Friday, June 22, 2007
Let’s Talk…
Joining Mark Carruthers on Let’s Talk last night: Ian Paisley Jr of the DUP and junior minister in the OFMDFM, the minister for social development the SDLP’s Margaret Ritchie, journalist and political activist Eamonn MCann and David Burrows, a member of the Parades Commission and a former leading Orangeman.
Mick Fealty @ 08:06 PM
I dont blame dunseith, he’s a legend and rightly so. i do blame the lame production - daft stories, weird lead stories that are absolutely pointless or so parochial that even fans of local broadcasting are left wondering what then f*** was that about. then they do that silly light story to take us up to hugo. leave that to hugo, please. while im ranting, can we get rid of the handover hing that dunseith does? whatever he’s talking about he has to blend it into some daft throw-over line for hugo to pick up. embarrassing.
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 02:07 PMFreddie w.belf,
I am not anti Dunseith as a whole but it may well be the only way of getting rid of the Gimps running the production of Talk-back, if the presenters were held accountable for the drudge that we’re forced to listen too maybe then the likes of Dunseith and Co would grow a pair and stand up to the production team and tell them what shite they are forcing down the radio waves.
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 02:42 PMFair point ANM. I agree that it’s the programme’s direction that’s in crisis, not dunseith per se. I admire him and respect him and I do regret that he’s not taking a stand on this programme. It should be the flagship. It’s a disgrace now.
Does anyone know who the producers of Talkback are?
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 02:51 PMThat’s tlakback dealt with, still doesnt explain why mark c is allowed to ruin lets talk on a regular basis. humph.
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 05:33 PMAgree totally that Eamonn McCann should present something like Talkback. We need a raical left wing viewpoint as the BBC (NI) is mediocre and not as *liberal* as its often presented right wing lunatic fringe commentator David Vance. Eamonn got many votes than David.
Is anyone else as pissed off as me that David Vance as an unelectable angry old man (46) is over representd on Nolan, Talkback, Hearts and Minds and Sunday Sequence. The man just had over 1100 votes - ten years ago ffs. His views are unrepresentative and the frequency of their airing breaches the BBC charter.
He is totally uninformed on any given subject but comes across as essentially reasonable in tone (while backstabbing all other participants in any BBC show he is invited on and advocating extreme violence on his blog. My bit said on the BBC. :)
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 07:42 PMSince she brings it up in nearly every feckin’ thread he/she posts in, no matter what the topic, can someone explain to me what the beef is between I wonder and David Vance?
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 08:03 PMYW
He poses views whch incite hatred and all views expressed on the BBC are at odds with his extreme views on ATW. On the BBC which he, incidentally, castigates as a left wing outlet, he appears a disproportionate number of times to the number of people who agree with him (untested since 1998)He has banned me from his site, after repeatedly asking me to post there rather than here, in opposition to his views. He’s a hyprocitical defender of *free speech* Try a Google search for his name and word “coon”. See?
As a licence fee payer, I object to the views which he represents being afforded airtime disproportionate to the support his vierws have across the ider (sane) world. Succinct enough for you? :) Theres more…
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 08:09 PMI, why not!
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 08:12 PMI wonder:
Nolan is crap.
Talkback is dated.
Hearts & Minds needs revamped.
Sunday Sequence has a small audience.
Vance fits into all of them very neatly. Willing to work for small bucks and happy to get his name noticed anywhere.
You don’t like his views---so what? Is the BBC there to cater for your views alone? I don’t like a lot of Vance’s stuff, either, and mainly because he seems to see the world in black and white. But he stands up for his beliefs and says what he thinks.
If you don’t like him, then switch off, or turn down the volume when he appears.
Better still, wean yourself away from the pisspoor programmes you seem to enjoy. I abandoned them all years ago.
Porlock
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 09:02 PMYW, P
I believe that there are a lot of extremely violent people out there that that site (of which you are well aware) links to and which provids a common *bond* of support. T
That support consists of encouraging a community belief in things which I believe to be erosive of the shared values which constitute community links, that that site encourages hatred and encouraging of expressing that hatred in a violent form.
I can make my views more expressive in a legal framework, which I fully intend to do. I am not and I encourage you all not to be dissuaded (as I was) by David Vances threatening me, with legal
ation. Although he is a former member of the UKUP.
he isnt on good terms with Bob McCartney.
In the meantime I intend t’exercise my democratic viw on a internet forum (which freedom I am denied by a *defender of freedom* speaker on BBC Radio Ulster. Next time David appears on Nolan. ask him about his role in Ulster Resistance in DonaghcloneyPosted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 09:24 PMFrom the Irish News earlier this month:
Plenty of weight and no substance to flagship show
01/06/2007
Opinion
By Denis BradleyI used to know a man who went around saying: “I’ll talk my fill because I am the boy who can talk”. He was more than a bit eccentric and he came back into my mind a lot during the last couple of weeks. Two things made me think of him. The first was all those advertisements that are dominating the billboards at the moment and are running nightly on television. The ads are for the BBC’s flagship programme Nolan. The other thing that brought my eccentric to mind was the Irish election.
“Love it or hate it, Nolan gets you talking’ is what the big ad says. This is the programme BBC NI is putting most of its energy, money and reputation into. It appears it is very popular and attracts a big viewing audience.
For years the BBC has had a problem. It could never quite match UTV in the popularity stakes. UTV had the common touch. Its main focus was in making money and therefore seldom put the same production values into news and current affairs. But it nearly always attracted the bigger audiences. The BBC may have had stature and reputation but it couldn’t match that with the common touch. As well as that the BBC had to meet its commitment to public service broadcasting.
That meant it had to cater for all sorts of tastes and demands.
Like the old public transport system it had to go to places where few people went.
In the meantime its rivals could concentrate on the routes where the big number of people wanted to go.
There was something else that had an impact but which will not be a factor in the future. Like politics we will find that broadcasting has been devolved.
During the Troubles, when it came to the ‘big’ stories, the ones that required a lot of research and authority, both UTV and BBC NI were stood aside and the network took over. That meant that people flew in from London and elsewhere to enhance their reputation as working at the cutting edge of investigative journalism. They had big wallets, big reputations and big egos and all the local reporters could do was stand and stare and desist from putting their hands around their controller’s neck for letting it happen.
So, what about the Nolan Show?
Do I love it or hate it? Neither actually.
To love it or hate it is to give it a dignity that it does not deserve. My point is that I don’t think the BBC should be running such a show. From what I have heard, I think that ‘Nolan’ on the radio borders on being unacceptable but I usually manage to avoid it, because where I live is tuned (thank God) to BBC Radio Foyle. But I have seen enough of the television Nolan Show to come to my own conclusions.
At a time when we are in need of serious and intelligent discussion, when we need the maximum amount of engagement by the maximum number of people, I think it is unacceptable for the BBC to go looking for the lowest form of entertainment disguised as a discussion programme. I don’t think it is the time to be using serious issues as weapons to provoke artificial outrage. Everybody, including those who love it, knows that the show is not about the issues. The show is about Nolan. That is fine as long as it is not the flagship of our premier broadcaster.
Whether Stephen Nolan loses weight or not is of great interest to his nearest and dearest but it should not be occupying valuable and premium airtime.
Not that I am against weighty men. Brian Cowen is a weighty man and he stood head and shoulders above everyone else in the Irish election. As every party went into the election with a frenzy of promises to reduce or abolish taxes of all sorts, Cowen was seen and heard to stand against the run towards populism and flaky solutions. As Bertie Ahern was off about other business, sometimes his own and sometimes the country’s, Cowen was the one who caught and interpreted the public mood.
Steady as she goes was the message. As the days and weeks passed and Fianna Fail were initially in meltdown and then neck to neck with the opposition, Cowen’s voice and Cowen’s authority could be felt pulling the arguments and the people in his direction.
Now there’s a man, love him or hate him, who can get you talking.
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 09:29 PMThe issue. with certain people, is that the last northern electionm proved that not enough people HATE to keep this conlfict going in a violent form.
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 09:35 PMI usually have Nolan’s programme on when driving in in the mornings, not because I like it but to have some background noise. Almost every other caller, rather than merely just voicing a often seriously misinformed opinion, flatters the host by stating that he is the “only man” who can “help” with a particular problem or grievance they’ve got. I often wonder whether the BBC deliberately encourages or prompts callers to make this comment when they call in, or if they are blinkered enough to believe that a talk radio host can get things done that their local MP or MLA cannot.
When I say his callers are misinformed, I mean chronically so. For example the other day one caller said that he never ever used trains, but simultaneously claimed in the same breath that the Dublin train broke down twice a day. Nolan didn’t bother to ask why a man who admitted that he never used the trains appeared to be aware of the breakdown frequency - breakdowns seldom make the news (they did last week only because Translink rather stupidly told their passengers that the train would only reverse, providing a comic moment that the media milked to full embarassing effect). He generally doesn’t bother to challenge much of the nonsense that people phone in with, except where he personally disagrees with it.
Regarding David Vance, I don’t think he should be put off the BBC. I think the fact that he gladly accepts a paycheque from that organization for doing the bit on Hearts and Minds, while simultaneously hammering it’s alleged biases on his blog, shows the world precisely how principled he is. I actually think it’s quite funny how Vance tones down his extremist talk for their benefit, knowing that if he stuck to his principles and expressed his real views, he’d lose the slot and the fee he receives for doing it. I hope Vance continues to make his absurd take on the world public, so that reasonable people know how out of touch and crazed that he is.
“I wonder ..”, I think you should change the record a bit though. You’re coming over as somewhat obsessed.
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 10:08 PMPorlock:
Nolan is crap, you say. Tell that to the SONY judges. He’s won more than anyone else in history. Not my cup of tea but you can’t argue with his success.
Talkback is dated, you say. It’s still very popular and David enjoys enormous respect from his audience. I listen regularly.
Hearts and minds needs revamped, you say. The programme reflects the need for our political culture to be revamped. Thompson does the job brilliantly. I watch every week.
Sunday Sequence has a small audience, you say. It actually has one of the biggest audiences on radio ulster and is most intelligent show they have.
Vance fits into them all, you say. He’s entitled to his views and even though I think he’s in danger of becoming a caricature of himself, at least he’s prepared to put his views out there to be taken on.
All radio ulster and bbc ni programmes can be improved, no debate. Let’s not forget that radio ulster is the most successful radio station in the UK in terms of awards and audience. There’s a reason for that. Hats off to them.
Posted by on Jun 24, 2007 @ 10:14 PMVance fits into them all, you say. He’s entitled to his views and even though I think he’s in danger of becoming a caricature of himself, at least he’s prepared to put his views out there to be taken on.
I hardly think that expressing your perspective and then buggering off without sticking around to debate it constitutes having your views “taken on”.
Posted by on Jun 25, 2007 @ 08:10 AMConmrade
The other tactic was taunting people here to come to his website (which means more money for him) and challenging him there. When I and others did this, he banned us. I think that this needs to be known, especially as Mick regards him as a “friend.”
I do take your point about changing the record. Most of my posts have more to do with other issues. Occasionally, though, I like to “tramp the dirt down.” :)
Posted by on Jun 25, 2007 @ 08:45 AMDupper
Where does one find info. on listening figures for RU?Posted by on Jun 25, 2007 @ 08:46 AMMan, Ball ?
Posted by on Jun 25, 2007 @ 08:48 AMPosts are on the issue:
BBC representation of political perspective.Posted by on Jun 25, 2007 @ 10:59 AMradio ulster listening figures are available on rajar.
Posted by on Jun 25, 2007 @ 05:22 PMi heard that talk back’s figures were down this last period.
not as bad as the alan simpson show! unbelievably crap programme. I didnt listen to george jones much but it was a better show than the slan simpson sh*t. i heard the show last week while driving am i wanted to phone the producers and give them advice! they probably despair at this point, so i thought id be kind to them
Posted by on Jun 25, 2007 @ 11:21 PMThanks for that last post,George. (Err sorry, ‘Kelly’s eye’!)
Posted by on Jun 26, 2007 @ 06:05 AM
