I think I have learned thanks to this forum that it is better to concentrate on positives than negatives. I acknowledge all the points that have been made by tactical voter, antz, breakfast news and BBC LDN. I have an opinion and all I ask is that all those in the forum respect that - as I respect their comments.
The Scottish opt out was still an absolute waste of BBC resources and licence fee payers money.
It was a NATIONAL election in which less than 10% of the seats contested were Scottish.
It's sickening how the BBC play up to Scottish nationalism- as an Englishman living in Edinburgh but often being back home, I find it particularly obvious. For example why do they need to revoice trailers for network programmes on BBC Two (I'm not talking about rewording them so they can say "on BBC One Scotland" at the end) with a Scottish voice. Are Scots really that naive? I think not.
I've made my views about Newsnight Scotland clear in another thread and won't repeat them- again Scottish viewers miss out on big name interviews and analysis that affects them to talk about the Scottish parliament- something that should be covered by Reporting Scotland.
Back to the election- BBC One Scotland essentially duplicated the coverage of the national programme but slower (priority rightly given to the potential audience of 45 million rather than 5 million for interviews etc.) and inevitably spent most of the first 2-3 hours reporting English results because the Scottish votes take longer to count!
An utter waste of money.
The analysis in London was no less relevant to the people of Scotland as it was to the people of Northumberland.
On the basis of the number of seats contested, surely the BBC should also be providing an entirely separate programme for London, for the North East, for the Midlands etc. etc. Why are Scotland and Wales special cases?
I hope than when someone gets a grip on BBC News spending they'll realise that such regional programming is patronising, misinformed, far inferior and ultimately ripe for the chop.
I think you can safely say that the majority of this forum agree with you Dunedin. You are correct about the wait for Scottish votes coming through.
I know you'd scrap Newsnicht - What would you do to Reporting Scotland though what is the solution here?? Would it just be better to split the BBC Scotland region up - or what??
I have no time for Galloway, but Paxman seems to spend his entire time trying to find an unanswerable question, and then repeating it over and over again.
What point was Paxman trying to make re Gallaway - that no one should ever stand against a black woman?
Re the overall election coverage, I have to say that I think all 3 channels (BBC, ITV and Sky) did themselves proud, and overall all did a very professional job.
I have no time for Galloway, but Paxman seems to spend his entire time trying to find an unanswerable question, and then repeating it over and over again.
What point was Paxman trying to make re Gallaway - that no one should ever stand against a black woman?
Re the overall election coverage, I have to say that I think all 3 channels (BBC, ITV and Sky) did themselves proud, and overall all did a very professional job.
No, the point that Paxman was trying to make - though didn't get a chance to because he didn't get past the first question - was that Galloway had used many questionable tactics in his campaign, not least of which was playing upon - and encouraging - the intense distaste that Muslim men in the community had for having a woman in a position of authority, and let's not forget that he was quite happy to be regarded by the less politically engaged as the official Labour candidate. Essentially, Paxman's point was to be that Galloway and his adjutants went out of their way to use the facts that she is black and female against her in every possible way; it was not simply that Galloway unseated a black female MP, it was that he had done so in such a despicable and dishonest manner.
I don't particularly wish to defend the approach that Paxman took towards Mr Galloway, because it was frankly rude and deliberately confrontational, and however much we all dislike Mr Galloway, it is important to at least show a modicum of respect to the office of a member of parliament. But as indefensible as Paxman's approach was, he was trying to make a very good point - that although Galloway was democratically elected, the means that he used to campaign and unseat his rival were as deplorable and unpalatable as Galloway is himself. Whatever Mr Galloway said on the night, his campaign was every bit about race and gender, and Paxman should be congratulated for attempting to highlight that fact, if not for his approach to doing so.
I have no time for Galloway, but Paxman seems to spend his entire time trying to find an unanswerable question, and then repeating it over and over again.
What point was Paxman trying to make re Gallaway - that no one should ever stand against a black woman?
Re the overall election coverage, I have to say that I think all 3 channels (BBC, ITV and Sky) did themselves proud, and overall all did a very professional job.
No, the point that Paxman was trying to make - though didn't get a chance to because he didn't get past the first question - was that Galloway had used many questionable tactics in his campaign, not least of which was playing upon - and encouraging - the intense distaste that Muslim men in the community had for having a woman in a position of authority, and let's not forget that he was quite happy to be regarded by the less politically engaged as the official Labour candidate. Essentially, Paxman's point was to be that Galloway and his adjutants went out of their way to use the facts that she is black and female against her in every possible way; it was not simply that Galloway unseated a black female MP, it was that he had done so in such a despicable and dishonest manner.
I don't particularly wish to defend the approach that Paxman took towards Mr Galloway, because it was frankly rude and deliberately confrontational, and however much we all dislike Mr Galloway, it is important to at least show a modicum of respect to the office of a member of parliament. But as indefensible as Paxman's approach was, he was trying to make a very good point - that although Galloway was democratically elected, the means that he used to campaign and unseat his rival were as deplorable and unpalatable as Galloway is himself. Whatever Mr Galloway said on the night, his campaign was every bit about race and gender, and Paxman should be congratulated for attempting to highlight that fact, if not for his approach to doing so.
This is absolutely right. Paxman was drawing on the conversation he'd just had with Tony Banks (and others) and was, quite fairly, putting the outcomes of that discussion to Galloway.