In
news:[email protected],
Tony W <
[email protected]> typed:
>>
>> That would be a first :-/
>
> It fails the test. Replace 'cyclist' with 'black' or 'jew' (or any other racial stereotype of your
> choice) and see if it is still legal.
>
> No -- not funny then.
>
But if it were IT personnel?
Seriously though, I must say I have not heard the programme, but it maybe worth a complaint to the
BBC if it is *really* that bad. *and* to the MD of the independent producers of the show (if
applicable). Whilst (due to the tradition of providing free speech_ a small number of complaints
*isn't* enough to haul a show off air in the UK, the broadcasters complaint handling procedures
oblige the producer or staff acting on their behalf to respond. This creates an extra administrative
work burden to the broadcaster and producer, and increases the cost of providing the programme. In
an increasingly cost-concious media world, this may well mean that the producer is less likely to
produce material that creates an influx of these complaints, for fear of not receiving future work.
This tactic has been successfully used by campaigning groups to dissuade both broadcasters and
private sector companies from sponsoring or commissioning material the groups find offensive.
IIRC the BBC already feel there are enough cyclists to be able to stuff the e-ballot for the
inventions poll. If a few of us said we were going to press for licence fee abolition if
anti-cyclist propaganda continued to be transmitted by the BBC, maybe they *would* listen
Alex