Mr Khan, what a sweetie feeding his Romanian neighbours. They're grafters; give them jobs and proper wages.
I also admired the Britain in Bloom lady's optimism and enthusiasm. Every neighbourhood needs someone like her.
They do a bit, but then I learn that benefit fraud is 31 times lower than MP expenses fraud (http://politicalscrapbook.net/2011/05/mps-expenses-vs-benefit-fraud/) and that we lose £290m per day to tax avoidance & evasion. That makes me reconsider who my 'fury' should be directed at.
Yes, Benefits Street is about real people but the cases are in no way representative of the majority of people claiming benefits. Viewers will go away with a very negative and distorted perception of benefit claimants and this plays right into the current government's hands.
Well, that's certainly a creative use of statistics.:D
The figure of £1.1bn quoted in that blog for benefit fraud is actually £2bn, once you trace back to the source document:
Whereas the fraud benefit number relates to one year, the MPs' overclaim number (which is also mis-stated and should be £1.1m) relates to five years. Hardly comparing like with like, eh?
Also, the biggest spin in that blog is dividing both the benefit fraud number and the MPs' overclaim number by the total numbers of benefit claiminats and MPs. In the case of benefit claimants, this appears to be everyone in receipt of some kind of benefit, including pensioners.
I've no axe to grind on this but you might want to look a bit more closely at numbers used by bloggers with big agendas and little grasp of statistics.;-)
A very similar thing happened last year with BBC3's "People Like Us". I know the featured area well, and once again the negatives portrayed far outweighed the positives that were not - but to do otherwise would not of course have made "good telly".
That is not to deny that the negatives portrayed were falsehoods - though some aspects of their portrayal were also, so it seems, "ehhanced" for the cameras.
The question IMO that must be asked is, what is the net affect on the image and welfare of the wider community?
It's not about pretending abuse of the benefits system doesn't happen or unfairly generalising about other groups (like MPs). It's about perspective and how a disproportionate amount of anger seems to be leveled at one set of people when others are getting away with and costing us a lot more.
You say that, but I think most people show far more hatred towards anyone working in the banking/financial sector, MPs, and businesses that aren't even breaking any laws and still pay national insurance, VAT and other taxes - as well as giving many thousands of people gainful employment.
In fact, I can't imagine many people showing ANY sympathy to the above - or whatever scapegoat we decide to attack tomorrow. This thread has also shown an alarming amount of xenophobia and hatred since Monday.
To be honest, besides this programme (and not everyone has been watching it), I don't think the average person on the street is more likely to moan about 'benefit scroungers' more than the above - or the influx of foreigners here to take our jobs.
But that's how this government and the media operates isn't it? Whip people up into a frenzy about migrants and benefit claimants, they're easy targets. It's a convenient way to misdirect public anger and distract from other issues.
I thought the Government was trying to defend immigration, even if trying to control it. Most people coming from elsewhere within the EU are here to work, not claim benefits (the exception perhaps being child benefit perhaps). The problem that this programme has shown is that people are here temporarily, and don't mind living in awful conditions to be able to save up money quicker - and that makes it harder for some other people who are no longer able to take those low-paid jobs.
But the main people in the street that we saw in week one aren't exactly worried about other people taking their jobs, as they're not even looking!
You say that, but I think most people show far more hatred towards anyone working in the banking/financial sector, MPs, and businesses that aren't even breaking any laws and still pay national insurance, VAT and other taxes - as well as giving many thousands of people gainful employment.
In fact, I can't imagine many people showing ANY sympathy to the above - or whatever scapegoat we decide to attack tomorrow. This thread has also shown an alarming amount of xenophobia and hatred since Monday.
To be honest, besides this programme (and not everyone has been watching it), I don't think the average person on the street is more likely to moan about 'benefit scroungers' more than the above - or the influx of foreigners here to take our jobs.
I thought the Government was trying to defend immigration, even if trying to control it. Most people coming from elsewhere within the EU are here to work, not claim benefits (the exception perhaps being child benefit perhaps). The problem that this programme has shown is that people are here temporarily, and don't mind living in awful conditions to be able to save up money quicker - and that makes it harder for some other people who are no longer able to take those low-paid jobs.
But the main people in the street that we saw in week one aren't exactly worried about other people taking their jobs, as they're not even looking!
A thoughtful and well-reasoned post - what the heck are you doing in this thread?:o:D
BIB: similar thoughts to those of Charlie Brooker in this Guardian column:
British society seems to require a regularly-updated register of sanctioned hate figures, about whom it's OK to say more or less anything; people who form a vital pressure valve for this terrifying pent-up societal wrath, lurking beneath the surface like magma under Yellowstone.
The current list includes paedos, MPs, immigrants, bankers, people on benefits and reality stars.
Some children on Benefits Street not attending school due to hostility caused by the programme from parents and some teachers, according to school provider Oasis. Some too scared to even leave the house, a Channel 4 journo has just tweeted. (@C4Ciaran)
Some children on Benefits Street not attending school due to hostility caused by the programme from parents and some teachers, according to school provider Oasis. Some too scared to even leave the house, a Channel 4 journo has just tweeted. (@C4Ciaran)
Some children on Benefits Street not attending school due to hostility caused by the programme from parents and some teachers, according to school provider Oasis. Some too scared to even leave the house, a Channel 4 journo has just tweeted. (@C4Ciaran)
Well done Channel 4.
Isn't it as much, if not more, the parents faults for taking part in the programme?
Some children on Benefits Street not attending school due to hostility caused by the programme from parents and some teachers, according to school provider Oasis. Some too scared to even leave the house, a Channel 4 journo has just tweeted. (@C4Ciaran)
Just watched episode 2 and just like the first all the way through I just kept thinking I wish they would drop a few predator missiles from cod on that street.
Just watched episode 2 and just like the first all the way through I just kept thinking I wish they would drop a few predator missiles from cod on that street.
Some children on Benefits Street not attending school due to hostility caused by the programme from parents and some teachers, according to school provider Oasis. Some too scared to even leave the house, a Channel 4 journo has just tweeted. (@C4Ciaran)
Well done Channel 4.
The school should have some kind of parents evening to talk about this, and a separate one for the kids in the school. Children have no control over the circumstances into which they are born. In hindsight, the program should have blurred out the faces of the those kids. Poor lambs.
The school should have some kind of parents evening to talk about this, and a separate one for the kids in the school. Children have no control over the circumstances into which they are born. In hindsight, the program should have blurred out the faces of the those kids. Poor lambs.
Agreed, hostility like this is disgusting and should bot be tolerated, especially the hostility towards the children
The school should have some kind of parents evening to talk about this, and a separate one for the kids in the school. Children have no control over the circumstances into which they are born. In hindsight, the program should have blurred out the faces of the those kids. Poor lambs.
I noticed a lot of them had their school badges blurred out, any idea what the point of that was?
I assume we've seen the latest, that a working couple were filmed but aren't included in the final cut?
The school should have some kind of parents evening to talk about this, and a separate one for the kids in the school. Children have no control over the circumstances into which they are born. In hindsight, the program should have blurred out the faces of the those kids. Poor lambs.
By the looks of it, the kids are the main focus of next week's episode.
The local news in the Midlands has been reporting all the backlash from the series. People now treat James Turner Street as a tourist attraction, driving down just to see what the place is like. One of the residents says it's now like living in a zoo.
Here's a report from last night's public meeting - a bit of a public relations sop by the sounds of it, with attendees given post it notes to write down what they think of C4, rather than being given a proper chance to speak.
I can foresee a situation in the future where people are going to be forced by law to sell all of their possessions before being able to claim welfare, that's if there is welfare after this series ends. I suspect 'mission accomplished' for the programme will be the abolition of working age benefits.
All we need is a newspaper and pollster to ask the question. Only a matter of when, not if.
That was the situation in this country at one time, welfare was only dispersed once you were down to "a bed, a table and chairs and the tools of your trade".
Watched it last night. It's shocking tv, especially that junkie flogging free magazines as Big Issues and the other fella stealing jeans. Surely they can be arrested after it's aired?
And the lovely Hyacinth and her front garden got less than a minute on screen.
Comments
Well, that's certainly a creative use of statistics.:D
The figure of £1.1bn quoted in that blog for benefit fraud is actually £2bn, once you trace back to the source document:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130128102031/http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd2/fem/fem_apr09_mar10.pdf
Whereas the fraud benefit number relates to one year, the MPs' overclaim number (which is also mis-stated and should be £1.1m) relates to five years. Hardly comparing like with like, eh?
Also, the biggest spin in that blog is dividing both the benefit fraud number and the MPs' overclaim number by the total numbers of benefit claiminats and MPs. In the case of benefit claimants, this appears to be everyone in receipt of some kind of benefit, including pensioners.
I've no axe to grind on this but you might want to look a bit more closely at numbers used by bloggers with big agendas and little grasp of statistics.;-)
That is not to deny that the negatives portrayed were falsehoods - though some aspects of their portrayal were also, so it seems, "ehhanced" for the cameras.
The question IMO that must be asked is, what is the net affect on the image and welfare of the wider community?
Funny, the amount of discussion on here on a regular basis suggests to me that there isn't a problem with awareness.
Ever considered it might have been staged?
You say that, but I think most people show far more hatred towards anyone working in the banking/financial sector, MPs, and businesses that aren't even breaking any laws and still pay national insurance, VAT and other taxes - as well as giving many thousands of people gainful employment.
In fact, I can't imagine many people showing ANY sympathy to the above - or whatever scapegoat we decide to attack tomorrow. This thread has also shown an alarming amount of xenophobia and hatred since Monday.
To be honest, besides this programme (and not everyone has been watching it), I don't think the average person on the street is more likely to moan about 'benefit scroungers' more than the above - or the influx of foreigners here to take our jobs.
I thought the Government was trying to defend immigration, even if trying to control it. Most people coming from elsewhere within the EU are here to work, not claim benefits (the exception perhaps being child benefit perhaps). The problem that this programme has shown is that people are here temporarily, and don't mind living in awful conditions to be able to save up money quicker - and that makes it harder for some other people who are no longer able to take those low-paid jobs.
But the main people in the street that we saw in week one aren't exactly worried about other people taking their jobs, as they're not even looking!
A thoughtful and well-reasoned post - what the heck are you doing in this thread?:o:D
BIB: similar thoughts to those of Charlie Brooker in this Guardian column:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/12/benefits-street-poverty-porn-british-fury
Well done Channel 4.
im sure they are very proud of themselves
Depends if the accusations of being mislead are true or not, plus its how they are portrayed too.
doesn't excuse the hostility towards the children, do you think people have a right to act so hostile towards innocent children
Any excuse to skive off school eh?
if you say so or they they are being harassed at school because of this "Documentary" and are afraid to go
Nasty
The school should have some kind of parents evening to talk about this, and a separate one for the kids in the school. Children have no control over the circumstances into which they are born. In hindsight, the program should have blurred out the faces of the those kids. Poor lambs.
Agreed, hostility like this is disgusting and should bot be tolerated, especially the hostility towards the children
I noticed a lot of them had their school badges blurred out, any idea what the point of that was?
I assume we've seen the latest, that a working couple were filmed but aren't included in the final cut?
The local news in the Midlands has been reporting all the backlash from the series. People now treat James Turner Street as a tourist attraction, driving down just to see what the place is like. One of the residents says it's now like living in a zoo.
Here's a report from last night's public meeting - a bit of a public relations sop by the sounds of it, with attendees given post it notes to write down what they think of C4, rather than being given a proper chance to speak.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-25750475
C4 have confirmed Richard Bacon will host a debate on the series immediately after the final edition airs.
They have a big bird, a bloke who lives out of a bin and people trying to learn the alphabet.
That was the situation in this country at one time, welfare was only dispersed once you were down to "a bed, a table and chairs and the tools of your trade".
And the lovely Hyacinth and her front garden got less than a minute on screen.
Now? It looked like a zoo when it was being filmed.