Grabbing our attention by behaving like a spoiled brat

WHAT  a spiffing wheeze, those oh, so talented and clever Channel 4 executives must have thought.

Have Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, that well-known Jew-hater and president of a nation that funds terrorist attacks on British troops, give the alternative Christmas message! Fantastic idea!

“And yet,” those young, daring tribunes of free speech must have thought, “doesn’t this pose a moral dilemma for us?”

And of course, it does: after all, how on earth will Channel 4 be able to trump this next year? Having offended so many people in one fell swoop, who can they book for the Christmas Day 2009 slot who will offend even more people? Assuming Osama bin Laden’s agent still isn’t passing on messages, who can they get? Peter Sutcliffe, perhaps? 

And no, I’m not making an attack on free speech; I’m not suggesting Channel 4 should not have the right to book anyone they want for their silly little self-indulgent three o’clock slot. I’m merely exercising my own right to freedom of speech by suggesting that offering a platform to someone who thinks Israel should be wiped off the map, and whose country actively funds Islamist terrorism, is disloyal to one’s own nation and amazingly irresponsible.

But hey, that’s Channel 4 for ya – irreverent and whacky, those rascals will just keep on “challenging our preconceptions”, as they themselves might describe it.

The rest of us would probably prefer to call it pathetic attention-seeking.



Filed under International, Media, TV

10 responses to “Grabbing our attention by behaving like a spoiled brat

  1. Leave ’em Tom, they ain’t wurf it. And I’m sure someone can demonstrate how it’s all New Labour’s fault…

  2. Simon

    I wonder whether anyone in this Government ever thought about their own moral dilemamas when they lied to the country about the real reason for going to war in Iraq, or the real state of our economy, or the real level of crime.

    I suspect not.

    If you don’t like what’s on TV switch it off. If you don’t agree with someone’s opinion, debate it or walk away. Alternatively, you could always get Jacqui to send in the anti-terror police.

  3. You didn’t have to wait long, Brian.

  4. Simon

    Actually, I’m not sure I did demonstrate that it was New Labours fault.

    I merely pointed out that when faced with their own moral dilemmas, New Labour have chosen to lie to the country time and time again.

    It’s not the Tories, but those people who supported the New Labour project back in 1997 that have been most let down by it since.

  5. Some people (like the media and politicians) seem confused as to what constitutes ‘free speech’.

    I happen to agree with you on this one, Tom – and Simon’s first paragraph.

    Question – does C4 still receive any public funding?

    If so, could you have a word in the right ears and have it removed for what is possibly an act of treason and certainly one of failing the public.

    I didn’t watch it, but did Mr Ahmadinejad defend his regime’s severe persecution of converts to Christianity while delivering his “Christmas” message?

    I thought not.

  6. wrinkled weasel

    Tom you are getting too old for this game. When you start frothing at the mouth about what the embryos at Channel Four are getting up to, it’s time to take up Chicken keeping, like me.

    Let’s have a debate about who is running the media. I mean it. Let’s not get party political, because it goes deeper than that. It is about the world view of the kind of people who work at the BBC and Channel Four.

    Let’s start by asking if you agree that there is a general lack of intellectual rigour, not to mention a grasp of the language?

    Then let us ask how pragmatism has become the new “truth”. By that I mean the ease with which radio producers fake phone-ins and omit salient points that do not conform to a liberal aetheist view.

    I have read BBC reports that are riddled with biased language…you know the sort of thing, “so and so CLAIMS THAT” when they clearly don’t believe someone, but they cannot say that, or the ridiculous dreck coming out of their Middle Eastern coverage that would have you believe Hamas is a charity organisation or that black on black crime in London is not a stark reality.

    Let us not forget that there exists a cult of youth in these media organisations and that consequently it is full of naive and credulous young people who not only have not been around the block, but have not taken their eyes off their Playstations.

  7. Auntie Flo'

    I agree with both Tom and Simon on this one.

    That means I’d like that evil tyrant, Ahmadinejad, denied the right to propagandise here.

    However, in all conscience, I can’t see how we could ban him from broadcasting without also banning those nulabour politicians whose lies led us into illegal war and the shameful and senseless slaughter of innocents. I wouldn’t, however, ban those politicians who voted for illegal war, as most were mislead by liars.

  8. Chris' Wills

    Ahmadineejad is an evil man (and perhaps a little crazy), however he was elected in reasonably free and fair elections and as the leader of a major power in the mid-east hearing his thoughts espoused openly might bring home to people some of the dangers around the world.

    I fear that he says openly what a lot of his electorate (as well as people around the region) think; similar to Mahathir Mohamad when he ran Malaysia.

    Rather than hiding and concealing his actions and beliefs the media should be publicising it more, exposing them to the glare of publicity.

    Rather than preventing the showing of beheadings and stonings they should be widely shown. There are real sickos out there and burying our heads in the sand (or having the media and goverment seeking to conceal the truth by not allowing the images to be shown) does no-one any good.

    Doesn’t help the victims either, no news from Burma recently doesn’t mean peace has broken out just that getting news from there is difficult.

    Yes someone might not like the images, shame that and “Won’t someone think of the Children” criers should be told to burry their heads. Reality isn’t always nice and the world isn’t equitable nor fair.

    As for Channel 4; perhaps they’ll have the man who saved the world and champion of the bankers, your dear leader, give a speach on his moral compass and why it points anywhere but North?

  9. Johnny Norfolk

    Why do Labour fund C4. They are just like the BBC. out of control and with co concern or resonsibility to anyone. but the are paid by us. Gawd help us.

  10. Jim Baxter

    Where’s me well-thumbed copy of ‘The Art of War’? (Oh no, not Sun Tzu again – only the educated had heard of him until ‘The Sopranos’ spoiled it all).

    If you know yourself but not your enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat.”

    Substitute thines, thys, and thous to taste.

    So, let’s get a good look at the man, knowing what he really thinks. Let’s watch how ‘reasonable’ he can seem to be and learn, or, better, remember.

    I agree though that education was almost certainly not the purpose of the pimple-squeezers who offered him the spot, given the spot that it was. They would have been chuckling into each other’s spiteful faces about their own iconaclasm.

    By chuckling I, of course, mean another verb which connotes sleazy self-indulgence in all its forms.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s