If no Brits had been playing this morning the tennis would probably not have been on 5 Live.
On that subject, the other day, Heather Watson got knocked out of the Australian Open. She didn't get a mention in that morning's sports bulletins. Very annoying for people who caught the first 2 sets on 5 Live Sports Extra but fell asleep during the third. Had she won - her victory would have been mentioned as Konta's was.
I'm sure that happened to a boxer from Nazi Germany. He lost to a black American so his defeat could not be mentioned in subsequent bulletins.
Today on Afternoon Edition, they were discussing whether music could be a force for political change. When the discussion got to modern times, they spent some time hyping up a rapper called Kano. Kano has been in court recently, in connection with a violent incident.
If the public were asked what MPs should be surveyed about, they might respond with one of the following subjects:
The UK leaving the EU,
The UK's relationship with the USA,
The NHS,
Strikes on the railways
Sentencing of criminals.
There are other matters that could be added to that list, but one matter that could not be added, is the abuse of female MPs because of their gender.
So of all the issues 5 Livve could survey MPs about, why did they choose to ask female MPs how they feel about the abuse they receive? Where is the journalistic scrutiny? MPs have said that they would not stand for election knowing what they know now, but they haven't stood down.
And then what was this morning's phone-in about? "The day's big story" according to the website. An issue many parents all over the country are facing. Well it wouldn't be the day's big story if it only affected an extremely low percentage of children would it? The subject was children wanting to change gender.
Never mind changing gender, 5 live needs to change agenda. It needs to stop being the safe space of the identity politics/sexuality/drugs/mental health subculture and go back to being a station covering live news and live sport. And by news I mean real news - not activism disguised as news.
I heard Emma Barnett's rant earlier. She ought to go back to LBC if she wants to rant like that. What was that she said along the lines of "we're trying to make Parliament more representative by encouraging more women to become MPs"? That's not the role of the BBC. There will be people in favour of that idea and others who think people should be judged on their policies rather than their gender. It is the role of the BBC to impartially cover this issue, broadcasting all perspectives and not favouring any of them.
Never mind changing gender, 5 live needs to change agenda. It needs to stop being the safe space of the identity politics/sexuality/drugs/mental health subculture and go back to being a station covering live news and live sport. And by news I mean real news - not activism disguised as news.
I heard Emma Barnett's rant earlier. She ought to go back to LBC if she wants to rant like that. What was that she said along the lines of "we're trying to make Parliament more representative by encouraging more women to become MPs"? That's not the role of the BBC. There will be people in favour of that idea and others who think people should be judged on their policies rather than their gender. It is the role of the BBC to impartially cover this issue, broadcasting all perspectives and not favouring any of them.
I agree this agenda driven type broadcasting should not be the role of the BBC.
All I want is the news broadcast well and impartially and not being lectured to on a daily basis.If presenters want to change things then become an MP. There are quite a good deal of ex tv and media people who have been elected to Parliament and I admire that rather than the BBC or any other news organisation being used as a platform just to bang a drum and used on their behalf.
As for Emma Barnett , whenever I hear her she is constantly sneering at everyone and everything.This is a terrible trait that unfortunately has become all to common throughout the BBC and where they think they seem know better than anyone else.
If the public were asked what MPs should be surveyed about, they might respond with one of the following subjects:
The UK leaving the EU,
The UK's relationship with the USA,
The NHS,
Strikes on the railways
Sentencing of criminals.
There are other matters that could be added to that list, but one matter that could not be added, is the abuse of female MPs because of their gender.
So of all the issues 5 Livve could survey MPs about, why did they choose to ask female MPs how they feel about the abuse they receive? Where is the journalistic scrutiny? MPs have said that they would not stand for election knowing what they know now, but they haven't stood down.
And then what was this morning's phone-in about? "The day's big story" according to the website. An issue many parents all over the country are facing. Well it wouldn't be the day's big story if it only affected an extremely low percentage of children would it? The subject was children wanting to change gender.
Never mind changing gender, 5 live needs to change agenda. It needs to stop being the safe space of the identity politics/sexuality/drugs/mental health subculture and go back to being a station covering live news and live sport. And by news I mean real news - not activism disguised as news.
I heard Emma Barnett's rant earlier. She ought to go back to LBC if she wants to rant like that. What was that she said along the lines of "we're trying to make Parliament more representative by encouraging more women to become MPs"? That's not the role of the BBC. There will be people in favour of that idea and others who think people should be judged on their policies rather than their gender. It is the role of the BBC to impartially cover this issue, broadcasting all perspectives and not favouring any of them.
I'm not sure I follow your logic here. If it is the case that Women MPs are subject to abuse that their male counterparts are not do you really think that the BBC should put up a speaker to say that somehow it's okay?
My MP is a Woman and a Conservative. She told me that in the wake of the Jo Cox murder she had decided to move one of her constituency surgeries because of her concern over inadequate lighting.
Can I add that your assertion that Radio 5 has not covered Brexit, Trump and Trade Deals is bunkum.
I'm not sure I follow your logic here. If it is the case that Women MPs are subject to abuse that their male counterparts are not do you really think that the BBC should put up a speaker to say that somehow it's okay?
That part of my post was about campaigning for more women MPs. So the people they should put up against that should be people who think MPs should not be selected or rejected based on their gender.
My MP is a Woman and a Conservative. She told me that in the wake of the Jo Cox murder she had decided to move one of her constituency surgeries because of her concern over inadequate lighting.
If she wants that to be raised she should be able to raise it herself without the BBC carrying out a survey on how female MPs are treated when it could be surveying MPs about things the public is more concerned about.
Can I add that your assertion that Radio 5 has not covered Brexit, Trump and Trade Deals is bunkum.
I do agree with wns_195's post.
The 9am phone-in is now totally unlistenable.
Emma Barnet's contract wasn't renewed on LBC as she spent Sunday afternoons talking to herself in a croaky voice attracting very few callers. In Football parlance she is an LBC reject so can't "go back".
What I really object to is how speculation about what might happen is now regarded as news that leads bulletins across the BBC, especially at the weekend, depending what the Sunday papers are reporting.
Tennis should be on 5LX - who the hell wants this womens final instead of Danny Baker - shoehorned in at 1030 and FT jettisoned - why??? You have a whole channel for live sports events esp mino sports
Tennis should be on 5LX - who the hell wants this womens final instead of Danny Baker - shoehorned in at 1030 and FT jettisoned - why??? You have a whole channel for live sports events esp mino sports
Firstly, FT is airing at 8:30pm while today's ep is already available via the podcast.
Secondly, I wouldn't classify tennis as being a "mino sport" by any measure you want to use...
I wouldn't classify tennis as being a "mino sport" by any measure you want to use...
The BBC obviously disagrees. I was looking at some old listings a few days ago, and they used to broadcast domestic tennis tournaments. When will 5 Live be broadcasting a domestic tournament?
If 5 Live considers a sport minor, it only broadcasts the elite competitions in that sport or the most high-profile Brits.
Next Sunday, 5 Live will broadcast the Super Bowl. They would never broadcast an American football match between two British teams in a British league. Money and resources are devoted to covering the NFL, just because of the popularity of the Super Bowl.
Nolan being nauseatingly empathetic just now with an Iranian who has apparently had a little inconvenience entering the States, claiming he is a British citizen. Important I think to record that although we're not as vocal as all the LibFascists, many of us here support Trump's outlook on protecting his country from malign foreign infiltration. Initial, broad exclusion is justified as a preliminary to drilling down to identify specific individuals who may wish harm.
I make no comment on the politics of it all, but in terms of the tone of the journalism, I totally agree about last night's Nolan.
He was like a man possessed with a story that was about someone of Iranian origin being stopped at Chicago airport. The man was travelling on a British passport but had clearly been to many of the more volatile countries in the world. So the authorities took a greater interest in him than many around him.
Many would see that as being a sensible thing to do and, if it is a story, it is a minor one in comparison to the mass protests, muslim outrage and state visit petitions around.
But Nolan, being Nolan, had to blow this up beyond all worth. I really don't understand why these excesses are allowed to happen. Everyone must realise that this is about Nolan being feted rather than about the story.
And whilst we are at it, Nicky Campbell was nearly as bad today. Nicky seems to have this chip on his shoulder that someone will address him as "former host of Wheel of Fortune" as opposed to "journalist Nicky Campbell" and so he wants any interview to show off how good he is. I loved Malcolm Rifkind's response to Nicky's comment that he wasn't answering the question. He simply said "I am answering the question, but not in the way you want."
The UKIP immigration guy should have said the same to Nolan last night when was asked several times if he supported Trump's policy on excluding countries. The UKIP guy answered several times with a truthful answer that they did not have a view on whether it was right or wrong. Nolan sensed blood, but it was really about us all thinking nice thoughts about Stephen who claimed he was doing it on behalf of the listeners. Well, he wasn't doing it on behalf of me.
But Nolan's faux outraged style is utterly tedious and bears no relation to good journalism. I've said it before but Lord Reith must be turning in his grave to hear Nolan broadcasting on a BBC station.
On Friday night's show he had a group of Paramedics on talking about the A&E delays. They described how when accompanying a patient to hospital by ambulance they were held up as they were responsible for the patient till handover, but if no-one was available to receive the patient they had to wait, which meant they were unavailable for the next emergency call. Nolan kept insisting, "There MUST be someone to receive the patient........There MUST BE SOMEONE......" He is incapable of holding a calm discussion on any topic and just wastes time going over the same point endlessly, especially on Question Time Extra Time. I'm simply flabbergasted he wins so many awards. I have no idea what it's based on? Certainly not good journalism.
Stephen Nolan: "tonight, a breaking news story". I'm immediately thinking an incident in which people have died, such as a terrorist attack, a transport crash, or a mass shooting. It turns out that somebody couldn't enter the USA.It may have been an exclusive but it was definitely not a breaking news story.
Nihal: "Donald Trump has clarified - thank God for that". You're presenting on the BBC and you're presenting a news item not a debate. Your opinions are not wanted; it is your impartiality we demand.
Nihal's opining follows Emma Barnett's feminist rant last week. It seems 5 Live's presenters are becoming increasingly overt. If 5 Live was an independent radio station I wouldn't mind, but it is part of the BBC, which is supposed to be impartial.
Nihal is incapable of being impartial and is beyond arrogant. I have boycotted Afternoon Edition for several months, since he shouted a female caller down because she supported Brexit, belittling her views. I tweeted Jonathan Wall this was unacceptable and as usual got no reply from him. But Nihal replied several times in the same arrogant dismissive manner, and when I pointed out to him it was perfectly possible to have a Twitter discussion without condescension and rudeness, he just carried on in the same vein till he childishly had the last word. Frankly, I was appalled, and will be avoiding 5Live whilst he is on the station.
But Nolan's faux outraged style is utterly tedious and bears no relation to good journalism. I've said it before but Lord Reith must be turning in his grave to hear Nolan broadcasting on a BBC station.
On Friday night's show he had a group of Paramedics on talking about the A&E delays. They described how when accompanying a patient to hospital by ambulance they were held up as they were responsible for the patient till handover, but if no-one was available to receive the patient they had to wait, which meant they were unavailable for the next emergency call. Nolan kept insisting, "There MUST be someone to receive the patient........There MUST BE SOMEONE......" He is incapable of holding a calm discussion on any topic and just wastes time going over the same point endlessly, especially on Question Time Extra Time. I'm simply flabbergasted he wins so many awards. I have no idea what it's based on? Certainly not good journalism.
Nolan seems completely ignorant of what goes on in A&E depts. , if he thinks patients can always be handed over straight away !
Stephen Nolan: "tonight, a breaking news story". I'm immediately thinking an incident in which people have died, such as a terrorist attack, a transport crash, or a mass shooting. It turns out that somebody couldn't enter the USA.It may have been an exclusive but it was definitely not a breaking news story.
Nihal: "Donald Trump has clarified - thank God for that". You're presenting on the BBC and you're presenting a news item not a debate. Your opinions are not wanted; it is your impartiality we demand.
Nihal's opining follows Emma Barnett's feminist rant last week. It seems 5 Live's presenters are becoming increasingly overt. If 5 Live was an independent radio station I wouldn't mind, but it is part of the BBC, which is supposed to be impartial.
I agree with you about Nihal, but on the whole I find Emma Barnett easier to listen to than Adrian Childs ( not that that 's saying much ! )
BBC only needs to be impartial on UK politics, I see no issue with people disagreeing with Trump's policy, lets face it, it's pretty hard to defend other than the UKIP/BNP racist brigade.
The BBC is also supposed to be impartial on foreign affairs. If it isn't going to be impartial on a topic, it should state on its website what the adopted position will be and allow people who don't share that position to opt out of the TV licence.
The BBC is also supposed to be impartial on foreign affairs. If it isn't going to be impartial on a topic, it should state on its website what the adopted position will be and allow people who don't share that position to opt out of the TV licence.
Where does it state that impartiality goes beyond the U.K.?
I know this is the 5 live web site but I tuned in to the BBC news channel for Boris Johnson's statement. The BBC were interviewing a member of the Tea Party who was defending Trump. I also believe Maestro Farage was interviewed by Andrew Neil on the Sunday Politics.
The complication re bias here is that both the Government and Opposition Parties say they do not support what Trump has done. In fact the only party supporting him is UKIP. It's difficult to achieve balance in such circumstances.
Comments
A great match now happening between Roger Federer and Nishikori, so 5 Live is giving us an hour of that old waffler David Davies droning on
On that subject, the other day, Heather Watson got knocked out of the Australian Open. She didn't get a mention in that morning's sports bulletins. Very annoying for people who caught the first 2 sets on 5 Live Sports Extra but fell asleep during the third. Had she won - her victory would have been mentioned as Konta's was.
I'm sure that happened to a boxer from Nazi Germany. He lost to a black American so his defeat could not be mentioned in subsequent bulletins.
The UK leaving the EU,
The UK's relationship with the USA,
The NHS,
Strikes on the railways
Sentencing of criminals.
There are other matters that could be added to that list, but one matter that could not be added, is the abuse of female MPs because of their gender.
So of all the issues 5 Livve could survey MPs about, why did they choose to ask female MPs how they feel about the abuse they receive? Where is the journalistic scrutiny? MPs have said that they would not stand for election knowing what they know now, but they haven't stood down.
And then what was this morning's phone-in about? "The day's big story" according to the website. An issue many parents all over the country are facing. Well it wouldn't be the day's big story if it only affected an extremely low percentage of children would it? The subject was children wanting to change gender.
Never mind changing gender, 5 live needs to change agenda. It needs to stop being the safe space of the identity politics/sexuality/drugs/mental health subculture and go back to being a station covering live news and live sport. And by news I mean real news - not activism disguised as news.
I heard Emma Barnett's rant earlier. She ought to go back to LBC if she wants to rant like that. What was that she said along the lines of "we're trying to make Parliament more representative by encouraging more women to become MPs"? That's not the role of the BBC. There will be people in favour of that idea and others who think people should be judged on their policies rather than their gender. It is the role of the BBC to impartially cover this issue, broadcasting all perspectives and not favouring any of them.
I agree this agenda driven type broadcasting should not be the role of the BBC.
All I want is the news broadcast well and impartially and not being lectured to on a daily basis.If presenters want to change things then become an MP. There are quite a good deal of ex tv and media people who have been elected to Parliament and I admire that rather than the BBC or any other news organisation being used as a platform just to bang a drum and used on their behalf.
As for Emma Barnett , whenever I hear her she is constantly sneering at everyone and everything.This is a terrible trait that unfortunately has become all to common throughout the BBC and where they think they seem know better than anyone else.
I'm not sure I follow your logic here. If it is the case that Women MPs are subject to abuse that their male counterparts are not do you really think that the BBC should put up a speaker to say that somehow it's okay?
My MP is a Woman and a Conservative. She told me that in the wake of the Jo Cox murder she had decided to move one of her constituency surgeries because of her concern over inadequate lighting.
Can I add that your assertion that Radio 5 has not covered Brexit, Trump and Trade Deals is bunkum.
That part of my post was about campaigning for more women MPs. So the people they should put up against that should be people who think MPs should not be selected or rejected based on their gender.
If she wants that to be raised she should be able to raise it herself without the BBC carrying out a survey on how female MPs are treated when it could be surveying MPs about things the public is more concerned about.
I haven't made that assertion
The 9am phone-in is now totally unlistenable.
Emma Barnet's contract wasn't renewed on LBC as she spent Sunday afternoons talking to herself in a croaky voice attracting very few callers. In Football parlance she is an LBC reject so can't "go back".
What I really object to is how speculation about what might happen is now regarded as news that leads bulletins across the BBC, especially at the weekend, depending what the Sunday papers are reporting.
Have to say not sure they covered the final last year on the main station?
Secondly, I wouldn't classify tennis as being a "mino sport" by any measure you want to use...
I do, because it is live sport and the final of a major tournament.
You have a whole channel for major sport too.
Yes. It would probably have been on 5 Live Sports Extra had they lost their semi-finals.
They didn't.
The BBC obviously disagrees. I was looking at some old listings a few days ago, and they used to broadcast domestic tennis tournaments. When will 5 Live be broadcasting a domestic tournament?
If 5 Live considers a sport minor, it only broadcasts the elite competitions in that sport or the most high-profile Brits.
Next Sunday, 5 Live will broadcast the Super Bowl. They would never broadcast an American football match between two British teams in a British league. Money and resources are devoted to covering the NFL, just because of the popularity of the Super Bowl.
He was like a man possessed with a story that was about someone of Iranian origin being stopped at Chicago airport. The man was travelling on a British passport but had clearly been to many of the more volatile countries in the world. So the authorities took a greater interest in him than many around him.
Many would see that as being a sensible thing to do and, if it is a story, it is a minor one in comparison to the mass protests, muslim outrage and state visit petitions around.
But Nolan, being Nolan, had to blow this up beyond all worth. I really don't understand why these excesses are allowed to happen. Everyone must realise that this is about Nolan being feted rather than about the story.
And whilst we are at it, Nicky Campbell was nearly as bad today. Nicky seems to have this chip on his shoulder that someone will address him as "former host of Wheel of Fortune" as opposed to "journalist Nicky Campbell" and so he wants any interview to show off how good he is. I loved Malcolm Rifkind's response to Nicky's comment that he wasn't answering the question. He simply said "I am answering the question, but not in the way you want."
The UKIP immigration guy should have said the same to Nolan last night when was asked several times if he supported Trump's policy on excluding countries. The UKIP guy answered several times with a truthful answer that they did not have a view on whether it was right or wrong. Nolan sensed blood, but it was really about us all thinking nice thoughts about Stephen who claimed he was doing it on behalf of the listeners. Well, he wasn't doing it on behalf of me.
I ended up listening to Ian Collins on LBC, at least he doesn't splutter & shout people down !
There was a caller just before midnight who had a similar experience to the BBC World Service man, but a year or so ago.
As ever, Nolan totally disregarded him, as he didn't fit in with his obsessive anti-Trump agenda.
So the whole of the midnight hour was based on the BBC chap's experience as it happened under Trump, not the previous administration.
I wish Charlie Wolf had been on to give some balance.
But Nolan's faux outraged style is utterly tedious and bears no relation to good journalism. I've said it before but Lord Reith must be turning in his grave to hear Nolan broadcasting on a BBC station.
On Friday night's show he had a group of Paramedics on talking about the A&E delays. They described how when accompanying a patient to hospital by ambulance they were held up as they were responsible for the patient till handover, but if no-one was available to receive the patient they had to wait, which meant they were unavailable for the next emergency call. Nolan kept insisting, "There MUST be someone to receive the patient........There MUST BE SOMEONE......" He is incapable of holding a calm discussion on any topic and just wastes time going over the same point endlessly, especially on Question Time Extra Time. I'm simply flabbergasted he wins so many awards. I have no idea what it's based on? Certainly not good journalism.
Nihal: "Donald Trump has clarified - thank God for that". You're presenting on the BBC and you're presenting a news item not a debate. Your opinions are not wanted; it is your impartiality we demand.
Nihal's opining follows Emma Barnett's feminist rant last week. It seems 5 Live's presenters are becoming increasingly overt. If 5 Live was an independent radio station I wouldn't mind, but it is part of the BBC, which is supposed to be impartial.
Nolan seems completely ignorant of what goes on in A&E depts. , if he thinks patients can always be handed over straight away !
I agree with you about Nihal, but on the whole I find Emma Barnett easier to listen to than Adrian Childs ( not that that 's saying much ! )
Where does it state that impartiality goes beyond the U.K.?
The complication re bias here is that both the Government and Opposition Parties say they do not support what Trump has done. In fact the only party supporting him is UKIP. It's difficult to achieve balance in such circumstances.