Stop blaming the messenger!

ShoppingTelly

Help Support ShoppingTelly:

It seems though that those are plastic measures as they then are all too happy to indulge peter simons manipulation of the audience. I do see what you are saying though

I think they induldge Peter as they use his face on their other projects like their bingo. I'll see if I can pry any info from Andy as he normally responds on twitter, he's been sick the last 5 or 6 days though.
 
I think they induldge Peter as they use his face on their other projects like their bingo. I'll see if I can pry any info from Andy as he normally responds on twitter, he's been sick the last 5 or 6 days though.


aaahhhhhhhh "sick' EH?
 
I can see some of your points, but then you start getting personal with other forum members and it distracts from your argument, bingowings.

I can see some of your points but its hard to understand you from way up in your ivory tower lol

(The above is a joke)
 
The problem with your argument Bingo is one thing doesn't add up, when the ASA contact Bid/Pd they have said on numerous occasions that extra training has been given to certain serial offending presenters. Now add that to the fact that certain presenters have said they have recieved warnings.

Now that either points to management giving warnings to presenters for something that wasn't their fault and enforcing extra training on presenters that don't require it..... or they are lieing to the ASA and viewers which would be a very silly thing to do which in all honesty probably would of shown up on the ofcom report.

Personally I don't think any of us can really make an educated guess on who's to blame unless we know how presenters are payed in regard to bonuses or commission .... also the length of contracts the usual offending presenters currently hold.

Don't forget Steve said they can only have 3 warnings then that's it.

The people who have run the place are to blame. they are responsible! even if they have a commission structure.if presenters started bending the rules to earn more they should have stopped the commission structure or not paid those who broke the rules. either way. they are to blame. they dictate the tone of the channels. they are the ones in charge. if you want to claim they are 'unable' to control the content of their presenters then they should all be fired for incompetence! they are managers after all. they are there to manager. personally i suspect they are beHind it all. manipulating the presenters to act out their will. look at Ben Moseby! loved when he started now, according to this forum.he has turned into AN EVIL BID PRESENTEEER! what could have caused such a transformation? drugs? bad acting classes? gambling debts? ... or ... something more evil????... i think something more evil!!
 
The people who have run the place are to blame. they are responsible! even if they have a commission structure.if presenters started bending the rules to earn more they should have stopped the commission structure or not paid those who broke the rules. either way. they are to blame. they dictate the tone of the channels. they are the ones in charge. if you want to claim they are 'unable' to control the content of their presenters then they should all be fired for incompetence! they are managers after all. they are there to manager. personally i suspect they are beHind it all. manipulating the presenters to act out their will. look at Ben Moseby! loved when he started now, according to this forum.he has turned into AN EVIL BID PRESENTEEER! what could have caused such a transformation? drugs? bad acting classes? gambling debts? ... or ... something more evil????... i think something more evil!!

I'm not one to deal in speculation, I like to deal in cold hard facts.

Fact 1 - Management told the ASA that the offenders have been told to do extra training to ensure they adhere to British broadcasting standards.
Fact 2 - certain presenters have admitted to and somewhat take issue to recieving warnings for not being accurate.

Having worked in retail most my life I can safetly say I wouldn't accept a warning nor re-trainng over something I didn't personally do.

I would ask you to deal in the facts rather than 'speculation or guess work' as it only creates ill informed conjecture that benefits no one.
 
I'm not one to deal in speculation, I like to deal in cold hard facts.

Fact 1 - Management told the ASA that the offenders have been told to do extra training to ensure they adhere to British broadcasting standards.

yep. thats exactly what they told the ASA...

Fact 2 - certain presenters have admitted to and somewhat take issue to recieving warnings for not being accurate.

Soooo. the one thing you believe from the presenters is their flippant comments??? really??

Having worked in retail most my life I can safetly say I wouldn't accept a warning nor re-trainng over something I didn't personally do.

I would ask you to deal in the facts rather than 'speculation or guess work' as it only creates ill informed conjecture that benefits no one.


Okeydokey then... erm... although your post is kind of steeped i both 'speculation' and 'guesswork'? are you exempt?
 
[/B]

Okeydokey then... erm... although your post is kind of steeped i both 'speculation' and 'guesswork'? are you exempt?

Every comment I say can be backed up with the relivent proof or at least with the person who said it. Please show me proof of what you say is the truth or who has supplied you with said information.
 
Every comment I say can be backed up with the relivent proof or at least with the person who said it. Please show me proof of what you say is the truth or who has supplied you with said information.

presenters have 3 warnings 'cos steve said so'? ..... leave it out Mobo. your theory is speculative as best. but then as is mine lol
 
presenters have 3 warnings 'cos steve said so'? ..... leave it out Mobo. your theory is speculative as best. but then as is mine lol

I always assumed steve was being sarcastic when saying its three strikes and you're out (as well as to drum up sympathy) but never once thought it was an admission of bid policy.
 
I always assumed steve was being sarcastic when saying its three strikes and you're out (as well as to drum up sympathy) but never once thought it was an admission of bid policy.

I agree. I think it's just flippant chitter chatter from Steve. I can't imagine any 'contractor' has a 3 warning system.
 
It dosen't look like the supposed recent changes have been reported anywhere other than that Sunday Times article, it isn't even mentioned on the Aurelius or Tnui Capital websites (the company headed by Bryan Green).

I have no idea what has taken place but someone mentioned that the article could possibly be referring to a development way back in 2012 albeit long after the event, it's been discussed on here before.

http://www.aureliusinvest.com/press-news/press-2012/new-investor-for-sit-up-tv.html
 
Andy Hodgson says he's working on other things at the moment so won't be on Bid 'for a bit'.
 
It seems odd that Bid are running several promos featuring Andy Hodgson if he has supposedly been 'sacked'. In fact he voices the promo for tonight's Kinkade special :wonder:
 
It seems odd that Bid are running several promos featuring Andy Hodgson if he has supposedly been 'sacked'. In fact he voices the promo for tonight's Kinkade special :wonder:

True but they also still have promos with with cris st Valery, Paul beck and mark stewert's voice on them. You would think they would re do them when someone leaves wouldn't you?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top