Online  permalink

The Moderation Lottery

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 51 - 66 of 66
  • Message 51

    , in reply to message 49.

    Posted by lateralthinking1 (U10007871) on Sunday, 16th November 2008

    It can take many days for the BBC to decide who is responsible for specific situations that have led to difficulties. I don't need to mention once again the example still on many people's minds bu you know the kind of thing.

    He was on holiday and so was another one. She was happy if someone else was happy and didn't need to get involved. A further one was more of a junior but not strictly speaking a BBC employee. What decided who went and who stayed? Seniority? Salary? Overall or direct responsibility in terms of job description? Proximity to the action on the day?

    We are told that the hosts are BBC employees. I ask again "are the moderators BBC employees too?". If not, who are they employed by - an independent company contracted to the BBC? If they are BBC employees, then clearly it is felt that they are better placed to moderate than the hosts are. Hence they are called moderators and have the authority to accept or reject a post.

    So why in some circumstances - and how can these be anything other than the greyer more difficult areas - are decisions bounced back onto the hosts? If it then goes wrong, would it be that she the host says "it wasn't in my job description to decide; it was for the moderators" and he the moderator says "no, I referred it back to the host?".

    Would it be that further up the chain, it would seem that another was on holiday when it happened and someone else was asked by the moderator for advice, but with the recommendation that the matter be put back in the hands of the host, and that she said to the moderator "well, if you are happy to pass it back to the host, I'm happy"...........

    See what I mean? What are the answers?






    Report message1

  • Message 52

    , in reply to message 51.

    Posted by lateralthinking1 (U10007871) on Sunday, 16th November 2008

    Nick, are you intending to provide any answers to my earlier questions?

    I am very disappointed that you haven't replied and am beginning to assume that the moderators are not BBC employees. This would of course raise some very interesting further questions.

    Report message2

  • Message 53

    , in reply to message 52.

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

  • Message 54

    , in reply to message 53.

    Posted by third-doctor (U1538046) on Sunday, 16th November 2008

    I think I read that there are far fewer mods and that the host is the one with the real powers, lateralthinking1.

    One of my concerns is that after someone has made the decision to censor, queries as to the reason are usually ignored. On the rare occasions that one does get a rationale, it appears so transparently a post-priori excuse that it calls into question the credibility of the entire process.

    Report message4

  • Message 55

    , in reply to message 54.

    Posted by lateralthinking1 (U10007871) on Sunday, 16th November 2008

    Yes but you can read a lot into the silence rather than any kind of civility like being given a response.

    Report message5

  • Message 56

    , in reply to message 55.

    Posted by SometimesInvisiblePoster (U9636067) on Sunday, 16th November 2008

    lateralthinking1

    Yes but you can read a lot into the silence rather than any kind of civility like being given a response.
     


    If you are talking about your question on the blog, Nick aked for a translation.
    If you did one fine, I am not going back there, if not maybe you could explain what the question was.

    Report message6

  • Message 57

    , in reply to message 56.

    Posted by lateralthinking1 (U10007871) on Sunday, 16th November 2008

    The explanation is in message 51, since when nothing. In 1982-83 I was as a 19 and 20 year old a volunteer member of something called the BBC Listening Panel. The relationship between the BBC and its audience was better in those days.

    Report message7

  • Message 58

    , in reply to message 57.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Sunday, 16th November 2008

    My apologies for not getting back to you earlier lateralthinking1 but it is a Sunday and I had to make Sunday lunch.

    Part of the answer to your question is contained in this useful explanation of the difference between moderation and hosting:

    www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb...

    So if a moderator is unclear about something they would normally refer it to a host.

    I don't understand the parallels with the recent Radio 2 situation.

    But if your question is "who's ultimately in charge of the POV boards", the answer is "I am".

    See this blog post:

    www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/...

    Report message8

  • Message 59

    , in reply to message 58.

    Posted by lateralthinking1 (U10007871) on Sunday, 16th November 2008

    Nick - To be human about this, I hope you enjoyed your lunch - it is going to be a late dinner for you! - and I genuinely recognise that people are putting in extra hours to find improvements. It was particularly helpful to have someone saying that they are in charge.

    To be helpful, I will put aside here my discussion about Radio 2 without comment other than to say that I feel that my reasoning was transparent and there is an understandable wish to move on and away. However - isn't there always a "however" these days? - would it be possible for you to clarify a little more your current role in terms of these message boards?

    I don't think that my abilities in comprehension are the worst of all time but I still don't get it completely. Would it be fair to see you sort of as the chief host of hosts on POV as well as blog editor etc? Are you a part of FM&T - I know what the initials stand for - and if so as it seems you are after all a BBC employee? Thanks.

    Report message9

  • Message 60

    , in reply to message 59.

    Posted by Nick Reynolds (U11648404) on Sunday, 16th November 2008

    I am indeed a BBC employee.

    As well as being editor of the Internet blog I am hosting the following sections of the POV boards: "The BBC", "bbc.co.uk" and "Digital". I am not a "chief host of hosts" (sounds a bit apocalyptic).

    I work for the BBC's Future Media & Technology department.

    The blog post I linked to explains more.

    Report message10

  • Message 61

    , in reply to message 60.

    Posted by Wetherby Pond (U1514913) on Wednesday, 19th November 2008

    NickReynolds (waits 2 minutes 17 seconds for next input)

    Is (waits)

    the (still waits)

    five (de dum de dum)

    minute (doo be doo be doo)

    delay (wibble)

    your smiley - yikes

    idea smiley - grr

    If so - why, how long for - and do you HONESTLY think any responsible poster will appreciate it?

    Report message11

  • Message 62

    , in reply to message 61.

    Posted by deansay (U5811575) ** on Wednesday, 19th November 2008

    I don't understand this time factor either.

    The three minutes has definitely been raised to at least 4 if not 5...what's going on?????

    Report message12

  • Message 63

    , in reply to message 62.

    Posted by Smilie Minogue (U8747614) on Wednesday, 19th November 2008

    Message 12 from Paul at CCT explains all! Blame John Sergeant for this one!smiley - biggrin

    www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mb...

    Report message13

  • Message 64

    , in reply to message 62.

    Posted by deansay (U5811575) ** on Wednesday, 19th November 2008

    Yes it's gone to 5 minutes

    4 minutes 32 secs and counting down....Hummmmmmm, is this a new way of pre-mode do you think?????





    Report message14

  • Message 65

    , in reply to message 64.

    Posted by Gizmomoo (U10999499) ** on Friday, 21st November 2008

    www.bbc.co.uk/dna/60...
    sound familiar

    Report message15

  • Message 66

    , in reply to message 65.

    Posted by Smilie Minogue (U8747614) on Friday, 21st November 2008

    Ever so slightly Gizmo. I wonder if the same moderation company 'does' this board too?

    Report message16

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

Copyright © 2015 BBC. 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.