To not want to give money to Children in Need?(80 Posts)
I know I'm being unreasonable, but I just hate the BBC at the moment and keep wondering if they're going to give the fucking money to the victims of Savile Scum Sucking Bottom Feeder Paedophile Sicko so they can pay for some counselling
It just seems to hypocritical seeing them being all jolly 'n' stuff when people out there are suffering.
There are a huge number of people working for the BBC and the recent allegations are about a handful of them. Some of the people giving their time and effort to children in need won't have even been born when all this stuff was going on.
Two programmes which I pay for missy? I'd gladly not bother with it at all if you were permitted to have a television without having to pay these jokers I'd gladly forego both programmes if I could be free from the bastards.
It just seems to hypocritical seeing them being all jolly 'n' stuff when people out there are suffering
I missed ^^ bit!
Thats NU its bloody stupid! There are millions of children in this country suffering every single minute of every single day. We could all be described as hypocritical just by going about our daily lives giving them maybe a fleeting thought.
You make it sound like the JS stuff is the only time this has happened - do you live in a bubble? If only eh! Yes its crap, yes its a terrible thing to have happened, but it is still happening to someone right now whilst we are debating it on here.
So whats the point in taking it out on a charity? You aren't hitting the pocket of the BBC, you are hitting the pocket of the charities that benefit from Children In Need.
If you really wanted to make a stand against the company (although I don't particulary agree with that sentiment either since the BBC is a changed place from 30 odd years ago) then get rid of the TV and watch the other channels online and don't pay the licence. As it is you are making a half hearted attempt at outrage aimed entirely at the wrong place while still using the service they provide.
I think they should have given everyones licence fee for this year to the charity.
Hmmmmm. You are not being unreasonable to be passed off at the bbc. Dh wants his licence fee back for the years that they were bankrolling paedo-chops.
Good point molepom. Think of all the fees we paid in good faith that were then misused and enabled the abuse of girls on TOTP etc.
Changed place from 30 years ago? Hardly, they're still screwing things up now!
YANBU it is always excrutiatingly awful - I would, however, give them money NOT to do it.
I mean the staff have changed from 30 years ago and I can't see how holding those there now liable for what happened helps. Those that worked there back then and helped cover this up absolutely should be though, I didn't make that clear.
I see you haven't commented on your double standards though. Why take your outrage out on a charity while still using the services the actual company provides?
I don't give to Children In Need, I support other charities and don't feel bad about not supporting any but those. If I gave to every charity that asked then I would be in need of it myself. And I NEVER EVER give to charities that phone up..... British Heart Foundation, take note.
you are blaming CIN for what the BBC have let happen.
I love the BBC but I haven't supported Children in Need or Comic Relief for years for a variety of reasons, none of which are anything to do with Saville.
i would like to know how many and how much the so called 'celebs' on this show get paid for doing there 'bit' in cajoling
blackmailing people who may not be able to afford to donate to this cause but feel they have to because some celeb tells them they should because its for a good cause
i wont be supporting CIN well i suppose apart from the £1 mufti at school,i cant deny him that
not because of the Saville subject but for other reasons
Another reason not to give money to Children in Need could be found in the list of things that they won't give charities the money for.
From their website
We don't give grants for...
Relief of statutory responsibility
Applications from local government or NHS bodies
Building projects which are applying to us for more than £20,000
The promotion of religion
Trips or projects abroad
Projects for pregnancy testing or advice, information or counselling on pregnancy choices
General awareness-raising work
Bursaries, sponsored places, fees or equivalent
Individuals (unless an eligible organisation is applying on their behalf)
Distribution to another/other organisation/s, for example, PTAs applying on behalf of schools
General appeals or endowment funds
Deficit funding or repayment of loans
Retrospective funding (projects taking place before the grant award date)
Projects unable to start within 12 months of the grant award date
Also from their website,
Small grant applications can be for any amount up to £10,000 a year and we are looking for projects where a relatively small grant can make a big difference for children and young people.
For main grant applications there is no upper limit but we make very few grants over £100,000 and most grants are for much less. The total amount of money requested each year is far more than we have available to give and requests for larger grants are always more competitive.
Funding can be awarded for between one and three years, depending on the nature of the request. Grants can only be made for one year at a time for holidays/residentials.
BBC Children in Need will consider funding support costs associated directly with a project, but we cannot fund organisational overheads and running costs where these are not integral to the project you are applying for.
So basically, they will pay for anything that they can put a shiny plaque on. Anything that actually helps a small charity pay for the boring but essential things isn't considered important enough for Children In Need to support.
I wonder if they give the money to charities for Retired Paedophiles then
missy yes, perhaps I do have double standards, but there are three other people in the house and they like the television too. I only watch two programmes on BBC and we watch the other channels. People are forced to pay these people just to have a television.
but to put in context...
Relief of statutory responsibility - as the body who is being rewarded the grant should already have their legal obligations in place
Applications from local government or NHS bodies - this is a charity awarding to help beyond the realms of the government/NHS
Building projects which are applying to us for more than £20,000 - as they can't afford it
The promotion of religion - this is just common sense
Trips or projects abroad - why should they fund this?
Medical treatment/research - there are other charities that raise money to fund this
Projects for pregnancy testing or advice, information or counselling on pregnancy choices - due to the moral/religious troubled waters this would represent
General awareness-raising work - there are more practical projects requiring funding
Bursaries, sponsored places, fees or equivalent - why fund one child when you can help many
Individuals (unless an eligible organisation is applying on their behalf) - as above
Distribution to another/other organisation/s, for example, PTAs applying on behalf of schools - accountability
General appeals or endowment funds - as in the majority of grants.funding etc there has to be a specific reason in order to grant funding to ensure accountability
Deficit funding or repayment of loans - a justified project should have the funding in place before starting
Retrospective funding (projects taking place before the grant award date) - as the two points above
Projects unable to start within 12 months of the grant award date - to ensure accountability and auditing
Unspecified expenditure - as above
As other have stated, the BBC are just the 'hosts' of this charity and do not benefit (other than viewing figures) and they do fund a lot of worthwhile projects that I know my own DS has benefited from
I wonder if they give the money to charities for Retired Paedophiles then
Erm...no, because its CHILDREN in need. The clue is in the name.
You don't withdraw potential money from needy and often desperate children just to make a point.
If it makes you feel good to do so then fine
But I hope this thread doesn't encourage others to do the same.
What does Comic Relief do? Perhaps they give the money to charities for Retired Paedophile and Debauched DJs from that. Wouldn't surprise me. They all look after each other don't they?
JS used to raise plenty of money for charity
I'm not trying to withdraw potential money from needy people Worra Anybody can donate to whichever charity they want without getting involved in children in need. I think people should donate to childrens charities, it's just the CIN that's making me feel this way.
I remember 15 years ago, Lou Reed's Perfect Day was remade, the BBC claimed, for Children in Need. I spoke to Lou Reed about this, because he said he would never allow a remake (artistic integrity and all that), but then he said the reason he did it was because it was for charity.
What he didn't appear to realise was that the BBC in addition to charity were using to say how wonderful they were because it's funded by taxes.
I felt that this was pretty disgusting tbh.
BBC 'we are so wonderful' video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJpQJWpVJds
hiddenhome - that post earlier where you said you wanted the BBC shut down and then your dh "phoned them to tell them that the is no one living in our flood wrecked house" etc...
Why would your dh ring the BBC about that? The BBC have NOTHING to do with collection of the licence fee or ensuring people have a licence. The Govt set the licence fee, not the BBC, and it is collected and licences issued by TV Licensing which is NOT connected with the BBC. So, bit stupid to ring them about your not being at your other address. Nor did they send you the threatening letters.
YANBU to decline to give money to Children in Need if you don't particularly like that charity or where the money goes. I don't. YABU to blame the current staff at the BBC for what went on 30+ years ago with the vile Savile creature. Seems hugely fitting that the SHOULD do Children In Need now more than ever BECAUSE of the past in many ways.
I've never given to cin. Charity begins at home.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.