Let's have a regular BBC radio 4 programme for elderly reminiscences.

As a GP, I used to mourn the fact that I did not have enough time to listen to my old patients' life stories. I always try to find something out about my patient as a person, especially if they did something interesting like farming. I got snippets, and one or 2 written biographies, but what I wanted was for someone to go and put a microphone under their nose and get them to talk for an hour or so. Which is what my patients wanted to do, so I had to tear myself away.

The recordings would be edited, and then put out on radio.  I say radio because that is possible, and cheap. TV is too expensive and poncey, they laugh in the faces of oldies, but radio would be attainable.


Broadcasting has loads of incentives for young peeps to listen,  (for understandable reasons) but has little or nothing for the oldies (unless you count snooker). 

So I have tried several times over the years to get local radio interested in delivering a regular programme say 30-60 mins once a week devoted to reminiscences of elderly folk. I envisage a success, because most elderly peeps have radio and or TV on, for company. The programme would be self sustaining, because the listeners would write in and say "Yes, I remember that, and what's more, in my village we had this..."

It would be educational for the young, too, to learn for instance that kids used to walk to school and wear knitted bathing costumes (not necessarily at the same time). And that milk camr round in big urns. And rag & bone men had horses, and we had to run out and collect the horse shit for the garden. Stuff like that.

The reason I am v keen on this is not just to catch more living history, but also to give the elderly a sense of self-respect and self worth. Like it or not, broadcast media is perceived as significant in our culture. "He's been on Telly" = "He is a significant person".  Therefore, for an elderly person to be on radio, and for the elderly generally to know that they have airtime devoted to them would be beneficial for their self esteem.  Which would reflect on their happiness and indeed their health.

So far, my approaches (which have been sporadic) have just been met with vague responses saying "we do that anyway, here and here". I tried to get Joan Bakewell interested when she was Elderly Czar, but all I got back was a message from her flunkey saying she doesn't do emails.  (What's the pint of a czar if people cannot communicate with them?)

I tried to raise the matter within the Seniors Group of the European Green Party, but the response was "We already do that in our country", so poor old UK was left, as usual, limping along behind.

I will try again to get local BBC interested, maybe with Age Concern and some professionally qualified peep. Maybe if I keep trying, it will be actually happening in time to catch my deathbed confession.

Benefit System raises mAny Questions

Is it me, or is the BBC Radio Any Questions? programme sliding inexorably down the sticky slope that leads to the dogs?

The latest programme has the whole panel blithering meaninglessly about the benefit system, mainly focussing on the tiny minority of dysfunctional people and families who choose not to work.

Nobody mentioned the fact that most people on the dole are poverty stricken, embarassed, and frustrated by their position, and would gladly work if (a) it would increase their prosperity and (b) if there was some bloody work available for them to do.

Osbornomics means that (b) is going to get less in the next few months.

The Green Wage Subsidy is the way to go. George "Smeagol" Osborne is looking for suggestions. I will write to him.

That's enough boring broadcaster Lib/Con split probing

Harry Hardnose, thanks to Steve Bell

Oh for goodness' sake, how long are the BBC and the media pack going to be asking LibDem and Tory politicians how they are going to work together? The marriage/divorce metaphor has been done to death. How long will they be trawling up the puerile ad hom insults that the politicians were peddling against each other during the election campaign?  Do these journalists not realise that politics is a game of two halves - one half where they pretend that their party has all the answers, and the other party knows nothing (Nothing!) and another half where, in coalition, parties work together on policy, ostensibly  for the good of the nation?

In modern democracies, where the will and the opinions of the people are represented by a sensible electoral system, coalitions are the norm, not the exception. When we get PR, which we will, coalitions will be the norm here too. Bloody Get Used To It. Are we going to have 5 years of endless probing for possible divergence of policy between LibDem and the Tory constituents of Government?  The real splits will turn up soon enough.

This style of journalism, this obsessive probing for divergence, is a perverse form of activism. It is not objective reporting, it is a seeking to be the journalist who exposes the fatal flaw that causes the Government to fall. Is this what they want? There is a reflexivity in the process of reporting - every question is also a statement. If they insist on concentrating only on divergence, they are seeking the economic downfall of our country, since the markets would certainly sell sterling big time if we went into another election within months.

Journalism should be about helping the people to understand the key issues facing the UK, which are:

•  How do we remedy the budget deficit without stalling the economy? See here.
• How do we bring about a more equal economy, and therefore a more cohesive society? Here.
• How do we decarbonise the economy? Here.
• How do we successfully get out of Afghanistan?  Here.
• How do we reform the political system? Here.

And a whole slew of other key questions, like how to we get a fair political balance in our news outlets, and how can we afford to blow £100 billion on the Trident WMD system (pictured left), and how do we control the multinationals?

And before anyone starts up, I am not a supporter of Clegg or of Cameron. I am not starry eyed about Government of any colour. We are badly governed, not just by the politicians, but also by an essentially conservative, sclerotic Civil Service. All I want is for journalists, especially the BBC journalists who are employed by us, the people, to set their minds to explaining policy dilemmas, and to quit their boring and predictable seeking  after cracks in the LibCon Coalition Government.

Avaaz: defend the BBC against the Evil One

The Evil All Seeing Eye of Mordorch has sent his Nazgul to fight against the Bibicee of the Shire. Although the BBC is not as truthful and impartial as we thought it was in the past, it is immeasurably less untruthful than the utterances of Mordorch's Orcs. Worse yet in the eyes of the Wrinkled One, the Bibicee is not a private Corporation, but an organisation paid for by public subscription. This makes it a Communist Conspiracy in the distorted thinking of Mordorch. Therefore Mordorch is intent on the death of the Bibicee.

We, the people, although we are sometimes obliged to knock the odd 1p off the license fee to punish them for not showing the DEC Gaza Appeal, must gather to defend the Bibicee against the Evil One. The Avaaz petition is here. Please sign.

Haiti: stop hyping up the security threat!

Great letter in the Guardian yesterday
Obsessive foreign concerns with "security" and "violence" are refuted by actual levels of patience and solidarity on the streets of Port-au-Prince. In keeping with a long-standing pattern, US and UN officials continue to treat the Haitian people and their representatives with wholly misplaced fear and suspicion.

This is very noticeable in the BBC reportage. The main man there seems to be desperate to film acts of violence. I have mentioned here the total irrationality of the determination to shoot "looters" and shown evidence that black people "loot" while white people "find" things.

Much was made of the escape of prisoners from the jail in Port-au-Prince, but it was not mentioned that many of them were political prisoners, and not a threat to security.

The perceived need to maintain "security" has led to the massive number of flights of US military planes, which have been prioritised over aid flights, and delayed aid.

This view is endorsed by a doctor on the ground. Media Tracker tells CNN to stop hyping the violence.

Like the Iraq war effect on Muslim radicalisation, (below) the military mindset just makes things worse.

Link: Reconstructing Haiti
Mercenaries circling for the kill

Any Questions? is getting a bit questionable

Went to Any Questions? in Cheddar last night.

Bit boring.

The only interesting discussion was about the ban on Islam4UK and possibly on juries.
the other questions were Google in China, election debate by 3 main party leaders, school lunch-boxes, and who do you least want to be marooned in a car with?

I put in 3 questions:
Should the UN effort in Haiti go beyond physical reconstruction of buildings to include reforestation and creation of a just society and equitable economy?
Should the UN set up a Rapid Reaction force of experts using military logistic skills to deal with disasters?
Should drug policy be determined by science or morality?

The politicians, Ben Bradshaw and Chris Grayling were pretty bland, and the most interesting were Louise Doughty, writer, and Peter Hennessy, historian. The Dimbleby was a bit testy and interrupty, possibly because he had a bad shoulder and looked as if he was on analgesics.

Islam4UK discussion made me wonder about my support for the ban. Why do they not just try morons like Choudry under existing laws on hate speech.

Both QT and Any Questions are becoming less and less interesting and more and more bland for some reason.

Griffin storm: BBC passed up the Question Time get-out

I am not going to boycott tonight's Question Time. I expect to see a disorderly, ill-tempered row, with the possibility of scuffles in the audience. I do not expect to see Herr Griffin confounded, just insulted, and I fear that the ratings for his National Socialist party will rise as a result.

The BBC's insistence on giving him an airing in view of the BNPs 2 MEPs is at variance with their obstinate refusal to give the Green Party air time in proportion with our vote. We can be damn certain that the BBC managers would not have stood up for the Greens in the same way they have stood up for the BBC.

The icing on the cake is that they have a perfect get-out clause from their problem. They could have said that they would not let Griffin until he has legalised the BNP's constitution by making membership open to non-whites.

This they have chosen not to do. If we choose, we can infer that there are Nazi sympathisers high up in the BBC.

This, coupled with the equally ugly decision of the BBC not to screen the DEC appeal for Palestinian aid after Israel's psychotic onslaught on Gaza, should make us think long and hard about whether to pay the BBC license fee. The very least we can do is to cancel our Direct Debit, so they have to scrabble around and send us reminders.

The only problem with a license fee strike is that it could bring an end to public service broadcasting, which is exactly what the megacapitalists like Rupert Murdoch want. So, from that point of view, we should continue. From a personal point of view, the only programmes that I really enjoy is Have I got news for You, and the wildlife programme, and overall, I would have a better quality of life if I had no TV at all. Oh and I caught a brilliant programme last night by Becca Wilcox about Who Made me Fat?, which is worthy of a blog all to itself.

So, it hangs by a thread, but I will probably pay my license fee, but maybe a few pence short of the full whack.