavourable characteristics, it hardly represents the best comparative model.
Far better to compare Scotland's prospective future with successful independent countries like Norway, Ireland, Denmark, even Iceland, than with such an overcrowded regional backwater!
Complain about this comment
InMyKip:
I have only commented because of individuals attempting to change what is true and for scaremongering.
If you want us to vote for Independence then at least we should vote for Independence while knowing the facts at least.
Complain about this comment
Good post Dougie
Complain about this comment
Cheers. :-)
Complain about this comment
Your own King James VI took you in to the Union hundreds of years ago; and you've had Scottish leaders running the entire UK much of the time since then; including the last 11 + years.
I hope, however, you do get your independence; but you know what? you guys still won't be happy. It's a well known fact that some people are born without the 'happy gene'.
Like I said before, English people do not care one way or the other if you remain in or out of the union; but for goodness sake, stop whinging and do something about it - the sooner the better.
Cheers!
Complain about this comment
Thanks.
Hope you get yours, too!
:-) :-) :-)
Complain about this comment
Anti-democrats always regard genuine grievance as "whingeing"...
Complain about this comment
Brian:
i hope that the bbc is devolving the services they offered.....
~Dennis Junior~
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS