The tragic death of George Floyd, the recidivist criminal killed while resisting arrest in Minneapolis, is widely believed to have been caused by racism lurking in every white breast.
Although Minneapolis is in the US and the first B in BBC points at its British provenance, our state broadcaster felt called upon to respond – by announcing blatantly racist policies of its own and thereby confirming the allegations.
Over the next three years the BBC, declared Director General Tony Hall, will be investing £100 million of our money to produce “diverse and inclusive content”.
That content will be produced by diverse and inclusive people: 20 per cent of off-screen talent must be black and other racial minorities, or else homosexual, crippled or coming from a “disadvantaged socio-economic background”.
I detect a possible loophole here, which we, licence fee payers, must be alert enough to close. A producer or a casting director who’s black, Muslim, one-legged, Lesbian and a former council estate dweller, must only tick one box, not five.
Anyway, this policy won’t just apply to off-screen talent. The output of BBC TV will be subjected to three “diversity tests”, and it must pass at least two of them to be adjudged fit for our delicately sensitive audiences.
The tests are: ‘diverse’ stories and portrayals, ‘diverse’ production teams and talent, production companies led by ‘diverse’ people. Allow me to translate: the BBC is introducing an ironclad racial (and other ‘disadvantaged’) quota that must be filled regardless of any other qualifications.
Presumably, if the requisite number of qualified people can’t be found within the mandated groups, then unqualified ones will have to do. And if this diversity adversely affects the quality of the output, then it’s just too bad.
I must be missing something, but I thought that having a race-based hiring policy violates every possible law dealing with equal treatment for all. This sort of thing strikes me as unmitigated racism, and I hope you’ll join me in a violent protest against such iniquity (bring your own Molotov cocktail).
Trying to find out whether producing discriminatory “diverse and inclusive content” is part of the BBC’s remit, I turned to the text of its Charter. This is what it says:
“The Mission of the BBC is to act in the public interest, serving all audiences through the provision of impartial, high-quality and distinctive output and services which inform, educate and entertain.”
I especially like the ‘impartial’ bit, and not only in view of the current developments. Over 90 per cent of BBC staff vote Labour at every election, which is predictable, considering that the corporation runs its appointment ads only in The Guardian, that celebrated bastion of impartiality.
The ruse works, judging by the unwavering left-wing bias of BBC programming. However, the Charter says nothing about “diverse and inclusive content”, and not even a word about compromising high quality for low politics.
Yet again the BBC unwittingly makes a case for the withdrawal of the licence fee. Let it fend for itself in an open market, to see how its “diverse and inclusive content” fares against the output of commercial channels. Best of luck to it.
P.S. On an unrelated subject, I’m amazed to see so many KIA cars on the road. One would think people would balk at buying a vehicle called Killed In Action.
Every time [well almost all the time] when a newscaster from Europe such as BBC or German Voice or France 24 is seen in the USA it is a minority person.
There won’t be any ‘almost’ before long. Personally, I don’t care what colour they are as long as they are the best candidates for the job. And I don’t see race as a sufficient qualification.
I’ve simply given up. I stopped watching all their new and current affairs output some time ago. Then I found I really wasn’t watching any drama or documentaries either as they always had a message that I mostly disagreed with. This also applied to ITV (as for Ch4 … I gave up years ago). So a few weeks ago I just cancelled my licence. I couldn’t abide funding that organisation anymore.
I was hoping Boris Johnson would tackle the BBC but he’s been so sidelined by the virus and it looks like Cummings may not be around for too long I doubt anything will change.
Now you mention this, I realise that the only things I ever watch on the BBC are the Queen’s speech at Christmas and — to my eternal shame — Match of the Day. Perhaps I’ll cancel my licence too.
How many at the BBC would board an airline built and maintained by workers hired based on race quota policies? Or suffer a loved one, or themselves, to be operated on by a surgery team also hired on that scheme?
I remember an incident in Russia when I was a child (my actor grandfather told me about it). The Soviets were big on amateur performances, theatrical, musical and choreographic, especially those involving factory workers. There were broadcasts, regular competitions glowingly covered in all the papers etc. One such competition had a jury headed by Culture Minister Yekaterina Furtseva. Afterwards, she made a speech, saying: “Isn’t it wonderful that a humble weaver is Ophelia and a simple turner is Hamlet? I’m sure that before long amateur groups will replace professional troupes.” Another member of the jury, the great actor Mordvinov, who was old and celebrated enough to feel he had nothing to lose, said audibly: “You idiot! Will you go to a turner when you give birth?”