Gladys Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 12 minutes ago, John Wright said: I’m not suggesting it’s Newsnight. I’m trying to point out that responsibility varies with nature of retainer. It also varies with how that responsibility is discharged. And I’m doing it the fairest most neutral terms possible. I get your point, John, honestly, but the show he was mandated to present had a certain style, presumably blessed by the programming manager or whoever. His written contract was probably no more precise than "presenter" but as you know, it is not all about what is in a written contract. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 34 minutes ago, woolley said: I don't think so. Are we such children that a presenter cannot have a viewpoint? Well a lot of people seem to be such children that they get upset when someone actually contradicts a presenter's viewpoint. One thing I have noticed over the last few years is that those on the Right who scream loudest about "Freedom of Speech" then get terribly upset when anyone but themselves uses it. 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 28 minutes ago, woolley said: I don't think so. Are we such children that a presenter cannot have a viewpoint? What’s wrong with being unbiased? It’s not like there’s a counter-balanced show for people with opposing views is there? Anyway, Stu can have opinions even express them but his role is chair person and he has to treat all opinions with respect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 8 minutes ago, Declan said: What’s wrong with being unbiased? It’s not like there’s a counter-balanced show for people with opposing views is there? Anyway, Stu can have opinions even express them but his role is chair person and he has to treat all opinions with respect. There is nothing wrong with it. That's what news and current affairs is for, but this programme is not in that genre, it is entertainment. Anyone can come on with their opinion and have a go. I agree with your second point, but nobody was treated with disrespect. There is a difference between respect and agreement. In relation to the "white privilege" point it appears that the only way one can afford it sufficient respect for the BLM movement is to agree with it. Otherwise, you are a racist. That is unacceptable. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: Well a lot of people seem to be such children that they get upset when someone actually contradicts a presenter's viewpoint. One thing I have noticed over the last few years is that those on the Right who scream loudest about "Freedom of Speech" then get terribly upset when anyone but themselves uses it. This is disingenuous. The uproar is not about people contradicting a presenter's point of view. It is about them kicking up hysteria with the aim of having someone fired for holding that point of view and expressing it. Quite a difference. Edited June 21, 2020 by woolley 10 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Power Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 35 minutes ago, Declan said: I don’t care whether they had a chat beforehand and all decided to ring in. It can’t be the first time that’s happened. Stu’s the professional phone-in host - it’s part of the job dealing with difficult callers. School leavers in contact centres get training on dealing with difficult callers. But a phone-in host of twenty years, was “ambushed” because some callers were prepared and lost control of his tongue? Come on! I think I’ve explained my issues with the show. This is my reaction to the show I posted immediately after listening... “I’ve listened to it. I don’t think Stu is consciously racist. But he is totally unempathtic towards the experience of the first two male callers, interupts throughout openly laughs at them. The female caller that follows is at least spoken to with respect, but then has a good blokey chuckle about her with the next caller. The best radio phone in hosts respect the callers, listen to them draw out their experience. There is empathy and they don’t simply scoff and dismiss uncomfortable views. Manx Radio will never win my listening if this is the way its presenters treat the public. ” After reading the transcript of the first call I think the phrase “White privilege” triggered him and he made some ridiculous comparisons to being ginger or fat. He may not be racist - it’s more likely he just doesn’t care about the issue and so spoke with reckless lack of sensitivity. I think it's been exaggerated and blown out of all proportion Declan. He wasn't disrespectful to anyone and his 'laughing' was only in exasperation at being unable to get a word in at the rants and personal insults which were being thrown at him. If anyone was disrespectful, it was without doubt the callers. 8 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augustus Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 3 hours ago, Declan said: I do accept messages just the inbox is full, due to my subscription running out and subscriptions not being available at this time. Stu - you were not ambushed. Residents of the Isle of Man, rang a phone-in show on A station their taxes pay. On a subject you had commented on publicly that day. I don’t support your sacking. But this suggestion of “an ambush”, the continued lack of contrition or recognition that the show went wrong, and the lack of an apology even a merely-mouthed one along the lines of “I’m sorry if I unintentionally upset people” is pushing me into that camp. If there had been no recognition from the station that this was a fuck-up it would have sent a pretty clear signal to the thousands that demonstrated in support of BLM or expressed concern about your handling (and within the admittedly limited pool of my Facebook circle it’s been pretty universal condemnation) that Manx Radio isn’t for us. Which is a fair enough editorial decision for Energy or 3fm to make but not for a station our taxes pay for that our taxes pay for. Am loving how around 800-900 was unquestioningly reported as 1500 and is now mutating into "thousands". 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 38 minutes ago, Augustus said: Am loving how around 800-900 was unquestioningly reported as 1500 and is now mutating into "thousands". I actually wrote ... “the thousands that demonstrated in support of BLM or expressed concern about your handling” Well thousands signed the petition expressing concern about Stu’s handling of the call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 4 hours ago, Declan said: I do accept messages just the inbox is full, due to my subscription running out and subscriptions not being available at this time. Stu - you were not ambushed. Residents of the Isle of Man, rang a phone-in show on A station their taxes pay. On a subject you had commented on publicly that day. I don’t support your sacking. But this suggestion of “an ambush”, the continued lack of contrition or recognition that the show went wrong, and the lack of an apology even a merely-mouthed one along the lines of “I’m sorry if I unintentionally upset people” is pushing me into that camp. If there had been no recognition from the station that this was a fuck-up it would have sent a pretty clear signal to the thousands that demonstrated in support of BLM or expressed concern about your handling (and within the admittedly limited pool of my Facebook circle it’s been pretty universal condemnation) that Manx Radio isn’t for us. Which is a fair enough editorial decision for Energy or 3fm to make but not for a station our taxes pay for that our taxes pay for. He didn't do anything wrong though. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 3 hours ago, Declan said: I don’t care whether they had a chat beforehand and all decided to ring in. It can’t be the first time that’s happened. Stu’s the professional phone-in host - it’s part of the job dealing with difficult callers. School leavers in contact centres get training on dealing with difficult callers. But a phone-in host of twenty years, was “ambushed” because some callers were prepared and lost control of his tongue? Come on! I think I’ve explained my issues with the show. This is my reaction to the show I posted immediately after listening... “I’ve listened to it. I don’t think Stu is consciously racist. But he is totally unempathtic towards the experience of the first two male callers, interupts throughout openly laughs at them. The female caller that follows is at least spoken to with respect, but then has a good blokey chuckle about her with the next caller. The best radio phone in hosts respect the callers, listen to them draw out their experience. There is empathy and they don’t simply scoff and dismiss uncomfortable views. Manx Radio will never win my listening if this is the way its presenters treat the public. ” After reading the transcript of the first call I think the phrase “White privilege” triggered him and he made some ridiculous comparisons to being ginger or fat. He may not be racist - it’s more likely he just doesn’t care about the issue and so spoke with reckless lack of sensitivity. He dealt very well with a couple of tossers. He offered an alternative viewpoint. It's simply a coordinated witch hunt. I thought he was excellent as it goes. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hissingsid Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 There was a march of about 700 and a few dogs most looked like dozy students and I am sure none of the marchers knew what BMA is intent on they are not a group sticking up for the underdogs of this world they are insidious group who are trying to control by the divide and rule method. Did you see many colored people marching....no. Do you see colored people demanding to pull Winston Churchill’s statue down, not in the footage today just mostly students with nothing to do other than create trouble. 3 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KERED Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 4 hours ago, woolley said: I don't think so. Are we such children that a presenter cannot have a viewpoint? Of course a presenter should have a viewpoint, and state it, if he/she desires. However - my problem with Mr Peters was that he seemed unable to resist the temptation to keep harping on about it over and over and over again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 6 minutes ago, KERED said: Of course a presenter should have a viewpoint, and state it, if he/she desires. However - my problem with Mr Peters was that he seemed unable to resist the temptation to keep harping on about it over and over and over again. He didn't really. The caller was looking to be antogonostic (annoying chip on shoulder idiot) and Stu simply challenged him where appropriate and relayed his own life experiences. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 3 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KERED Posted June 21, 2020 Share Posted June 21, 2020 57 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said: He didn't really. The caller was looking to be antogonostic (annoying chip on shoulder idiot) and Stu simply challenged him where appropriate and relayed his own life experiences. Thanks DDB - I'm sorry that I was unclear. I was not thinking about the Jordan episode. What I meant to say was that my problem with Mr Peters was that during his years of hosting Talking Heads etc., was his incessant pushing of his own viewpoint over and over. 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.