Reply from BBC

[Sentry 4]

25 November 2011

Dear Mr xxxxxxx

Thank you for your recent correspondence and for the petition which you handed in to BBC Scotland, Pacific Quay, on Saturday 5 November. I will herein address each of the points you raise, as noted in my email to you of Friday 18 November.

Firstly, let me assure you that there is no institutional bias within BBC Scotland for or against Rangers FC or its fans (or, for that matter, for or against any other football club or its fans). Nor is it the case, as you contend, that BBC Scotland "(highlights) Rangers FC and its fans in a negative light at every opportunity" - the BBC Scotland 'Blue Heaven: where are they now?' documentary broadcast in May 2011 (the follow-up to the earlier six-part series on the progress of Rangers' young apprentice footballers) offers but one example contrary to the contention.

In all of our reporting we seek to ensure that we maintain the standards expected of us, by providing fair, accurate, informative and impartial journalism. In so doing, however, it is inevitable that the stories we report will not always be in tune with all of the views held by our audiences, varied as those views will be. Nor will it be the case that the perspectives offered and opinions expressed by commentators and programme contributors will meet with universal agreement or approval. However we do, at all times, seek to provide an appropriate platform for a range of views to be aired on issues of topical interest. And in so doing, we strive to ensure that the BBC's quality standards are consistently met.

You note in the petition that you wish "to highlight the behaviour of certain employees when referring to Rangers fans in derogatory and offensive terms." I am uncertain exactly to whom you refer, as there is no specific reference to any member of BBC Scotland staff included in the document in question.

You also submit that "there are "elements" within BBC Scotland who are acting against the best interests of the BBC code of conduct for reasons best known to themselves." Again, without specific details, it is difficult to address the issue you raise.

What I can say, however, is that all employees of BBC must adhere to a code of conduct that accords with our values as a publicly funded broadcaster and we have rules and regulations in place to ensure that any behaviour which runs counter to those rules and regulations is dealt with quickly and effectively.

You also note the previous demonstrations held by members of your group at Pacific Quay and questions asked of BBC Scotland management. As noted in my email of 4 November, all complaints previously submitted by you and your group have been answered in detail. As noted then, and again here, where editorial failings are identified or mistakes made we will always try to acknowledge these as quickly as possible.

You contend that, in your opinion, "nothing has changed within BBC Scotland since (your) last protest." Please be assured that BBC Scotland is aware of the importance of the issues you raise and the sensitivities which surround those issues. Where there have been errors in editorial judgement we have sought quickly to correct them. Where apologies have been required, we have readily made them. However we do not accept the contention that, underpinning our journalism, is behaviour or values, personal or institutional, that call into question our impartiality as a broadcaster.

In your previous correspondence you also made reference to photographs which you contend were taken of your group (at previous demonstrations) from vantage points within the Pacific Quay building and subsequently posted on websites related to Celtic FC. As noted in my email of Friday 4 November and in conversation with you when delivering the petition on Saturday 5 November, if you can supply evidence of this to me I will happily look into the matter.

Yours sincerely

Ian Small

Head of Public Policy & Corporate Affairs

[BRITNEY IS NOT FEELING IT 8,293]

Complete Horse Shit

[ScottBF2 3,540]

Email him with the examples he wants, if he's as helpful as that then there won't be a problem.

It's not as if you were expecting him to say "After careful investigation into our daily proceedings, we have realised the BBC offices are indeed infested with Earl's, we will be submitting each of these taigs to 3 hours of electric shock to the knackers at the earliest possible opportunity."

[maxiblue 18]

this is complete nonsence,just goes to prove that bbc dont want to address this glaring act of BIAS against RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB. NO ONE LIKES US,WE DONT CARE!!!

[thebooler 4,509]

Another example of someone at the BBC saying a lot, but not actually saying anything at all.

[Columbo 588]

It'd be interesting to see the original letter that was sent.

To be fair to the BBC in this instance and indeed any company will(and please do not take this to believe I don't think their coverage has been fair) never concede they are in the wrong unless specific examples are put to them that in effect forces their position

[jmo21 15]

Email him with the examples he wants, if he's as helpful as that then there won't be a problem.

It's not as if you were expecting him to say "After careful investigation into our daily proceedings, we have realised the BBC offices are indeed infested with Earl's, we will be submitting each of these taigs to 3 hours of electric shock to the knackers at the earliest possible opportunity."

This.

You need to give him points to address, not woolly statements.

[StuartM6 279]

What a lot of shit.

[ForeverBlue_Since91 2,895]

Well there not going to say there is a biased against Rangers are they? and the bit about them taking photos of the fans protesting the last time what can he do about that?

They are not journos they are just people who work in the office. None of them probably have any real importance.

[3rfc2 3]

Craig Whyte 'see you in court bbc' fecking bullshitters

[watp_72 33]

Well there not going to say there is a biased against Rangers are they? and the bit about them taking photos of the fans protesting the last time what can he do about that?

They are not journos they are just people who work in the office. None of them probably have any real importance.

Doesn't matter what position they hold, all staff were told it was forbidden.

[Senna 735]

What do you expect from a pig but a grunt?

[Bothwellbear 1,392]

you need to give examples...

[Govan Front Antz 15]

This.

You need to give him points to address, not woolly statements.

At least some people are doing something about it, unlike the joint action group and let's not get started on follow follows reluctance to acknowledge the problem or the protest.

[bluenose48 951]

Did you seriously expect anything else but that reply.

[MayboleLoyal_atb 3,724]

Am not being smart here but surely you sent him examples?

[MasterD 7,436]

Can you post the letter that was sent to the BBC?

[derek1872 548]

No offence to you mate as you are doing something constructive. You need to give references to your points. You can't just send a letter calling them a bunch of charlatans and claim they hate us. The response you got was the response you would have got from anywhere.

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

No offence to you mate as you are doing something constructive. You need to give references to your points. You can't just send a letter calling them a bunch of charlatans and claim they hate us. The response you got was the response you would have got from anywhere.

Dare I say it, but given BBC Scotland's modus operandi, had Sentry (or anyone) given them a 100-page-long bullet list of their indiscretions a similar response would have been forthcoming.

The only way to really deal with these gutter-dwelling vindictive publicly-funded bastards is to drag them through the courts of public opinion - show them up for what they are - then close the fucking thing down.

The obligatory BBC Licence Fee is an anathema.

Cut off their money I say - fuck the lot of them.

[Misteral 2,932]

Well done OP for at least writing to them but response was as expected. I think if you had named and shamed specific journos they would have rubber eared you completely or said they would look into it and come back with a no case to answer. Bang Head Brick Wall blah blah

[nelsonRFC82 305]

I think this reply has actually given you the opportunity to provide him with specific examples (Kevin "h**" Thomson, being called DOBs on Off The Ball, regular reporting on sectarian related news events from Ibrox, even when the discussion was about Lennon being attacked at Tynecastle!...that's jsut off the top of my head) and then invite comment on them.

One thing really jumped out at me; "Where there have been errors in editorial judgement we have sought quickly to correct them. Where apologies have been required, we have readily made them. However we do not accept the contention that, underpinning our journalism, is behaviour or values, personal or institutional, that call into question our impartiality as a broadcaster.".

I would guess this is his attempt to brush over the "inappropriate editing" of the McCoist footage. Has it ever been asked of the BBC; Who/How many were involved in the editing of this footage? Have they provided an explanation as to their motive in taking the decision to edit the footage in this way? If so, what was this explanation? Are they still employed by the BBC?