Should the first news item ever be sports results on the BBC news?

[Jeffrey Shaw 88]

"World will end tomorrow; but more of that later, after more sport!"

[ECCOnoob 1,016]

I agree with you before it starts all we hear is the Olimpics for me it is London that will benifit from the games not me in Inverness even though I as a tax payer have paid the cost of it.

The BBC are well out of order using 75% of air time for the Olimpics.

It is all London 2012 not the rest of the UK.

 

We as english taxpayers might object to Scotland's no tuition fees and your free prescription charges. BUT we dont have a choice. It comes out of general taxation. Just like our taxes paying for some of the cost of the Olympics. Just like some of our taxes pay for unemployed to sit at home. Just like some of our taxes have to pay for schools and care fees when we dont even have children ourselves. Some of our taxes have to pay for the NHS when some of us already pay for our own private healthcare.

 

The point is..... Just because YOU dont like it ..... so what?

 

The money the Olympics generate, the increased status of the country, the income and increase to the public purse from the increased trade will all go into the same pot. The public purse which covers everything - including some things YOU would be benefit from.

 

Of course the event is Londoncentric. Why wouldn't it be? Its our capital city after all. Its hardly going to have the same inpact as the Preston or Durham Olympics is it. Besides, your city was not ignored. The olympic torch went through just like everywhere else. Thousands lined the streets in Scotland to see it. Perhaps its just YOU who doesn't like it.

 

The BBC as our public funded broadcaster is of course going to show as much of the huge rare public event taking place. There are dozens of other channels and hundreds if you have sky. Just switch over.

 

Why do so many people think just becuase THEY pay taxes and licence fees they have a right to dictate how THEY want it spent. We all have to pay, and it covers a hell of a lot. We have a say each and every election. What do you want, personal consultation of everything and everyone?

[ECCOnoob 1,016]

It always used to be that the first part of the news was current affairs and politics and the second shorter part was sport. That allowed those not into sport to avoid that section and those not into current affairs and politics to avoid that part. It was a system that worked very well.

 

I don't know why it was changed. Last night's news was

 

4 minutes of sport

4 1/2 minutes of current affairs and politics

1 1/2 minutes more sport

 

Because, as you have been told several times now, the producers will decide on what is new and relevant.

 

On a Sunday, there is most likely very little happening in the world of politics which is actually NEW news. Therefore it slips down the agenda.

 

The terrible tradegy in the US cinema was OLD news as it happened the day before and had already been reported on. Therefore the developments of naming the victims was not as important as the story proceeding it. it slips down the agenda.

 

Harsh as it may seem. In a 10 minute bulleten you have to start with the NEW items first and then proceed with updates of OLD items. I bet you will find the opening headlines of a full weekday bulleten will be very different in order because more things will have actually happened.

 

Except for the thankfully rare occasions of a big disaster. You will find that most weekends by their very nature are slow news days. Nothing happens in politics, very few "annoucements" are made. Many businesses are closed and most events are in development or too early to fully report on.

 

Its no surprise that there is no full news programmes on a saturday and sunday.

Edited July 23, 2012 by ECCOnoob

[Daven 10]

Wait until the Olympics start - it'll wall to wall sport 'news', morning. noon and night - yawn ,yawn, yawn.

Sport 'news' should stay on the sports channels.

[ECCOnoob 1,016]

Unfortunately the BBC does not have any dedicated sports channels and god forbid they would even suggest such a thing.

 

The thought of them spending our licence fee monies on a dedicated channel for sport would get the Daily Mail anti licence fee brigade stampeding down to tv centre with their pitch forks.

 

God sake - its only for a few weeks and its not happened for over 60 years and most likely wont happen again in any of our lives. Get over it and just turn over to something else.

[Daven 10]

Unfortunately the BBC does not have any dedicated sports channels and god forbid they would even suggest such a thing.

 

The thought of them spending our licence fee monies on a dedicated channel for sport would get the Daily Mail anti licence fee brigade stampeding down to tv centre with their pitch forks.

 

God sake - its only for a few weeks and its not happened for over 60 years and most likely wont happen again in any of our lives. Get over it and just turn over to something else.

 

Keep yer wig on - intend to do so.

Is this hot weather making you a little tetchy today ?

[HeadingNorth 11]

You're very aggressive in your responses sometimes. There is no connection between not agreeing sport is news and wishing the death of thousands of people.

 

That was meant to be tongue in cheek, but it's hard to tell on a forum sometimes; apologies if it's offended anyone.

 

The point about the gripe being with people who think sports is a valid topic for a news programme, is the valid one. The rest was just thrown in as an aside, and perhaps it wasn't the best idea.

[LeMaquis 10]

I'm getting increasingly hacked off by the dominance of sport over real news on the BBC. Last night was a prime example when almost the entire evening news was given over to sport and the first item was about the cyclist who had won the Tour de France.

 

No pun intended but this isn't news. I remember in 1981 when England's victory at one of the Ashes tests was the main news on the BBC's 9 o'clock news ahead of the then booming unemployment figures. Expect more of this stuff during the Olympics but not from the tests against South Africa.

[Vague_Boy 10]

I'm getting increasingly hacked off by the dominance of sport over real news on the BBC.

Sport is not news. Ever.

 

If there was some kind of sporting contest that decided the fate of the Middle East, that would be news.

 

There has never been an important sporting event in the history of the world. (Important as understood by those of us who don't think that what the Kardashians do is somehow of relevance out here in the real world.)

 

It's all just panem et circenses.

[shane39 10]

Will the bbc presenters be wearing their freebie north face, ralph loren or burgheus (or whatever) at the olympics? Or are they banned.

[dabuckle 10]

If they didn't show sports then people would become more conscious of what happened around the world enabling themselves to make decisions of their own... and where would the government be then with a free thinking society???

[Phanerothyme 12]

Sport is much more reassuring than current affairs. Syria's been going on for months and months, how can that qualify as news in the face of a British win in a world famous French cycle race?

 

All that remains is for the DWP to give out free crisps and beer and the stage will be set.