Minorities and the BBC

Listening to and watching the BBC, it seems that the vast amount of their output of general programmes and news and news-related programmes, feature, advocate and disproportionately support minorities.

A big question for me is, if you added up most these minorities would that be or represent a/the majority? If the answer is yes, then thats fine – but if, as I believe the answer is no, then there is (and UK society has) a problem. The problem being that there is no ‘representation’ of ‘normal’, ‘middle of the road’ people and their values, beliefs or opinions – and that is just on the BBC, never mind politically or more widely.

I recall that when I worked in the field of management and leadership development, there was little or no media available on good and effective management or leadership. This was largely because that was not entertaining and even seen as boring. It’s the same with most ‘commercial output’ on ‘analogue’ or ‘digital’ media – and certainly the BBC. Where are the ‘normal’ characters and/or plots on The Archers, Eastenders or Emmerdale? There used to be a lot on Coronation Street but even that has changed.

Whatever the reason, the BBC are obsessed with representing what they see as reality, in and around Portland Place. regarding our obligatory and apparently inevitable ‘diverse’ society. Listening to the Today programme on Radio 4 this morning, they had am ‘un-checked’ view from a representative of one of these minority groups “The way England is going to look in the future”… If that is not social engineering or brainwashing I don’t know what is. Then there was a feature supposedly about ‘classical music’ and even that was a thinly disguised focus on ethnic minorities.

There is, by the way, nothing inherently wrong with a ‘diverse society’, but not on this scale or so fast.

It is not necessary to name these key minorities, as anyone reading this will know and understand what and who they are. Amongst other things, the big issue seems to be, why are the publicly-funded BBC (and others) focussing on these groups – what is their motivation or objective in supporting, encouraging or possibly accelerating such social engineering and change?

The myths about ‘popular music’ in the late 20th and early 21st centuries…

I have read a number of posts on Twitter recently that have encouraged me to write this short blog, which some are likely to feel is somewhat of a diatribe.

These Twitter posts are not infrequent and reflect views clearly and widely held, that so-called ‘popular music’ is…and should be seen as… ‘on a par’ with music that is commonly described as ‘classical music’. Such a myth has been developed and encouraged by the ‘music industry’ (and in the case of the Beatles, by the city of ‘Liverpool’) over the last few decades and has meant an almost universal brainwashing of global citizens that this is indeed the case and that it is all accepted as ‘music’.

In the strict sense of a definition, of course, much of it is ‘music’, but the key issue for me is whether ‘art’ and especially ‘great art’ (of any type) is determined by the level of great (public and massed) adulation OR by its great content and quality. For me it is and should always be the latter.

It just cannot be, that even the ‘great’ Beatles, who managed to strum a few naive, repetitive and bland chords on a guitar to accompany some arguably catchy lyrics, could possibly be compared with even the weaker output of, say, JS Bach, Mozart, Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky or such composers. This is, frankly, an insult to anyone with reasonable senses or sensibilities.

So how have we arrived and this ludicrous point in civilisation given that, up to now and especially following the ‘age of enlightenment’, things have generally move forward and improved. I don’t have the answer for this ‘u-turn’ in our development as human beings, but it is clearly accelerating downwards based even on a cursory analysis of, say, Spotify. There we see a lot that makes even the Beatles look vaguely acceptable.