Unity, over at LC has kicked over a hornet’s nest with a piece - inspired by a Donal Blarney (hiss, spit) post, addressing intolerance towards the BBC’s various ethnic-targeted content.
Google Alerts must have gone crazy, as by 6am the usual trolls had surfaced.
Now, as long-time readers will be aware, I curry no favour for “political multiculturalism” - it’s a busted flush, as I have outlined in some depth. But that doesn’t mean that I don’t think a multi-ethnic/cultural society can’t work.
Also, I get very annoyed when whites claim that they’re being victimised and prejudiced against when an organisation seeks to redress its own bias towards the dominant ethnic populous. The argument against multiculturalism is not helped by such precious insecurities.
My response to two early comments is below: -
You will not get “White News†- content doesn’t need a silly prefix to be overwhelmingly white and usually male. A vast majority of content appeals to the majority population: who are white. Radio Two/Three/Four and a majority of the output on the BBC television service appeals to a White audience - otherwise they wouldn’t watch!
The BBC also appeals directly to local communities through local television, radio, and internet coverage. This again, is colour blind - yet the audience profile is, again, overwhelmingly white and the presenters/content reflect this.
And so, to involve a community with its own unique music and culture - who let’s not forget pay taxes, the BBC has some Asian and Black output, which seeks to address the institutionalised bias that leans - somewhat naturally - towards the native creed.
Now, I don’t actually agree with content aimed at a specific ethnic community. I think the BBC is already far too big, and much of its content would be happily produced by private enterprises - there is no shortage of entrepreneurial spirit in the Asian community!
I don’t see a role for the government (and by extension the BBC) in seeking to address a perceived/real bias. I don’t think *political* multiculturalism works - although I see no-reason why a multi-cultural society can’t work.
Back to the comments above. They convey the usual precious sensibilities. Let’s get one-thing straight, the dominant white population are not under siege. They’re dominant. There doesn’t need to be a “white†TV channel. White culture is already massively over-represented.
And by the way, there is no ethnic test before you can tune into Asian networks, so Lee’s membership-based point is redundant.
{ 4 } Comments
Although I largely agree with your comment it /does/ push my buttons when people refer to the Beeb as an organ of government.
Following Gilligan, and Labour’s emasculation of the corporation, how can you disagree?
Gilligan is exactly the reason I do disagree; Gilligan would never have happened if the Beeb were an organ of government, and the fact that the Beeb are as oppressed by this authoritarian government as the rest of us is not proof that they are part of it.
Well I don’t think they’re exactly an organ of the government, but certainly with their funding issues right now they have unwillingly or otherwise become as good as that. The lack of news about Labour government things is too conspicuous in its absence to think anything else.
Post a Comment