P.K. Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said: That's been my suspicion as well. But it's worth pointing out that they shouldn't just be looking at a transcript - and to be fair it should be an independently-transcribed one anyway, not one supplied by the station. To get a true impression of what happened you surely have to listen to the broadcast itself. To rely on a transcript suggests you're back in the days of Lord Reith and all broadcasting consists of men in dinner jackets reading out carefully-checked scripts. As I understand it the Com Comm asked MR for a transcript. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 Just now, P.K. said: As I understand it the Com Comm asked MR for a transcript. Oh yes, I was just making the point that a professional regulatory body really ought to be (a) asking for a recording not a transcript and (b) transcribing it themselves (or getting a third party to do so). Apart from anything you get impression that their processes date back to the days of recording on reel-to-reel and transcribing involving typewriters. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 3 hours ago, gettafa said: Stu Peters of Manx Radio used his platform as a presenter to publicly mock & laugh at racism. Whilst speaking with a black man live on air, he stated that he has never experienced more privilege than a black person and continued to make racist remarks throughout the show whilst laughing off individual comments trying to stand up for black people. MANX RADIO WE NEED YOU TO ADDRESS THIS.. This man is currently classed as a PUBLIC servant yet can’t see the issues behind the level of racism experienced on the Isle of Man or in the world, nor has he shown any interest in educating himself on these matters. Amazing! She can even read Stu's mind... 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 2 hours ago, John Wright said: You’re looking at arse about tit. It was his response that is alleged to be the problem. They must suspend if there is prima face cause. There clearly is, in the current climate. And there you have the very nub of the issue, I am not sure that there "clearly" is a prima facie cause. Did Stu say anything to incite racial hatred or that racially discriminated, or was he just putting forward his view on the role of BLM in the IOM ? If the definition of racism is now that you do not unquestionningly back BLM, then we are all in a hand cart to hell. 7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gettafa Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 (just to be clear - the above post from P.K. is quoting me quoting the petition against Stu Peters) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 13 minutes ago, Gladys said: And there you have the very nub of the issue, I am not sure that there "clearly" is a prima facie cause. Did Stu say anything to incite racial hatred or that racially discriminated, or was he just putting forward his view on the role of BLM in the IOM ? If the definition of racism is now that you do not unquestionningly back BLM, then we are all in a hand cart to hell. But to prove that Stu has brought Manx Radio into disrepute, they don't, and never have had, have to prove that he a thoroughgoing racist or that he has broken the law regarding hate speech or discrimination. All they have to prove is that he has brought the station into disrepute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 32 minutes ago, Gladys said: And there you have the very nub of the issue, I am not sure that there "clearly" is a prima facie cause. Did Stu say anything to incite racial hatred or that racially discriminated, or was he just putting forward his view on the role of BLM in the IOM ? If the definition of racism is now that you do not unquestionningly back BLM, then we are all in a hand cart to hell. You’re another one missing the point. It’s not whether he’s racist, incited racial hatred or racially discriminated, it’s whether he’s brought the station into disrepute. Given the reaction, whether you agree or not, there is prima facie cause to suspend and investigate. It’s subjective to a degree and what might bring into disrepute one year might not do so another, and vice versa. It has nothing directly to do with racism, although that’s the peg it hangs on, the perception of support, or not, of BLM. its a classic folk devil and moral panic panic issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gettafa Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 Which is why there needs to be a strong hand at the tiller of Manx Radio. The boss is obviously a pleasant enough chap but that ain't enough. How can you prove the station has been brought into disrepute. If anybody is going by petitions - for what they are worth - the petition in support of Stu Peters is outweighing the one against and there are many more comments. (Incidentally, I see there are people using the wrong petition, judging by the comments). Seriously, how has the station been brought into disrepute? 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 48 minutes ago, John Wright said: You’re another one missing the point. It’s not whether he’s racist, incited racial hatred or racially discriminated, it’s whether he’s brought the station into disrepute. Given the reaction, whether you agree or not, there is prima facie cause to suspend and investigate. It’s subjective to a degree and what might bring into disrepute one year might not do so another, and vice versa. It has nothing directly to do with racism, although that’s the peg it hangs on, the perception of support, or not, of BLM. its a classic folk devil and moral panic panic issue. Ooh, you can be cutting!. If it is a matter of bringing the station into disrepute, why are the CC involved? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 9 minutes ago, Gladys said: Ooh, you can be cutting!. If it is a matter of bringing the station into disrepute, why are the CC involved? Not sure they are at present. MR has to go first. If they’ve received complaint, or MR have self referred, they may become involved. It may be the act that brought MR into dispute ( if that has actually happened) was a breach of their guidelines. Theres more than one thing running in parallel, different tests. Please note, I’m not saying Stu was, or wasn’t, racist or that his actions or words brought, or didn’t bring, MR into dispute. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kopek Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) It could be that Stu P was offered the chance to make an online statement and make an apology IF he caused any offense to ANYONE but refused, tore up his contract and told MR where to stuff it!!! Although a freelance contract, it may have had a notice period and MR are waiting for that to end to announce his departure? His relative silence may indicate that he is trying to save his job? ( but not his pride?). Edited June 20, 2020 by Kopek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 2 hours ago, gettafa said: (just to be clear - the above post from P.K. is quoting me quoting the petition against Stu Peters) Just to be clear I don't think it was Stu's best idea to post both petitions up together. But hey, courage never goes out of fashion... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 30 minutes ago, John Wright said: Not sure they are at present. MR has to go first. If they’ve received complaint, or MR have self referred, they may become involved. It may be the act that brought MR into dispute ( if that has actually happened) was a breach of their guidelines. Theres more than one thing running in parallel, different tests. Please note, I’m not saying Stu was, or wasn’t, racist or that his actions or words brought, or didn’t bring, MR into dispute. If MR didn't receive a complaint from the trio who rang in determined to be outraged then why was any action taken at all....? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 I suspect more people are outraged at the treatment of Stu Peter's to be fair. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted June 20, 2020 Share Posted June 20, 2020 25 minutes ago, P.K. said: Just to be clear I don't think it was Stu's best idea to post both petitions up together. But hey, courage never goes out of fashion... Not sure what you mean. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.