By Max Musson:
It was Greg Dyke, at that time Director general of the BBC, who stated in January 2001 that the BBC was “hideously White”. This statement came in an interview broadcast on BBC Radio Scotland that month, in which he compared the BBC to the Metropolitan Police, who had been branded ‘institutionally racist’ by the 1998 Macpherson Inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the murder of Black teenager, Stephen Lawrence.
Dyke didn’t say that the BBC was racist, but he acknowledged that, like the Metropolitan Police, the BBC had a problem with race relations, stating that the organisation’s management structure was more that 98% White[sic], and he said the BBC was unable to retain staff from ethnic minorities and questioned if they were made to feel welcome.
He stated: “I think the BBC is hideously white. “The figures we have at the moment suggest that quite a lot of people from different ethnic backgrounds that we do attract to the BBC leave. “Maybe they don’t feel at home, maybe they don’t feel welcome.”
The director-general said a failure of the corporation’s equal opportunities policies was most noticeable at the highest levels, but that the corporation was committed to beating racism.
“Our biggest problem is at management level. I had a management Christmas lunch and as I looked around I thought, ‘We’ve got a real problem here’,” he said.
“There were 80-odd people there and only one person who wasn’t White.”
He added that by 2003, 10% of the BBC’s UK workforce and 4% of management would be from ethnic minority backgrounds.
Obviously, Greg Dyke’s perception of the BBC was rather different from that of the British public who have noticed that for several decades the growing prominence of non-White presenters and the growing disproportionate influence within the BBC of people from minority groups, be they religious, racial, or sexual minorities, and it was with an amazing display of ‘brass neck’ that one time comedian, Lenny Henry spoke out last year repeating the complaint that people from Black and ethnic minority backgrounds are under represented on the BBC.
Lenny Henry, who is Black and features regularly on television programmes and in TV commercials on commercial television, mentioned Black actors such as David Harewood, and Idris Elba, who he claimed have not received the opportunities they deserve. Yet a quick glance at Wikipedia shows that David Harwood has featured in no less that 51 different television plays, series and films since 1990, many of these in several episodes, in addition to sixteen films made for the cinema over that period. Furthermore Idris Elba has featured in 32 different TV programmes since 1994, some of these as the main or a prominent character in long running series, such as: ‘Dangerfield’ in which he appeared in 12 episodes; ‘The Wire’ in which he appeared in 37 episodes; and ‘Luther’, in which he played the starring role in which he appeared in 16 episodes. In addition, Elba has appeared in thirty-three films for cinema, in two of which he was laughably caste as the Norse god Heimdall, a role if ever there was one that should have been played by a White actor!
Lenny Henry also fails to remember: Trevor McDonald, who is of Caribbean ethnic origin; Matthew Amroliwala, who is of Asian ethnic origin; George Alagiah, who is of Ceylonese origin; Moira Stuart, who is of Caribbean ethnic origin; Liza Aziz who is on part Bengali ethnic origin; Mishal Husain, who is of Pakistani ethnic origin, and many more who have been prominent news and current affairs presenters over many years on the BBC. Furthermore, he fails to recognise that many of the people he regards as ‘White’ are in fact of Jewish ethnic origin and who therefore have a minority outlook as far as programming is concerned. He doesn’t recognise that Robert Peston, who is currently Economics Editor for BBC News, and who was replaced in his previous role as Business Editor for BBC News, by Kamal Ahmed (of Iraqi ethnic origin), is Jewish. Nor does he recognise that Nick Robinson, Political Editor for the BBC has Jewish ancestry.
Henry also doesn’t seem to recognise that a whole host of other BBC presenters, journalists, actors and entertainers are of Jewish origin — too many to mention — and that the current Creative Director of the BBC, Alan Yentob and the current Director of BBC Television, Danny Cohen are both Jewish. Jews may not be ‘Black’, but they do constitute a minority ethnic group, often with sensibilities that lie more with immigrants and non-Whites than with the indigenous British. So far from Black and minority ethnic groups being under represented within the BBC, they are if anything massively overrepresented, featuring on our TV screens massively out of proportion to their numbers within our society.
This fact was brought home to me this morning as I watched BBC breakfast news, which featured a sports report by Black sports presenter Ore Oduba, who is of Nigerian ancestry, who gave us a rundown on recent sports news, barely mentioning a single White athlete. I think he mention a White athlete in passing, once, possibly twice, but no more than that. All of the people featured by Oduba were non-White.
Oduba featured England cricketer, Moeen Ali and work Ali has been doing within the predominantly Asian community within which he lives, and Moeen Ali was prompted to talk about how his Muslim faith plays such a prominent part in his life.
Oduba then interviewed an Asian cricket coach about the part played by Asian athletes in British cricket; he also spoke gushingly about Usain Bolt, Jessica Ennis-Hill and Mo Farah, all of which are non-White or of mixed race, and in his coverage of motor racing focused his attention on Lewis Hamilton, the Formula One driver, who is of mixed race. One would think form watching this programme that all of Britains prominent athletes are non-Whites and while one may argue that in the sport of track and field athletics, non-Whites are disproportionately successful, that is not so of cricket and certainly not so of motor racing.
Lewis Hamilton is the reigning Formula One world champion and is leading the championship this year, and he has received much BBC coverage celebration his achievements, but he is a lone figure as the only non-White to achieve prominence in motor racing. If we contrast the prominence with which Lewis Hamilton features on television with Danny Kent, the twenty-two year old motorcycle racer who is currently leading the Moto3 world championship, having won five of the nine grand prix held so far this year, and only once finishing outside the top three. Danny Kent is the most successful British motorcycle racer since Barry Sheen, yet we find that he has never been mentioned on the BBC sports news — a strange and glaring anomaly!
‘Eddie the Eagle’ Edwards, the ‘heroic failure’ of the 1984 Winter Olympics ski jumping has been mentioned for frequently on British television this year than Danny Kent!
Possibly Danny Kent has not been mentioned because he is not particularly photogenic, or because he does not interview well and featuring him would not make good TV? However this is not so, he is a handsome young man who is serious, dedicated and articulate and shines out as a role model for young people.
The silence is more likely due to the fact that like many other sports, MotoGP is an implicitly White sport and that motorcycling in general is an implicitly White pastime, in which non-Whites rarely if ever feature. And so, just as with music, disproportionate prominence is given on television and within the mass media generally, to the genre of music that is of ‘Black origin’, and in which Black artists disproportionately excel, rather than the many other genres of music that are implicitly White, in which Whites excel and non-Whites hardly feature at all.
Far from the BBC failing to give prominence to Blacks and people of minority ethnic origin, the opposite is the case, as in keeping with the dictates of the Equalities Act 2010 and just like every other public institution, the BBC have a duty to promote multiracialism and multiculturalism and therefore give disproportionate coverage to ethnic minorities.
It has long been recognised that the media practice a policy of ‘blonking’, that is, ‘gettING Blacks ON Camera’, in order make the public accustomed to seeing Black faces everywhere, but in recent years matters have gone far beyond that crude beginning. Last year in response to Lenny Henry, Lord Hall, the Director-General of the BBC, promised that 15 per cent of the on-air BBC staff will be Black, Asian or minority ethnic (BAME) by 2017, a target that was clearly exceeded many years ago, together with 10 per cent of their managers. Furthermore, in order to help achieve these goals, Lord Hall announced a new group of advisors including Lenny Henry, para-Olympian athlete Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, and broadcaster Baroness Floella Benjamin, who like Lenny Henry is Black.
Among further measures to be introduced is a new “leadership development programme” for six BAME members of staff, to give them additional training and experience “right at the very top of the BBC”. The corporation will also establish a £2.1million “Diversity Creative Talent Fund”, which will be “reprioritised from other budgets” to help change the portrayal of ethnic minorities in its programmes.
A further six “commissioners of the future” will be trained specifically to work in comedy, drama, factual, daytime and children’s programming, while 20 BAME graduate trainee interns will be taken on by the BBC. Also, an “Independent Diversity Action Group”, chaired by Lord Hall, will also be set up help to oversee the changes, and will include Lenny Henry, Nihal, the Asian Network presenter, Tanya Motie, the BBC executive, Daniel Oudkerk QC, writer George Mpanga, and footballer Jason Roberts, all but one of whom are non-White.
It would seem that our TV viewing is going to feature an increasingly high proportion of Black and other non-White presenters in future, almost certainly in order to accustom we White British into regarding our looming minority status as something natural and inevitable. Never before have we needed a credible alternative White media, never before have we needed the fulfilment of the Six Prerequisites!
By Max Musson © 2015
# # # #
Stefan
- Edit
Again it proves there’s no democracy as we get this forced upon us whether we want it or not.
If the BBC moves to a subscription, then we can vote with our wallets & not pay for this propaganda.
Dan England
- Edit
Your so right Max, but I have a simple solution to this, I first use the Mute button And then the home button this shrinks the screen to the corner of the TV. Normally I rarely watch TVas it makes me want to puke, my wife is the TV adict however I use small mp3 device to listen to music, I can also watch family photos and videos preloaded.
It is not just the BBC that gives preference to ethnics they all do it, as it is all part and parcel of the UNs Agenda 21policy. If anyone hasn’t read it yet as I’m sure not many have, go to the “UK Column” website and download a succinct version of it
At one time subliminal adverts were considered a criminal act, it was classed as rape of the mind, of course these criminals that use this sort of thing now are capable of much worse. Even if there are no ethnic faces in the advert say just a hand, that is nearly always an ethnic even when a mask or other is worn, you can spot their perculula shape.
Reading in the paper today “That you could go to jail if you smack your child” children have always been checked as we all were,we never came to any harm it was usually for our own good.
Stefan
- Edit
The UN needs to get its own house in order before telling the rest of us what to do.
Albert
- Edit
If you look at BBC & Sky News, Blacks and Minorities are well over represented, Also when they have to get a so called expert on any subject the person will be Black or Asian……take a look at any sports event on TV 99% of fans will be white, but the camera will find a Black person and continuously hoover on this loan black person….Its laughable..at the same time deadly serious.
A Swain
- Edit
The United Nations mafia outfit is around 70% non-White which is why White nations need to withdraw from it and set up an international equivalent to cater for their own collective benefit and interests.
Heather
- Edit
“Never before have we needed a credible white media”
As a regular reader of this site, I have found mine.
I rarely watch any TV, firstly because most of it is banal,or tawdry and cheap, especially the so called reality shows which just seem to debase our people further, and pull them further away from reality.
I am outraged that such deliberate social engineering,and what I personally see as an anti-white agenda is going on under the banner of equality.
It isn’t equality if one side is being given more of a helping hand. Why should my Daughter sit side by side with a “minority” child, both be given exactly the same education and opportunities, yet the supposed minority child goes on to be given just that little bit extra just because they are black or Asian.
It also insults my very basic natural instinct of ancestral right. The “new British” as I think they are called are being handed everything they had no part in building, at the expense of those who it was all intended for.
Stefan
- Edit
I guess Lenny is paying back for all the kindness done to him, where as we see nothing but relentless propaganda.
A Mayer
- Edit
I have yet to go into our TV room without remarking ‘another black’. I have not watched the TV for years. Your article is true and quite depressing. Whenever I listen to BBC radio 4, I think ‘where do we come into this? as an Ahmed hands over to a Hussain, who hands over to a Shah, who introduces a Ghosh, another Ahmed, etc. Asians, Jews Blacks and others abound. One African who is quite unintelligible Adebojo I think, I have never listened to. It is all insulting to the intelligence.
.
Not for publication unles you wish. Would you please be careful with the pronouns, I hate pedantry and hope it is not taken as such, but there is a constant confusion of the AS pronouns ‘We’ plural of ‘I’ and ‘us’ the objective or dative case.- ‘To accustom we White British’ is obviously wrong. It is a persistent mistake and spoils the effect.
Max Musson
- Edit
Thank you for your comments. In your closing comment I assume you would rather I used ‘us White British’ in place of ‘we White British’?
.
To be absolutely honest, I have simply learned to speak, read and write English, by adopting the conventions, style and syntax used by the better educated of those around me, I have never consciously learned language structure in sufficient detail to understand what “objective or dative case” actually means. Similarly, I know what nouns and verbs are, because I was taught this elementary distinction in preparation for GCE ‘O’ Level English, many moons ago, but once you start talking about adverbs and pronouns, I don’t really know what you’re on about. I’m sorry if this makes me sound ignorant.
.
‘We White British’ sounds right to me, and now that you have focused attention on the phrase, it would appear to me to be a contraction of, ‘we, who are the British’, whereas ‘us British’ would be a contraction of ‘us, the British’.
.
‘We few, we happy few …’, a phrase used by Shakespeare, would appear to be comparable to ‘we British’, and it sounds right, sounding better than the alternative, ‘us few, us happy few’.
.
I may be wrong however and if so, feel free to press your case further.
Dan England
- Edit
I remember before my retirement, I was assistant coastal manager on St Mary’s Island, when a university professor came into the lighthouse and started picking faults with the wording on a poster. We the staff could not find fault with the wording verses what he suggested it should be. We all agreed that it made more sense than his suggestion. Later on asking the public what they thought about it they too said it made more sense to them.
.
Getting back to the ethnic usurpation of our country and its many institutions, is there nothing we can do now to take control and steer us away from the black abyss that seems to be in waiting?
.
My own feeling is we should have a People’s Militia, not a military one where the authorities would love to just flex their muscle and imprison its supporters, but a political one that can demonstrate against this sort of thing. Yes I know their are EDL and others but we need something more respectable, something the public could support without feeling they had joined a mob of yobs.
.
I still think that a People’s newspaper paid for by subscribers and handed out free is a way to wake our Fellow Countrymen up, I for one would subscribe to that all we need is someone with the skills and dedication to get it up and running.
Eric
- Edit
It’s quite simple. ‘We’ is a subjective pronoun (the subject of a clause). ‘Us’ is an objective pronoun (the object of a clause).
.
“WE gave it to him” and “he gave it to US” are correct.
.
“US gave it to him” and “he gave it to WE” are incorrect.
.
The subject does the giving in this case (active), and the object does the receiving (passive).
.
“‘We few, we happy few …’, a phrase used by Shakespeare, would appear to be comparable to ‘we British’, and it sounds right, sounding better than the alternative, ‘us few, us happy few’.”
.
This sounds right because ‘We few, we happy few’ is elaborating on ‘we’ in the previous line:
“But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers”
.
In the first line, ‘we’ is used correctly as the subject of the clause.
.
If you’re in doubt about whether to use a subjective or objective pronoun, see what the clause sounds like in a simpler form. For example, changing “To accustom we White British” to “It accustomed we to it” makes it sound wrong. “It accustomed us to it”, and therefore “To accustom us White British” is obviously therefore correct.
Walter Greenway
- Edit
It ain’t arf hot mum!
I am happy with that/this/your, now our, explanation. However I like reading Kipling, Prelutsky, Tolkien and John Clare etc.etc. poems occasionally because they make me smile – sometimes.
Having said/written that I am sure had I got (past tense) my head around modern English grammar years ago it would have made learning OE a lot easier.
Understanding Alfred’s use of OE grammar, for example, in his translation of Boethius’s work, [Alfred’s Metres of Boethious] would be very helpful and interesting.
Although personally I give King Alfred the benefit of the doubt despite the fact that some folk think it was actually a monk what done the work for him. But in either case Knut was greater/greatest and the irrelevance is unnoticeable.
Max Musson
- Edit
You have a unique sense of humour, Walter!
A Mayer
- Edit
Thank you for your comments.Examples of poor linguistic constructions abound. Very common, especially in the north, is the use of the dative ‘them’, as in ‘has he done them exercises?’ used as with the negro line ‘O dem golden slippers’. In a song it does not seem at all bad, eg Christy Moore ‘Them’s the boys will show you where to go’ as a colloquial Irishism. An American commentator on a film showing Muslim threats to locals in Burnley noticed the poor speech of the Lancashire women, saying ‘yet they were born in England.’Them’ was speaking as no educated person does. The worst thing is that Muslims and other foreign groups have surpassed the native English in many cases. Your example of contraction or ellipsis is accepted, the missing words are understood. It is just like a wrong note in music, the wrong usage jars personally in the case of ‘we’ and ‘us’. I won’t go on because it might be boring to others.
Tony
- Edit
Linguistics are part of our regional identity going back generations. It is a good thing rather than a bad thing.
SerpentSlayer
- Edit
I think such things are pedantry, the language is as it is spoken. I dont think you can make too many rules, they will only be broken as language evolves. If northerners speak differently, then they speak differently. If it wasn’t for the printing press, cinema and television broadcasts, I would wager we would all speak dialects that people from other regions would barely understand. I go by a rule of, if it sounds right, more fitting, more inspiring, then I use those words. Perhaps because I am a high functioning autistic, I find that if it fits, it fits and have no time for restrictive grammar rules, social etiquette and the like.
Dan England
- Edit
It is strange how a subject can shoot off in a tangent much different to what it started out as, the ethnic usupation of our media and institutions. This is like throwing a rag to a dog to take its attention away from attacking you, although I believe the lessons in grammar were not of that nature. I often wish that I had paid more attention to the subject, I wonder just how the generations to come are going to handle the subject with the text epidemic that we have today, like lol,4u, and the many other rubbershy things.
It would be nice to see more people commenting on this site as I know they are there, maybe the site needs a makeover to get a wider audience responding, I feel quite lethargic at times but I’m old there is no excuse for some of the younger ones.
touchstone
- Edit
Only morons watch television anyway.
Max Musson
- Edit
I wouldn’t quite take that hard a view. I believe that nationalists need to be cognisant of the mind-conditioning effect of most television, and that we should watch it selectively, choosing to watch only those TV programmes that are devoid of PC and cultural-Marxist propaganda.
.
We should acknowledge also the insidiously habit forming nature of TV viewing and should exercise the self-discipline to turn the TV set off and do other things in preference and resist the temptation to leave it turned on, operating in the background. We also need to periodically review our viewing habits and if we are unable to exercise the self-discipline required, then as you infer, we should opt to get rid of our TVs for good.