http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday Comments on 'e-mail the BBC to object to "Thought for the Day"' en-gb team@pledgebank.com 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 2 hourly http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2990170 As much as i agree with the intention of this pledge, i am shocked with some of the comments i have read above. Such as Richard Handley who seems not to recognise that sanity might inculde those who do not share entirely his views. Anyhow, good work on the whole http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2920132 The contributions have been streaming in, and now we're ready to launch the Secular Thought for the Day website. It is ready and waiting at http://www.secularthought.org The first "thought" will be posted at about 08:00 on Wednesday February 18th. I haven't decided yet which submission will be first, but every one I've received so far has been excellent, and every one of them deserves to be the first post. So, between now and Wednesday please let as many people as you can know about this site. Blog about it, talk about it, write to your local paper about it. Spread the word. And of course remind people of the purpose behind it: to demonstrate to the BBC that a Secular Thought for the Day is just as valid, if not more so, than the faith-oriented intermissions on Radio 4's Today programme. And if you haven't signed up to do your bit for this site then there is still time. The pledge is at http://www.pledgebank.org/SecularTFTD http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2912975 Something of a cheek for Mark Damazer to be launching this blog while having ignored all arguments re. TFTD.. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio4/ http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2912850 I just came across an interesting blog along the same sort of lines at platitudes. It's very good, see this post in particular. http://afterthoughts.crowth.net/theyre-religious-so-they-can-say-what-they-like/#more-2588 http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2910643 Having come so far with this campaign, it is imperative that everyone who complained about TFTD is encouraged to persist with the process and see it through the BBC Trust. Complaints to the BBC Trust must be made within 4 weeks of Mark Damazer's last email response. They must also be substantive and specific. If we all get palmed off by the BBC Trust in the same way that we were by Mark Damazer then we will have ever stronger grounds for complaint. If we just give up and go away then we are allowing the BBC to continue discriminating against secular speakers in their choice of TFTD contributors. The article by Michael Brooks in this week's New Scientist, called "Natural Born Believers", argues that humans are primed for supernatural thinking and that disbelief is therefore hard to achieve. Those that have made this leap must surely have useful insights into our daily affairs, that belong on TFTD! http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2909765 Does anyone know what the policy is on Wake Up To Wogan's 'Pause For Thought' spot, I assume it's the same as TFTD. Maybe this should be the next target? http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2909033 For those still watching this, yesterday the BBC aired a version of the one show, which basically patronised atheists as being "too embarrassed to talk about God" and "not willing to make a commitment". I refute it utterly - the implication that we are not religious because of fear of commitment is extremely and deeply insulting. http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2908331 My email to BBC Complaints is a bit too long to post here. You can read it at:- http://quedula.blogspot.com/2009/01/bbc-religious-programming.html http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2907879 Alan Clarks's reply from BBC Complaints is appallingly bad in its failure to address the issue. It says: "- and a balance of view is maintained over a period rather than within every script." Yet we are not asking for balance within a 5 minute script - just for a few atheist TftDs out of the 360 per year that are solely from a religious viewpoint. Incidentally, on its webpage, the Religious and Ethics Department classifies atheism as a "religion" which further weakens their position. http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2907253 I'm not giving up, just opening this to the floor for other organisers too. Also I certainly wasn't leaned on. Ignored more like, just like everybody else! Aside from contacting the Trust, another thing people might be able to do has been suggested by David Solomon. He says: "What about an email to all the present speakers on this slot asking them to support the inclusion of secular spakers as well as religious speakers, or alternatively, changing its name to "Religious Thought for Today"? My guess is that many of them are fair-minded people who would be supportive." If you can find them, you could write to them protesting. http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2907146 As Mr.Damazar suggested, I complained to the BBC trust. Here is their reply, which avoids answering my complaint in the same way that Mr.Damazar did. ----------------------------------- Thanks for your e-mail regarding 'Thought for the Day'. We appreciate that you unhappy that the programme does not include non-religious thinkers. We also note that you've read Mark Damazer's online explanation but still feel that it contravenes our policy on impartiality. It's always good to receive correspondence from listeners, and to be challenged by it. 'Thought for the Day' is set within the 'Today' programme, and has the remit of commenting from a religious perspective on a current news issue. It follows therefore that it is supposed to say something of substance, and that its contributors - speaking from a variety of distinctive faith positions - can stimulate, challenge, provoke, irritate, and sometimes comfort. There are 360 Thoughts a year, and 30 or more contributors, from many faiths and many denominations - and a balance of view is maintained over a period rather than within every script. However, we do acknowledge your concerns and we'd like to assure you that we've registered your complaint on our audience log. This is a daily report of audience feedback that's circulated to many BBC staff, including members of the BBC Executive Board, channel controllers and other senior managers. The audience logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions about future programming and content. Finally, I've attached an invitation from the Head of Audience Services asking you to participate in our survey. We would welcome your views on the service you have received. Thanks again for taking the time to contact us. Regards Jonathan Carberry BBC Complaints http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2905421 Ok, I've started a pledge to create a Secular Thought for the Day website. Please give me your support: http://www.pledgebank.com/SecularTFTD I need at least 30 people to get it started. http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2905366 Gavin has emailed everyone a summary of the fallout from his pledge. It had a great impact and just shows what can be done if everyone does just a little bit. I'm disappointed then that he appears to be giving up. He writes "...by the way we have been ignored, that I just don’t feel like it any more." Has Gavin been leaned on by the same people who are leaning on Mark Damazer? While complaining to the BBC Trust is a good thing to do I can't imagine that it is going to have any effect. Anyone want to help me start up a "Secular Thought for the Day" website? Any other ideas for action? http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2905335 It is very distressing to get from Mr Damazer a regurgitation of his previous statement without any comment on the many valid points made by so many listeners. Combine this with the refusal of the BBC to reconsider its initial reaction to the Gaza appeal and one begins to feel that there is a certain arrogance within the Corporation. Contemptuous may be more apposite. Lawrie Scott http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2900186 Reply at last from Mr Damazer. Exactly the same as his website statement of 7th January, apart from the following words at the end of his penultimate paragraph: "and the harm done in the name of religion is explored." I've replied expressing my dissatisfaction at the inadequacy of his response. http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2898897 In case anyone hasn't yet found them here are the pertinent BBC guidelines regarding editorial impartiality:- "Impartiality lies at the heart of the BBC's commitment to its audiences. It applies across all of our services and output, whatever the format, from radio news bulletins via our web sites to our commercial magazines and includes a commitment to reflecting a diversity of opinion. In practice, our commitment to impartiality means: • we strive to reflect a wide range of opinion and explore a range and conflict of views so that no significant strand of thought is knowingly unreflected or under represented. • we must ensure we avoid bias or an imbalance of views on controversial subjects. Impartiality in series Programmes dealing with widely disparate issues from one programme to the next but also clearly linked as a strand with a common title. These should normally achieve impartiality within individual programmes, or across two or three editorially linked programmes, rather than across the strand as a whole. We can not achieve impartiality in this context by ensuring other views will be heard on other services". http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2897891 When religious programming is limited to "songs of praise" I have no objection. The truth is I've not seen any to comment. However, researching the subject I have just been watching some of the religious programming on satellite. I was appalled to find childrens programming on "Genesis" which included the following: 1) Kids have been encouraged to say what prayer to god has done to them... healing wounds, making them no longer 'allergic' to tomatoes and cherries...?? 2) Children were told bad things happen in life because otherwise "people go floppy like trees that aren't in the wind". 3) A Parent was telling his son how before religion he was an immoral, greedy man who used to drink. No examples of moral, selfless non-believers there. 4) Describing non-believers as "me-wants monster" and believers as "god-wants warrior". Yay that's just what we want more extremists willing to do god's will as a warrior. This was childrens' programming! GAHH! I do hope BBC coverage isn't similar to this. On balance if better quality BBC broadcasting cuts out some of the market for these channels that may justify their existence. However, that budget should include programming of other groups such as secular views without an agenda constrained by a religious boss. http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2897386 The BBC is spending £10m a year on religous propaganda: http://www.secularism.org.uk/105572.html http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2896490 Thanks pluto, I wondered what had happened to it. http://www.pledgebank.com/thoughtfortheday#comment_2896234 We have two mentions on the politics.co.uk website. Also one on The Guardian site. http://www.gavinorland.com/religion/more-media-mentions-of-tftd-issue/