I’ve had a rather busy week, so apologies if the topic of this particular post now seems a wee bit dated.
The BBC, the British Broadcasting Corporation, is presently under attack regarding its policy towards broadcasting news from both England and Wales.
Firstly ,the Beeb announced on the 17th of November that it was to look at allegations that Wales is not getting fair coverage on the UK news network, on programmes like News at 10 and Newsnight apparently there is little or no coverage of the Welsh Assembly and Welsh affairs in general.
Not the first time this has arisen and as I pointed out here, the determinant of what news goes onto UK-wide network programmes, which obviously have a finite amount of time to cover an infinite amount of topics, is surely what is interesting and relevant to the largest proportion of viewers in the UK as a whole. Now, (again) as I pointed out previously, if people in Wales are bored with the rather parochial offerings delivered up by BBC Wales, you’d imagine that there’d even less interest in these everyday stories on behalf of the average viewer outside Wales. In its role as the UK’s public broadcaster, should the BBC be allocating a certain percentage of its time in every news broadcast to inform us that, for example, Mrs Jones had her handbag snatched on Swansea High Street or, for that matter, to tell the British nation that Dermot Ahern was up visiting Paisleyville today? In my opinion, no, that is why we have regional TV and the UK-wide network should be retained for the stories that interest and concern the UK as a whole.
Having read of this complaint from their Welsh brothers, the Campaign for an English Parliament rushed out a press-release*, making a complaint about how the BBC covers England and English matters. The core of their argument is if Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales can have their own “national” BBC then why can’t England?
Tougher one to answer.
And the answer has got to be, everything else being equal, then “yes” there should be a BBC England.
But practically what would it report on or do differently from what is already covered on “BBC UK”?
Politically, until England gets a parliament (and I know I’m venturing into Catch 22 ground here), then the macro political issues affecting the English are exactly the same those which affect the rest of us in the UK. At a micro level then the “local” issues are covered by the regional stations such as BBC Cumbria. England is, by far, the biggest part politically and economically of the UK, the news that is broadcast on "BBC UK" is connected invariably with what is going on in England, not N.Ireland, Scotland or Wales (hence the complaint mentioned at the beginning of the post). Take a small, but very important example, football. Look at the coverage given to the travails of the English national team over the last couple of weeks. OK, England has 85% plus of the population, but how much coverage has been given to the relative success of both the Northern Irish and Scottish teams in the Euro-Championship campaign? 15%? Divide that by two and you’re getting closer to the reality.
But where England loses out and where the CEP have a strong argument is that in the absence of a “BBC England”, English cultural or national identity is almost completely ignored by “BBC UK”. But in attempting to define “English culture”, then you are going to run into a helluva lot of stereotypes...well, yeah, but BBC Scotland, Ulster and Wales are quite happy to tell us exactly what it means to be Scottish, (“N”)Irish and Welsh on their respective Saints’ days. So why deny the English the same doubtful privilege on April 23rd?
I’m a UK Unionist, I’m interested in the history and culture of the four constituent parts of the British nation, but if I were to rely on the BBC, I’d learn next to nothing about England’s individual history and culture whilst being filled up to the brim with the events and background which have created the present-day N.Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
I don’t think a BBC England is necessary to fill that gap, but I do believe that much more emphasis should be placed on telling an audience in the UK and beyond exactly what it means to be English.
*Too rushed, two factual errors. There are 9, not 8, counties in the province of Ulster.
Secondly, the claim 45% of the N.Irish population are Catholic and, as a result, consider themselves to be a part of the "Irish Nation".
You don't have to be Catholic to be part of the "Irish Nation" and not all Catholics would consider themselves to be part of the "Irish Nation".
4 comments:
There is a lot that a BBC England could report that does not affect the neighbouring countries.
For instance, health and education in England are separate from Wales and Scotland, as is the desire for Labour to impose road tolls on English drivers.
20 cancer and sight drugs are denied to England's sick and dying. I think the whole of England would be interested in that, don't you?
On a national note, I really would like to see a national news station, which informed me about what was going on across England and not just have to be satisfied with local and world-wide news.
As far as English news goes, I hear far more about Scotland and what the Scots want, than I do about England and what we would like from our own government.
The English are denied their own national identity and part of that problem is the refusal of our broadcasting system to allow us our own programming, where the English (or if you prefer, the English residents) can hear national opinion and debate, which is central to England and not Scotland (in particular).
I am not British. I am English. We could discuss that if we had national programming. As it is, we have to be satisfied with a long line of Scots,, trotted out day after day by the BBC, telling us that we are British only.
There is room in my life for the British, but there is currently no room anywhere for the English.
A bit of recognition would be very welcome in my own nation.
Before anyone trots out the "mongrel" line of government rhetoric when anyone says English, I can confirm that having researched my family tree along many lines, my family have been here for hundreds of years and we have no Scots or Welsh mixed in there. That gives me the right to claim my nationality is English and I am not ashamed to say so.
That gives me the right to claim my nationality is English and I am not ashamed to say so
Even, if you'd some Scottish or Welsh "mixed" in your blood, you'd be still entitled to call yourself English. And nobody's is saying that you should be ashamed to be English.
Also, I think the "mongrel" rhetoric is used for the British national identity as a whole and I think the fact that most of us are a mixture of different backgrounds, ethnic, culturally and what have you; it is something to be proud rather than ashamed of.
"if the topic of this post is a WEE bit late" answers the question, you see to be Scottish is to be "proud and glorious", the Queen said so on opening Holyrood.
To be welsh is to be a nation apart, to be good at singing and rugby (well in the past it was the case) a little bit secretive, breaking into the mother tongue at the approach of a foreigner.
To be English ie to get the blame for all the world's ills, I've lost count of all the atrocities that Blair has apologised for or that Gorden will pay for.
The Queen.s priorities are Duke of Edinburgh, Prince of Wales and the Duke of York.
Most galling of all is that England is the only nation State in the whole of Europe without a dedicated Parliament.
Patrick Harris, Portsmouth, England.
"In my opinion, no, that is why we have regional TV and the UK-wide network should be retained for the stories that interest and concern the UK as a whole."
That's the problem, it's not like that now. Every story about Health or Education or University Fees that's on the BBC network, and there's a lot of them, have no relevence outside England. So What you already have is a BBC England operating across the UK.
If the BBC network did only concentrate on UK wide stuff, fine. But it's the fact that it keeps talking about English only policies, which has no relevance anywhere else that bugs people.
Post a Comment