Friday, 7 July 2017

How the BBC killed off disabled activism.

Image result for disable the BBCDisabled on social media complaining of the BBC fee system and its god-given right to open our wallets and take whatever it wants, under dire threats of heavy fines or even goal, for owning a TV set.  

Notwithstanding its sheer bias of its output, it raised issues when they decided to stop disability dissent on their youtube and other websites, or supporting the disability campaigns.

We could look to their dedicated  'disability' dept, but many of us recall when the BBC kicked the disability activists out and only allowed sanitised reporting of disability issues, and complaints when the BBC itself fell short, they also removed feedback from the SEE HEAR programs for the deaf, simply because many complained it was non inclusive and biased output, and only aired because the law said they had to include, despite low ratings FROM deaf viewers.  

The BBC wanted 'hard luck' stories, and tales of 'heroic' deaf and disabled people a complete an patronising approach to the issues disabled people face.  They did not want to air concerns made from the the disability lobby sectors, who produced facts that rattled the patronising cages.   It still continues where dedicated disability programs were not supported.  

We were told SEE HEAR will continue ad infinitum even if no-one watches it, because 'it is the access law'.  A perpetual gravy train for the deaf boys and gals, whose expertise goes no further than the local deaf club, if that.  Or even those who never set foot in one.  Like some off-shoot of the dodgy hand shake communities like the Freemasons, only BSL is your automatic entrance card.

What we see of BBC and disability attitudes, is some weird 'luvvie' set up of the chosen few who post on disability issues who are heavily backed or involved with charities who won't challenge the systems discriminating against us, few of those charities or systems with any grass root members either, because we get in the way of their corporate approaches, and challenge the priorities they project. 

One leading disability/deaf journalist alone at the BBC, is reputed to be supported by 43 different charities,  atypical of 'career disabled' who just love to support anything and everything with no real aim in sight, because they gain prestige and kudos so doing.  Primarily such bloggers receive help to promote own blogging with very little own participation or view.  The charities in turn get free adverting, and maybe a few more donations we cannot say where it is spent.. Most disabled activism of the BBC was closed down a few years ago, and Deaf BSL activists removed altogether, for abusing other posters who demanded inclusion.

Although there is an online equivalent (OUCH too), it has lost totally the vital option of using the BBC to highlight real issues. You cannot respect the disabled contributing to the BBC at present, or those that toned down raising issues to avoid being dumped too, and when others offer articles to the BBC, they want to alter 70% of the wording 'in case charities were offended..' or 'other disabled might be', or even some obscure unrelated minority may not like it, in effect no valid criticism or alternative to the status quo was allowed. It is so Political Correct no balance is viable. Democracy it isn't.  

No real activism is tolerated. No real issues can be raised where many would be able to see them, of course we have social media, but that hasn't proven a real tool to disability activism, it has simply fenced in the activists to talk to own kind neutralising them in 'closed sites', where the main aim is to talk to yourself or the already converted as they are closed sites, mainstream ignores them.   

Why should any of us pay so much money to bolster up a national TV channel that does not allow national participation ? and does what it likes ? Today's ads on the website ask "Send us your stories..' they then send them back to you until they approve of the wording !  wording that is perfectly acceptable on social media and newspaper sites. What moral high ground does the BBC think it has a right to ?

If the Americans were told to pay a subscription to a TV channel (Or else !), where the actual output was pure self-indulgence, it would never have been aired at day one for sheer arrogance, in the UK it is a national treasure.......... Which suggests we are poorer than even we think we are !

[ATR invites the BBC to air this] !

No comments:

Post a Comment