BBC Television programmes  permalink

Question Time Audience 7/3/13

Messages: 1 - 27 of 27
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by Sheumais (U14594517) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    I notice the applicants to be in the audience for Question Time have to confirm if they are members of a political party and wonder how many normally are? I ask this because someone involved in John O'Farrell's Eastleigh by-election campaign proudly condemned UKIP as "disgusting". This lady is South East Regional Policy Co-ordinator at The Labour Party (webcache.googleuserc..., which is not going to be reflected in the application, but the lengthy opportunity she was given to express her views and that Dimbleby insisted her point be directly addressed, made me curious as to quite how the audience invitations are decided.

    Reply to this message 1

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Jol (U1706161) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    And what a fool she looked too !

    And why to audience members raise their hand to make a point and then incoherently babble, making no sense at all ? I know they're on the telly but if you have a dispostion to be nervous speaking publically, don't put your hand up to speak !

    Reply to this message 2

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by shytalker (U15033137) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    And what a fool she looked too !

    And why to audience members raise their hand to make a point and then incoherently babble, making no sense at all ? I know they're on the telly but if you have a dispostion to be nervous speaking publically, don't put your hand up to speak !  
    A lot of the comments could also be directed at the texts,last night, at best they were irrevelant at worst puerile.Who decided to put the links up about the imminent birth.It is supposed to be a political programme,not a social network.

    Reply to this message 3

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by pennyork (U13858151) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    Question Time over the past few years has chosen audiences who are so PC, together with panelists who are also too PC, afraid to go against their party line, David Dimbleby shuts people up if they dare to say anything that reflects the country the rest of us live in and don't like what we see happening. Boring, boring, boring!
    So last night it was a refreshing change to hear an audience speaking their minds on immigration - however did they get past the BBC Thought Police.

    Reply to this message 4

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Reservoir Hamster (U14288323) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    I also noticed one of the texts during the programme described Melanie Phillips as "truly vile". That was over the top as well. We live in a democracy. Let's attack each other's ideas and policies, yes, but let's lay off the totally uncalled-for personal attacks. It only makes you look bad, not the person you're attacking.

    Reply to this message 5

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by st3ph3n (U13643748) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    And what a fool she looked too !

    And why to audience members raise their hand to make a point and then incoherently babble, making no sense at all ? I know they're on the telly but if you have a dispostion to be nervous speaking publically, don't put your hand up to speak !  
    A lot of the comments could also be directed at the texts,last night, at best they were irrevelant at worst puerile.Who decided to put the links up about the imminent birth.It is supposed to be a political programme,not a social network. 
    The text service has been changed. It used to be on page 155 which now is "number not found".
    Dimbleby tells viewers to contact by text to 83981 but does not give any page number for viewing texts.
    I couldn't find texts last week but last night I searched the index and found Question Time against one of the option list on the left. I clicked on it and got in. The page number did not show on the split screen. ( Can't find it now)
    Is there now a new number for this page ?


    Reply to this message 6

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by bootjangler (U880875) ** on Friday, 8th March 2013

    And why to audience members raise their hand to make a point and then incoherently babble, making no sense at all ?  

    And why do some of them keep it in the air while talking?

    "Put the arm down mate," was a conversation I had with the TV last night.

    Reply to this message 7

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Jeff (U13971268) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    I too thought they selected a politically balanced audience, but it was obviously not the case with the good people of Dover, judging by the amount of applause Bob Crow got every time he said something. The word "claque" springs to mind.

    Reply to this message 8

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by Quo Vadis (U14704177) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    And what a fool she looked too !

    And why to audience members raise their hand to make a point and then incoherently babble, making no sense at all ? I know they're on the telly but if you have a dispostion to be nervous speaking publically, don't put your hand up to speak !  
    I thought the biggest fool in the audience was the woman in yellow in the front row. How does she magically know how 'immigrants & those Asians' as she called them, spend their money? And just how does she know what machinery they're bringing in if indeed they are? Mad as a hatter!

    Reply to this message 9

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Sploink (U9993613) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    So THAT was who the woman in the audience was! I mentioned her to a mate, and he said perhaps it was someone who had got UKIP mixed up with the BNP. But now you've told us who she is, Sheumais, it can't be that. I'd thought it was ignorance, now it looks like calculation. Mel P (who I usually don't have much time for) put her in her place, and also explained pretty clearly why UKIP was so attractive to certain tories. Well done to the UKIP woman for not descending to the audience woman's level, though I do think DD's chairmanship on this point looked bad.

    I hear Nigel Farage has recently had dinner with Rupert Murdoch smiley - whistle

    Reply to this message 10

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by Sploink (U9993613) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    I enjoy it when the texts go off message - it makes the prog more fun. There used to be loads of messages commenting on the audience, and a whole swathe about Peruvian earth worms. Made me smiley - laugh Politics shouldn't be all doom and gloom. This Week has made itself a success by mixing serious politics with a certain jokiness.

    Reply to this message 11

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Prophet Tenebrae (U5995226) ** on Friday, 8th March 2013

    I love that everyone talks about immigration being a "taboo subject" (I'm looking at you, Mad Mel) and yet it has to be one of the single most prominent items in the past decade. Generating not so much column inches but column parsecs...

    Yes, truly discussion of immigration has been utterly suppressed!

    Reply to this message 12

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by LaraAntiPova (U11262370) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    My eldest went to a Question Time. Don't think there was an invite.

    Apparently they are told to keep their hands in the air - presumably to allow the camera/sound people to keep trained on them.

    Also everyone going in had to state their political allegiance and have a question they wanted to ask.

    The people who are chosen go off for a warm-up type chat just before airing.

    It was filmed an hour before airing.

    Apparently it was very interesting but definitely not for me!

    Reply to this message 13

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 1.

    This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by pennyork (U13858151) on Friday, 8th March 2013

    They have not selected a politically balanced audience in years! Last night was the first time in years that the good people of Dover told it as it is - an overcrowded island sinking under the weight of mass immigration.. Anyone who denies this is a joined up member of the PC Brigade.

    Reply to this message 15

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by Haesten (U4770256) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    Did the BBC know the young lady was a Labour party plant?

    Reply to this message 16

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Essential Rabbit (U3613943) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    So we have in the audience a Labour party high up, allegedly masquerading as an ordinary member of the public, who was in touch with the Labour party panel member, and who (according to her tweets) was aware before the programme that she would be "randomly" selected from the audience.

    The producers have serious questions to answer!

    Reply to this message 17

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 16.

    Posted by Sheumais (U14594517) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    Did the BBC know the young lady was a Labour party plant?  Only the BBC can answer that, but they will have known she was a party member when she applied to be in the audience, as that is specifically asked in the application. I don't recall anyone asking that when you arrive for a recording, albeit the one I went to was a few years ago. Only those selected to ask questions are identified and specifically seated and she was not one of those.

    This topic has been discussed elsewhere and more information has been revealed. I believe she tweeted beforehand that she was going to have a go at UKIP, but whether that was before the broadcast or before the recording, I don't know. It has also been stated the lady in question had a lengthy discussion with Stephen Twigg before the recording, but when you consider what their respective roles are, that's hardly outrageous.

    What seems most unusual about this is Dimbleby's repeated insistence that this lady's statement (it wasn't a question) be addressed when they were already supposed to be discussing UKIP in general. Not only that, but the microphone hovered above this lady's head for some time, so she could continue the challenge, when it doesn't always do so. Why was her opinion suddenly so important? It seemed the wider audience didn't believe it was such a valid point when denounced by Melanie Phillips.

    UKIP's Eastleigh campaign literature was referred to, but the vast majority of the TV audience would have no knowledge of what it did or didn't say, so I can't see why that was debated at all. It would be interesting to hear why Dimbleby thought it merited so much attention.

    Reply to this message 18

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by Portly (U1381981) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    A large section of the "Question Time" audience appears to be party officials and councillors planted by the Labour Party. I'm sure the Tories and others try to do this too, but Labour are clearly better-organised in this respect.

    I missed Thursday's edition of Question Time because I was watching the test cricket from Dunedin. It was something of a relief that I had an excuse not to tune in.

    Reply to this message 19

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by maestaf (U14145694) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    The people wanting to be in the QT audience are clearly going to be interested in politics and it's hardly a surprise that some will belong to political parties. For once, Dimbleby got it right in giving the woman who attacked UKIP so much time. She was concise but persistent and clearly discomfited the UKIP woman. It was great TV and the most interesting thing to happen on QT all season. If QT was like that all the time, with audience members putting all the panellists under that amount of pressure, it might be worth watching.

    Melanie Phillips extraordinary attack on that audience member should have been stopped. The panellists are not there to complain about the audience and unlike the panel; the audience does not get to answer back. Ms Phillips used to be a decent panellist, but she was superfluous on a panel with a UKIP representative. Maybe that's why she decided to rant.

    Reply to this message 20

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by Aunty Rose (U14288414) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    Did the BBC know the young lady was a Labour party plant?  Only the BBC can answer that, but they will have known she was a party member when she applied to be in the audience, as that is specifically asked in the application. I don't recall anyone asking that when you arrive for a recording, albeit the one I went to was a few years ago. Only those selected to ask questions are identified and specifically seated and she was not one of those.

    This topic has been discussed elsewhere and more information has been revealed. I believe she tweeted beforehand that she was going to have a go at UKIP, but whether that was before the broadcast or before the recording, I don't know. It has also been stated the lady in question had a lengthy discussion with Stephen Twigg before the recording, but when you consider what their respective roles are, that's hardly outrageous.

    What seems most unusual about this is Dimbleby's repeated insistence that this lady's statement (it wasn't a question) be addressed when they were already supposed to be discussing UKIP in general. Not only that, but the microphone hovered above this lady's head for some time, so she could continue the challenge, when it doesn't always do so. Why was her opinion suddenly so important? It seemed the wider audience didn't believe it was such a valid point when denounced by Melanie Phillips.

    UKIP's Eastleigh campaign literature was referred to, but the vast majority of the TV audience would have no knowledge of what it did or didn't say, so I can't see why that was debated at all. It would be interesting to hear why Dimbleby thought it merited so much attention. 
    And you will get no answers from the Beeb. This blatant shill for their political masters won't be mentioned at all on PoV, I bet.

    Reply to this message 21

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 21.

    Posted by maestaf (U14145694) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    Sometimes I almost feel sorry for the BBC. Whatever its methods for selecting the QT audience, I am sure that they are more scientific than the people who come here whining that their political view is underrepresented. In any case, QT is meant to be about the discussion of politics, not some sort of instant opinion poll that tests the popularity of a statement by the amount of applause.

    It seems to me that the audiences are representative as it is entirely predictable what they will applaud. In order these are: denunciations of politics or politicians as boring/deceitful/self serving etc, praise for popular institutions or occupations such as nursing, attacks on the Government, (of whichever party) and populist nonsense like there are too many bureaucrats in the NHS. Applauding Bob Crow saying unemployed construction workers should build new houses does not mean the audience is left wing; it indicates that it includes many idiots.

    Reply to this message 22

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 21.

    Posted by Lee (U1149673) ** on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    And you will get no answers from the Beeb. This blatant shill for their political masters won't be mentioned at all on PoV, I bet.  
    Who are the BBC's political masters supposed to be this week? I only ask because it keeps changing (sometimes our 'masters' are the Tories, sometimes they're Labour etc). It's almost as if people are judging BBC output on their own personal political viewpoint..?

    Reply to this message 23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by Sheumais (U14594517) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    "and populist nonsense like there are too many bureaucrats in the NHS"

    That's populist nonsense is it? You can't think of any reason why people might suspect it is the case?

    Much of the problem with Question Time seems more centred upon the chairman, than the BBC's politics, but you'll probably attribute that to my politics too. There are other BBC journalists who appear considerably more adept at ensuring the politicians do at least make an effort to answer the questions the public might like answered, such as Andrew Neil or Eddie Mair. The programme might be improved by the replacement of Dimbleby. I'm sure there are other non Scots who could do the job for those who seem troubled by such things.

    Reply to this message 24

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by stirling (U13732738) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    Thursday's QT was one of the best in ages. Instead of the usual panel of unknowns we had some heavyweights from both the left and right. As for the usual now tiresome right wing complaint of left wing bias in the audience, there were plenty of anti immigrant pro UKIP points of view on offer.

    Reply to this message 25

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 24.

    Posted by maestaf (U14145694) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    "and populist nonsense like there are too many bureaucrats in the NHS"

    That's populist nonsense is it? You can't think of any reason why people might suspect it is the case?

    Much of the problem with Question Time seems more centred upon the chairman, than the BBC's politics, but you'll probably attribute that to my politics too. There are other BBC journalists who appear considerably more adept at ensuring the politicians do at least make an effort to answer the questions the public might like answered, such as Andrew Neil or Eddie Mair. The programme might be improved by the replacement of Dimbleby. I'm sure there are other non Scots who could do the job for those who seem troubled by such things. 
    Yes, I got that one wrong. I am certain that there are too many bureaucrats in the NHS. The populist nonsense is suggesting that the removal of a few superfluous bureaucrats would solve all the NHS' financial problems.

    I totally agree with you about the Chairman. I thought it was interesting that Andrew Neil rather than Dimbleby chaired the Eastleigh by-election coverage. I feel that Dimbleby is being eased out, but far too slowly for my liking.

    Reply to this message 26

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by Sheumais (U14594517) on Saturday, 9th March 2013

    "and populist nonsense like there are too many bureaucrats in the NHS"

    That's populist nonsense is it? You can't think of any reason why people might suspect it is the case?

    Much of the problem with Question Time seems more centred upon the chairman, than the BBC's politics, but you'll probably attribute that to my politics too. There are other BBC journalists who appear considerably more adept at ensuring the politicians do at least make an effort to answer the questions the public might like answered, such as Andrew Neil or Eddie Mair. The programme might be improved by the replacement of Dimbleby. I'm sure there are other non Scots who could do the job for those who seem troubled by such things. 
    Yes, I got that one wrong. I am certain that there are too many bureaucrats in the NHS. The populist nonsense is suggesting that the removal of a few superfluous bureaucrats would solve all the NHS' financial problems.

    I totally agree with you about the Chairman. I thought it was interesting that Andrew Neil rather than Dimbleby chaired the Eastleigh by-election coverage. I feel that Dimbleby is being eased out, but far too slowly for my liking.
     
    Yes, I think the NHS needs rather more radical surgery than that too.

    If they move Andrew Neil to Question Time, will Blue Nun sales suffer? Maybe they should move it to ITV and let them sponsor the programme. Something needs to be done to Question Time, either replace Dimbleby or just let it die.

    Reply to this message 27

    Report message27

Back to top

About this Board

The Points of View team invite you to discuss BBC Television programmes.

Add basic Smileys or extra Smileys to your posts.

Questions? Check the BBC FAQ for answers first!

Go to: BBC News Have your say to discuss topics in the news

Make a complaint? Go to the BBC complaints website.

BBC News: Off-topic for this board, so contact them directly with your feedback: Contact BBC News

or register to take part in a discussion.



Mon-Sat: 0900-2300
Sun: 1000-2300

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Recent Discussions

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

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