Outraged at BBC Party and Drunk Celebs

[mrsgogo]

Who is paying for this party at the BBC - the licence payer????

And do we really want to see interviews with drunk celebs?

I'm a massive Beeb fan too, and watched an insane amount of their coverage. It even lured me away from David Mitchell and Election Come Dine With Me, which is saying something!

I agree you need interesting content, but I just don't think this was it - and it felt very out of touch. More 1997 than 2010. If they wanted to do Vox-Pops then throwing a party with some of hte more politicised celebs but also with more 'real' people from different backgrounds - teachers, farmers, small business owners, students, even Justine (when was she on, I missed her?!) and other MNers - would have been better. What it needed was people who had some genuine political views, having Joan Collins slurring "I've been at a dinner party, what's happened?" was just embarrassing.

Good idea - mixing people from those groups the political parties claimed to represent and celebs would have been good. And agree that Brucie and Joanie were toe-curlingly embarrassing. Brucie probably demanded to be there as a condition of re-signing for Strictly!

But to be fair to the Production Team, the moment he turned to the (absolutely disinterested) audience, they were probably gnashing their teeth and wailing too!

good post 30and.
it's not so much the money for the booze and who paid for it, it's the patronising assumption that your average viewer is so sleb-obsessed we want to listen to their drunken ramblings rather than proper content about the election from people who actually know something.
Why should I care what Maureen Lipman thinks when she is sober, let alone drunk?!

It was embarrassing. I imagine lots of them were seething with hatred for each other.

I didn't want to hear JC s, or Dom Joly's opinions (although I was a bit gutted when the link went down before Fern Britton got to have her say)

And Andrew Neill. - step away from the Just For Men - you aren't fooling anyone

ifancyashandy
If you look on the lefties thread you will see that most of us started on BBC and then moved to ITV because the lovie-lovefest was so cringingly embarrassing.

Whether or not the party was paid for by licence fee is not relevant.

If they had filled the boat with political pundits or even the odd intelligent person instead of 6th rate slebs like Joan and Brucie then it could have been interesting.

MMeLCB that's as maybe but the overnights show that the Beeb whooped ITV's backside in the ratings. Have already said I agreed with the point on having less celebs.

I don't think your comment on whether the license fee was or was not used was directed at me - as that was the OP point?

I did have to laugh when Dom Joly said "Where is Lembit Opik? Has he been killed?"

It would have been really interesting to have had different groups - 'Now let's go to the trawlermen and see what they have to say!' etc.

I don't think we needed extra entertainment. Jeremy Vine bumming over those virtual dominoes was very amusing. Very "The Day Today".

Risks sticking neck out here but have been thinking...

They could have done live OB's to say, trawlermen (and women!) in Cornwall, ship builders in Tyneside etc but these are VERY expensive. More expensive than having a load of people in London.

So, they could have brought said TrawlerPeople(!) and Ship Builders to London but again, that is expensive (transport / overnight accomodation / loss of earnings etc)

Having a load of semi-literate slebs make their own way / buy own drinks is the least expensive option BUT I do see why people have an issue with it. Tricky one and I don't have the answer.

It's the conummdrum created by 24 hour rollng news. Blame Murdoch. For everything!!

come to think of it, I think they should have bagged David Mitchell from the lame Channel 4 thing, and Armando Iannucci (sp?) and someone clever and Right Wing (can't think of anyone off the top of my head) and had them being funny in the studio

No, I meant the second part of my post to the OP.

It was a shame, a lost opportunity. As you say, there are so many good political commentators - to have wasted airtime on such rubbish.

Well - I was reading 'The Daily Star' - my dh buys it - big source of marital discourse - but thats another story! Anyway headline on page 6 - 'Fury at BBc's Celeb Freebie'. Apprently the booze was free and the do cost the licence payer £29,000. Apprently loads of people have complained to the BBC.

I know it's the Star - not known for its quality journalism but goes against ifancyashandy theory that they would be buying own drinks.

If the Star is correct it is beyond belief that we have paid for this party.

Well if it's in the Star....!

News papers lie. I know this to be true. I know this to be true because they have lied about me

Meant to add, also... the print media have a vested interest in the BBC being seen by the tax payer to be wasteful as they wont complain when (if) it is taken apart. People no longer buy newspapers in the same volume they used to and now get their news via web and oh yes, 24 hour telly news. No BBC means a whole heap of channels available to oh yes, newspaper moguls.

Like I said earlier, blame Murdoch. And then blame Sue!

I'm absolutely spitting feathers about this. Why the BBC thought getting celebs pissed on a luxury yacht (an event that was doubtless funded by us) and then interviewing them was relevant or interesting is baffling. It was disgraceful and wrong on many levels.

If the BBC consider that to be appropriate programming on an election night then frankly I do hope they do get taken to pieces by the Tories (if they do turn out to be the incoming government).

And breathe....

Sorry, but it seriously pissed me off. Like I care what Joan Collins etc think.

FFS.

It annoyed me too.

Thought it was a bit distasteful really.

I never see why I should listen to some celebrity spouting on about politics anyway, I can hear uninformed opinion around my own kitchen table thank you very much, I don't need it on my tv.

Ifancyashandy - I would like to say I do not generally have a problem with the bbc - dont mind paying for my licence etc. Think the bbc is a good thing. This is just an situation where they got it wrong. I know and i did say I realise The Star may be wrong - but it rings true to me.

God yes, I love the BBC. Doesn't mean it is perfect. Or beyond critism.

But it would have cost far more to send journlists all over the country to interview loads of talking heads. At least they were all in one place!

I trust they made Edwina Currie et al on CH4's Come Dine with me buy their own ingredients......

I thought the Beeb's election coverage was great, and the web-site even better.

What CH4 did is irrelevant that is NOT public money. The licence fee should not be used to get the rich pissed.

Or anyone pissed for that matter

Maybe when we have anotehr election, in September, they will have sunk this idea.

Though I have heard that political parties will not be able to afford another campaign for a very long while, so simply for funding considerations we may be having to put up with whatever the pick-and-mix counter gives us.

In the Telegraph yesterday, it was reported that it was engineered so it could be could be classified as a broadcast and not hospitality.

Also ,the contrace for hire with the company included a clause in which they had to promise not to reveal amount paid.

I agree, Who gives a fuck what any of thes people think? I am interested I the opinions of political analysts and genuine men and women on the street. Noone else.

'They could have done live OB's to say, trawlermen (and women!) in Cornwall,' ...my new Tory MP for SE Cornwall could be classed as a trawlerwoman as she and her husband own a fishing boat and she has represented the SW at European level on fisheries policy!