Thursday, 20 September 2007

UK standards fall to a new low

As if everything else the BBC has got up to lately wasn't bad enough, it now seems that they've sunk to to new depths. Not content with depriving various competition entrants of their chance of winning a prize, the latest installment of Blue Petergate reveals that the editorial team fixed a vote for the name of the new cat.

A cat. Who the hell really cares if it's called 'Socks' or Cookie', apart from the young viewers? Why interfere? I can't see how either name could be deemed inappropriate. Unless there's something afoot along the lines of the Papal Hovis contract. Anyone checked the price of shares in Sockshop lately?

3 comments:

Custard. said...

The highlight for me has to be "the BBC's standards must be as high in small-scale competitions as they are in the most major news story."

OK, the BBC are probably the most reliable news service in the UK. But that doesn't stop them reporting hearsay and rumour as news. Why should we expect higher standards on their competitions than we get on the news?

Steve said...

As Ginger said, it really doesn't matter what name is chosen. If the viewers choice was totally inappropriate, then maybe go for a second choice. But this is just pointless stupidity.

Ginger said...

Well my outrage was somewhat tongue in cheek. And I'd really rather that an organisation was better at the accuracy with the big stuff than the trivial. But equally, I can only view that kind of manipulation with quite a strong degree of incredulity! It just seems so petty and pointless

© Advancing Gingerly 2007-2009