LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksPersonally I think the BBC have gone way over board with Mandela's passing. Its just been totally saturated. That's just my opinion of course just asking if other people agree disagree? Although the highlight must of been the signing guy
Personally I think the BBC have gone way over board with Mandela's passing. Its just been totally saturated. That's just my opinion of course just asking if other people agree disagree? Although the highlight must of been the signing guy
I don't think so. In terms of global relevance, I don't think there are many to match Mandela's importance since 2000. Probably John Paul II did. Possibly Ronald Reagan? I'm sure there are others but no names are springing to mind at the moment. Even in terms of celebrities, there aren't many outside of Michael Jackson, and I would always prefer coverage about someone like Mandela than Michael Jackson.
I do have gripes with it, primarily because none of it is news, per se. It's all just biographies, memories, recollections, etc, because nothing new has happened in a long time. All of the stuff broadcast, excluding the news surrounding his funeral, could equally have been broadcast months ago. But I accept that it's going to happen, and if people don't know, there's going to be no better time than to inform about it. The main difference with me though is that I use the BBC website, so I get to choose what I read. And once I've had enough about Mandela, there's still just as much coverage on other relevant things.
I think the people who got most frustrated were those relying on the TV and radio, where if you've got no interest, you still have to sit through loads of coverage. But then to my mind, in the web-enabled era, that's your own choice to let someone else pick what content is relevant to you.
Yes, I think they've gone way, WAY overboard. And way too one-sided, too. Mandela for all the good he did, had more then one side. The way the BBC have been covering him, anyone would think he was Mother Theresa, Mahatma Ghandi and John the Baptist, rolled into one. And the BBC aren't the only guilty ones.
I think that man deserve that. Just because of him lot of people walking on the earth and earning billion of money. Simply the American president is there because of his revolution .So i think he deserve not only BBC but the attention of all the channels in the world [my opinion]
if(lifeGivesYou == lemons){
makeLemonade()
}
With 24 hour news channels covering the whole thing, i really don't see the need for the extent of coverage on BBC1. They just end up with 2 channels showing the very same thing.
It was a newsworthy event that deserved coverage, but effectively a week of BBC eulogising was way OTT (IMHO of course) in fact it got to the point where I was changing channels to avoid coverage.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")
Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute
Likewise.Originally Posted by peterb
It reminded me of Princess Diana's death. Shocking, and newsworthy. But the media latched onto it like a Doberman with a favourite bone .... they won't let go of it for a minute, and snarl at anyone that tries to take it away from them. And the print press, or some of them, are still milking it to this day.
Yes, Mandela was important, and yes, it needs decent coverage. But respectful coverage of actual news, like the actual death, memorial and funeral is fine. Countless talking heads, interviewed by virtue of once having been on the same continent as the man, droning on for hours on end? No.
I like watching the Marr show on Sunday morning, but am not around when it goes out. So I record it. This morning, some BBC planning dunderhead decided to put Marr on BBC2 instead, and show Mandela on BBC1. So naturally, the recording failed. Why these idiots couldn't have just put Mandela on BBC2 instead, and left Marr alone, beats me. But no, they have to screw around with BBC1 and BBC2.
Yep. Lots of other interesting stuff going on at the mo, like gay sex in India being banned again thanks to a coalition of religious scum, but barely a mention.
Saracen (15-12-2013)
Question Time in Jo'burg last week was convened to discuss Mr Mandela's legacy. From what I heard, South Africa is in for a very torrid time. The lid looks set to come off the box that Mr Mandela was keeping closed.
If Mr Mandela's legacy is that he temporarily prevented the demise of his Country, he wouldn't be happy with that and if you think South Africa is in the news too much now, you just wait.
Fed up of it now, and I see the family are starting to milk it for every penny.
Capitalization is the difference between helping your Uncle Jack
off a horse and helping your uncle jack off a horse.
Trying not to sound disrespectful but one BBC channel is enough for coverage ! I like my politics in the morning .
I think the BBC just reinforce what you are meant to think, somebody who could bring about more equality would deserve 24 hr coverage, not just for a tiny % of black people.
wasn't he the leader of a recognised terrorist organisation?
□ΞVΞ□
Respect other cultures. Don't try to impose your own beliefs and values on them just because yours are different to theirs.
I don't respect any ideal, belief or culture that passes laws based on sexuality. What the law is doing is imposing the beliefs and values of one group onto another.
But it is okay to impose your belief on others if the magic sky fairy tells you to?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
