The bbc, again.

[Wisbech Eagle]

Covering the important stories as usual.

Marmalade to be rebranded in post-Brexit food deal

The breakfast favourite will be legally renamed when Britain aligns with new EU labelling rules.

www.bbc.co.uk

Hardly important but interesting to some.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

I’m sure Wissie is wetting himself with excitement

Why would I get excited over this? It’s interesting and I can see both sides of any argument but this is down to the EU and not us. It will quickly feel normal.

 

[Spiderman]

Why would I get excited over this? It’s interesting and I can see both sides of any argument but this is down to the EU and not us. It will quickly feel normal.

Nothing about the EU is normal

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Nothing about the EU is normal

Is obviously an opinion I disagree with but more importantly has nothing to do with the fact that any relabelling, for whatever reason, quickly becomes normal.

 

[ASCPFC]

Covering the important stories as usual.

Marmalade to be rebranded in post-Brexit food deal

The breakfast favourite will be legally renamed when Britain aligns with new EU labelling rules.

www.bbc.co.uk

These are the stories the BBC does best.

 

[Phil’s Barber]

So he was investigated by the Police in 2016 and the CPS decided not to prosecute him.

Of course his defenders are saying why sack him because he did nothing wrong (criminal).

I think the more pertinent question, is why sack him now?

As I mentioned before you do not have to be guilty of a crime to be sacked, reputational damage is a justifiable reason for sacking someone e.g. an inappropriate relationship. So what has changed since 2016? Why did they not sack him then?

If he does decide to sue the BBC I expect his defence will be that the BBC looked at all of this in 2016 and decided nothing to see here. If there is no new evidence he may have a case, why did the BBC change their mind.

From the BBC's POV one reason why things may have changed is if he lied to the BBC back in 2016 and this has now come to light e.g. I never met the person don't know who they are and then proof of contact has now come to light or something like that

None of this requires a criminal conviction just that the BBC is satisfied he has not been truthful.

We shall see.

The Scott Mills alleged victim turns out to have been under the age of 16…

BBC’s own article here…

BBC sacked Scott Mills after learning alleged victim in police investigation was under 16

It comes as Mills released a statement saying he had "fully cooperated and responded" with the police investigation in 2018.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Badger11]

The Scott Mills alleged victim turns out to have been under the age of 16…

BBC’s own article here…

BBC sacked Scott Mills after learning alleged victim in police investigation was under 16

It comes as Mills released a statement saying he had "fully cooperated and responded" with the police investigation in 2018.

www.bbc.co.uk

The BBC appears to be saying that they either knew nothing about the original investigation and certainly didn't know the age of the victim until 1 year ago.

I do think it's possible for the BBC to be unaware of the investigation, if Mills chose not to mention it, and the police didn't feel the need to talk to the BBC.

I've known people convicted of a minor offence and the company we worked for were unaware, if they had known they would have been sacked.

However the question remains when did the BBC become aware of the age of the victim if a year ago why did they do nothing until recently?

 

[PalazioVecchio]

And so, the BBC seem to have given Nigel & Sharon another hammering ?

 

[Badger11]

BBC to cut almost one in 10 staff in £500m savings

The BBC's interim director general says the cuts will require "some big and some difficult choices".

www.bbc.co.uk

I think we can guess why the BBC hired their new DG from Google.

It's about time the corporation has been overloaded with management and DEI. The question is were will they make the cuts? In my career I have been through this process 3 times, the first time the management hit the staff which was never the problem and eventually they had to hire more staff. The 2nd and third times they got it right and removed the bloated middle management.

 

[Badger11]

BBC director-general urged to axe News 24, BBC3 and Radio 2

Insiders are urging Matt Brittin, a former Google executive who takes over next month, to resist the temptation to 'salami slice' BBC departments and channels to achieve the drastic cuts.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I'm inclined to agree with this article.

When you need to make cuts it's better to identify specific areas rather than telling each department to cut by 10%. That never works and often departments that need extra money are held back whilst the useless ones keep their jobs.

BBC New 24 is a station that nobody watches and was supposed to rival CNN which it clearly has failed to do.