BBC Sack Jon Holmes As They want To "Diversify"

The Wolverine

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3817609/BBC-sacked-white-man-Radio-4-comic-told-need-women-minorities.html#article-3817609

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/jon-holmes-bbc-presenter-sacked-white-man-mail-on-sunday-a7341831.html

BBC presenter Jon Holmes has been let go from his show because they wanted to replace it with more women and diversity.

He got a phone call which said:

'I'll get straight to the point,' she continued. 'I'm afraid for the next series, we're not inviting you back. We're recasting it with more women and diversity.'

What the actual ****? Several ex BBC emoloyees and applicants have come forward with similar. A woman who applied for a job there was told 'we can't have you, because you are too white and middle class'

"Another performer was considered 'perfect' for a role but could not be employed because bosses had been told to cast someone Asian, he said."

Funny that as an ex Labour member was hired without the mandatory application process as a high up the other day who's very much white and rich. I wonder will they agree to replacing board room members to "diversify". The BBC is an absolute disgusting organisation.

Do they not even engage their brains and realise what a racist policy this is towards men and women?

Ex members who actually set up the diverse policy believe it's even got out of hand

"One executive admitted: 'It was never about sacking people who already do the job and simply replacing them to tick a box"

Rather ironically, racial equality campaigner Trevor Phillips said it showed the BBC 'don't believe black or Asian people are as good as white people' :pac:

He said: 'They are misunderstanding what the point of the diversity drive was about. This sounds like somebody who is basically climbing their way up the greasy ladder and they think hiring black and Asian talent is part of what they have got to do to look good.

Another interesting tidbit was:

"The BBC has been at the centre of 'diversity' rows in the past. In 2001, its then director-general Greg Dyke provoked a storm for declaring the Corporation was 'hideously white'"

Then these people working there are shocked when investigation after investigation is made into them for bias and talks are has about privatising them. It's no shock these people are funded by the public as the station would be bankrupt if it was a private station with all its waste.

Omackeral

If replacement's not a one legged transgendered ginger midget with a pirate accent I'll be personally offended.

Grayson

Are the replacements any good? Cause if they're **** than this is really bad.

btw, I have no idea who any of these people are.

The Wolverine

Grayson wrote: »

Are the replacements any good? Cause if they're **** than this is really bad.

btw, I have no idea who any of these people are.

Doesn't matter if they are good or not sacking someone cause they don't fit what you could call an ethnic quota is disgusting whether white or black or purple is the one sacked.

Imagine they said to a black presenter "we have enough black presenters we need to whiten up the lineup, we won't be taking you on for the next series"

There would be war.

So he is being discriminated against by his employer because of his race and his gender. Sounds illegal to be honest.

Oh wait, he is a white male, carry on then.........

kneemos

Only John Holmes I've heard of was the guy with the wang.Is that why he dropped the h?

The Wolverine

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So he is being discriminated against by his employer because of his race and his gender. Sounds illegal to be honest.

Oh wait, he is a white male, carry on then.........

Nevemind the old white male thing it's slowly becoming just white they seem to have a problem with white women too can't be having them either.

dav3

The Wolverine wrote: »

Doesn't matter if they are good or not sacking someone cause they don't fit what you could call an ethnic quota is disgusting whether white or black or purple is the one sacked.

Imagine they said to a black presenter "we have enough black presenters we need to whiten up the lineup, we won't be taking you on for the next series"

There would be war.

Was he sacked or was his contract not renewed? Big difference.

Got to love your tabloidesque thread title, 8/10 for that one.

Here is a statement from the BBC.

A BBC spokesman said: “While the government’s new charter for the BBC does set us diversity targets, we always hire presenters on merit. We’d like to thank Jon Holmes for his contribution but our comedy shows are constantly evolving and it was simply time to create opportunities for new regulars when The Now Show returns this autumn.

“Jon’s contract was lapsed and wasn’t renewed and this was a creative not a diversity decision.”

But they would say that wouldn't they? Grrrrrrr damn men hating BBC. Or perhaps after 18 years they just decided to go in a different direction to what looks like a poor man's Alan Partridge.

No doubt you'll catch a few with the thread title though.

darkpagandeath

What's the demographic breakdown in the UK to claim hideously white ? Would this not be akin to going to Japan and complaining there are not enough White Europeans on the network ?

dav3

dav3 wrote: »

Or perhaps after 18 years they just decided to go in a different direction to what looks like a poor man's Alan Partridge.

No doubt you'll catch a few with the thread title though.

Indeedy.

He can't be that great a comic. I've never heard of him.

So his contract wasn't renewed and he says it's because he's not a one-legged black lesbian. Which is making headlines and publicising his name.

Handy that, now he's unemployed.

BoJack Horseman

Get Mishal Hussein in there.
She is already carrying the entire BBC on her shoulders.

ArtSmart

dav3 wrote: »

Was he sacked or was his contract not renewed? Big difference.

Got to love your tabloidesque thread title, 8/10 for that one.

Here is a statement from the BBC.




But they would say that wouldn't they? Grrrrrrr damn men hating BBC. Or perhaps after 18 years they just decided to go in a different direction to what looks like a poor man's Alan Partridge.

No doubt you'll catch a few with the thread title though.

+1

The Wolverine

dav3 wrote: »

Was he sacked or was his contract not renewed? Big difference.

Got to love your tabloidesque thread title, 8/10 for that one.

Here is a statement from the BBC.




But they would say that wouldn't they? Grrrrrrr damn men hating BBC. Or perhaps after 18 years they just decided to go in a different direction to what looks like a poor man's Alan Partridge.

No doubt you'll catch a few with the thread title though.

According to that statement, if the BBC has diversity targets then how the hell can they then claim they always "hire on merit"?

Holmes's axing follows the BBC's April announcement of new diversity targets to ensure that women will make up half of its staff by 2020, including on screen, on air and in leadership roles. The Corporation is also aiming to increase the proportion of its workforce from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds to 15 per cent by the same date while lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender people should by then make up eight per cent of the staff

So if say 85% jobs are filled and the black and minority quotas is to be filled what happens if white male and female applicants are better than some of the "minority" applicants.

I'm not sure how your trying to paint me as a "their always against the white males" tactic I was more than happy add a white woman being rejected for being "too white and middle class" and would be disgusted with a woman loosing out to fill a diversity target.

"A poor man's Alan partridge" he has numerous awards including two baftas, eight Sony gold radio awards and two British comedy awards ffs

You'll excuse me for beliveing him and other men and women over an organisation which has had senior members come out with rubbish like "it's hideously white" and "we can no longer tolerate male only panel shows" shows along with being found to have a left wing bias after two or 3 investigations. Not to mention the fact they had to make a big pay out to a former country file presenter for age discrimination.

ArtSmart

On another note; Is Alan Carr Asian?

MonkieSocks

ArtSmart wrote: »

On another note; Is Alan Carr Asian?

Yes,

Cork-Asian









He He

The Wolverine

Actually another thing I just noticed gay, lesbian, bi and trans to make up 8% of the quotas.

What the hell has being gay, bi or straight to do with getting a job there? How do they propose to even tell, ask for a practical demonstration? Anyone could lie and say they are gay or bi and not only that are you even allowed to ask a person's orientation?

As for transgendered, I'm not being funny but say of their OPs are done will they need to provide medical evidence they changed? Would someone be comfortable with doing that how is it any of their business?

dav3

The Wolverine wrote: »

According to that statement, if the BBC has diversity targets then how the hell can they then claim they always "hire on merit"?



So if say 85% jobs are filled and the black and minority quotas is to be filled what happens if white male and female applicants are better than some of the "minority" applicants.

I'm not sure how your trying to paint me as a "their always against the white males" tactic I was more than happy add a white woman being rejected for being "too white and middle class" and would be disgusted with a woman loosing out to fill a diversity target.

"A poor man's Alan partridge" he has numerous awards including two baftas, eight Sony gold radio awards and two British comedy awards ffs

You'll excuse me for beliveing him and other men and women over an organisation which has had senior members come out with rubbish like "it's hideously white" and "we can no longer tolerate male only panel shows" shows along with being found to have a left wing bias after two or 3 investigations. Not to mention the fact they had to make a big pay out to a former country file presenter for age discrimination.

Do you think maybe you're getting a little bit too worked up over someone the majority of people in this country haven’t heard of?
I know when I read the thread title I thought to myself, as I’m sure many others did too, ‘who the **** is Jon Holmes?’
If Jon was bringing in the viewers, or listeners, he would have had his contract renewed, it's as simple as that.

Instead of reacting to daily mail headlines such as

BBC sacked me for being a white man... even though I work in radio

and then running on here with your outrage over some imaginary cultural war, perhaps take time to reflect that you’ve just been baited by the daily mail and that most people don’t care about this ****.

Here is a quote from Jon on that particular headline

Well, let's just clear this up. That headline isn't a quote, or what I've said at all.

So why don’t you calm down getting so worked up over what’s happening within a UK broadcaster and take a few deep breaths.

He wasn't sacked, his contract wasn't renewed.

kneemos

Diversification is good.Never put all your eggs in one basket.

darkpagandeath

kneemos wrote: »

Diversification is good.Never put all your eggs in one basket.

Is the uk not 55m white ?

kneemos

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Is the uk not 55m white ?

Don't think it's a them and us situation in fairness.

darkpagandeath

kneemos wrote: »

Don't think it's a them and us situation in fairness.

What that supposed to mean just talking demographics for transparency like. I have noticed on the UK major news networks it's a good 50/50 mix. Does a black woman count as a woman or a minority for example ?

Bowlardo

his contract was not renewed. he wasn't fired. really misleading headline.

darkpagandeath

Bowlardo wrote: »

his contract was not renewed. he wasn't fired. really misleading headline.

You think in a labour court reason for not renewing contract... Diversity would fly ?

aphex™

Used to hate watching cbbc when I was a kid. It was like paint by numbers. You could only have two whites on screen if you had a black person to go with them.

kneemos

darkpagandeath wrote: »

What that supposed to mean just talking demographics for transparency like. I have noticed on the UK major news networks it's a good 50/50 mix. Does a black woman count as a woman or a minority for example ?

Depends on the region I suppose,but even at that the majority are probably second or third generation British,so to single them out on colour is a bit on the racist side as they are as British as theQueen.Though not reflecting society could also be viewed as racist.

darkpagandeath

kneemos wrote: »

Depends on the region I suppose,but even at that the majority are probably second or third generation British,so to single them out on colour is a bit on the racist side as they are as British as theQueen.Though not reflecting society could also be viewed as racist.

Works the other way around no ? To many white on the telly ? There as British as the Queen to ? As I pointed out in the Japan example you would be laughed out of Japan saying Diversity.

suicide_circus

Thomas Sowell had a good take on "diversity".

ligerdub

Whether or not his contract wasn't renewed or he was fired it makes no odds, having quotas on diversity make anyone not in that quota group from their existing staff members extremely vulnerable in their jobs.

He specifically may or may not have been let go anyway (given how long he has been the I suggest he would have been kept on), but at some point you will reach people who are getting shafted by this stupid policy.

The fact that he was told this over the phone was somewhat noble of them, but it does say that he specifically has been a victim here, and it's unpleasant.

It's not just confined to media, I have a personal experience of this. I remember seeing a job spec not so long ago that I could have written specifically for me based on my background. I applied for it and heard nothing. The role kept on being readvertised, but still no response to my application. I ended up speaking to a recruiter about it, and the recruiter told me (off the record) that they were specifically looking for a woman to fill the role, as the team has an issue of too many men on the team. They were advertising for several months, and proved quite frustrating for me to continue to see this advertised.

The Wolverine

kneemos wrote: »

Depends on the region I suppose,but even at that the majority are probably second or third generation British,so to single them out on colour is a bit on the racist side as they are as British as theQueen.Though not reflecting society could also be viewed as racist.

Yes but even if they are British born and bred and as British as the Queen doesn't help them whether white, black or say Indian.

The quotas are labeled by skin colour from their April announcement not say country of origin.

BlitzKrieg

"I'm afraid for the next series, we're not inviting you back. We're recasting it with more women and diversity"

thats code for cheaper

which incidentally often does involve someone who is female or from a minority group but thats beside the point.

Its a show with 6 full time cast members, he was out of contract and I imagine the budget needed tightening and he was the easiest to drop being out of contract.

The BBC stating he was dropped for *creative reasons* is also code for dont look at us it was decision made within the production which is almost always budgetary.

Insect Overlord

/thread

The Wolverine

dav3 wrote: »

and then running on here with your outrage over some imaginary cultural war, perhaps take time to reflect that you’ve just been baited by the daily mail and that most people don’t care about this ****.

So why don’t you calm down getting so worked up over what’s happening within a UK broadcaster and take a few deep breaths

Why the need for the aggressiveness and insults and insinuating I'm some sort of crazy angry just because I posted about something I think is wrong? As even if it's a case of not renewing I find their policy of having skin colour based quotas disgusting, which has merit on its own.

You claim I'm "outraged" and post all that unwarranted aggressively styled post?

I'm not sure where the needlessly snarky, condescending and aggressive attitude is coming from?


Edit: actually forget it. I've just seen some of your other posts and the way you engage with other posters, the insulting and aggressive manner is astounding. From telling posters to "engage the hamsters on wheel" when referring their intelligence to calling anyone who's concerned about the immigrantion crisis in Europe a "far right loon"

I wont be engaging an aggressive poster like you any further.

hatrickpatrick

Omackeral wrote: »

If replacement's not a one legged transgendered ginger midget with a pirate accent I'll be personally offended.

But I'll be totally triggered if the replacement isn't a three legged genderfluid bald ogre with a Ninja accent.

So the question is... Which of us is the better trigger finger?

Outlaw Pete

Deleted User wrote: »

So he is being discriminated against by his employer because of his race and his gender. Sounds illegal to be honest.

It is illegal in the UK, thankfully... but it almost became legal at one point thanks to feminist and minster for "Equality" at the time, Harriet Harman.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_politics/7474801.stm

pickarooney

aphex™ wrote: »

Used to hate watching cbbc when I was a kid. It was like paint by numbers. You could only have two whites on screen if you had a black person to go with them.

It's really sad that at such a young age you would have already been obsessed with skin colour. What kind of conversations went on around the dinner table?

Badly Drunk Boy

If the BBC were not renewing yer man's contract, they were really stupid to mention diversity as the reason.

There was some period drama on BBC during the year, possibly Versailles, but they had a black woman playing a very white historical figure. (By 'very white', I mean that I checked some images/paintings of the real historical person, and she'd out-pale the Gothiest Goth.) What's the deal with that? Artistic licence? Diversity?

pickarooney wrote: »

It's really sad that at such a young age you would have already been obsessed with skin colour. What kind of conversations went on around the dinner table?

In school, my 5 year old niece (and the rest of her class) had to come up with one thing that they'd do if they ruled the world for a day. My sister read some of the classmates efforts but one stood out: "I would kill Donald Trump!". What sort of conversations goes on in that kid's house?

The_Captain

aphex™ wrote: »

Used to hate watching cbbc when I was a kid. It was like paint by numbers. You could only have two whites on screen if you had a black person to go with them.

I think it's good to have this kind of thing on children's television. CBBC has a wide mix of races, men, women, people with disabilities and people with learning difficulties on their shows. None of it is remarked upon, no one is treated differently or explains their cultural background, they just do their job and children get to see this and hopefully gain some understanding that other people aren't different just because they look different.

The Backwards Man

Story is a fraud, I've read that article three times and the value of the house he lives in isn't in it.

The BBC don't get rid of comedians unless they aren't funny or they are a bit of a cnut. Your man falls into one of those categories for definite.

newport2

The_Captain wrote: »

I think it's good to have this kind of thing on children's television. CBBC has a wide mix of races, men, women, people with disabilities and people with learning difficulties on their shows. None of it is remarked upon, no one is treated differently or explains their cultural background, they just do their job and children get to see this and hopefully gain some understanding that other people aren't different just because they look different.

I agree it's good, but should it not reflect society somewhat? Does twisting numbers totally out of proportion on TV not indirectly suggest to children that these people are "different", when of course they are not.

Fratton Fred

newport2 wrote: »

I agree it's good, but should it not reflect society somewhat? Does twisting numbers totally out of proportion on TV not indirectly suggest to children that these people are "different", when of course they are not.

Not really, it just makes them completely oblivious to the colour of someone's skin.

My daughter used to attend a very multicultural school, but to those kids the difference in the colour of their skin was no different to the differences in the colour of the shoes they wore. Part of the reason for this was that every time they turned on the TV everyone was different colours, so it was very normal.

newport2

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Not really, it just makes them completely oblivious to the colour of someone's skin.

My daughter used to attend a very multicultural school, but to those kids the difference in the colour of their skin was no different to the differences in the colour of the shoes they wore. Part of the reason for this was that every time they turned on the TV everyone was different colours, so it was very normal.

Fair enough. My point was that if say 10% of society was a certain colour and on TV 50% were, this wouldn't add up. But if what you say is true, then ok. Wasn't really questioning it, just wondering what effect it has.

padd b1975

The Wolverine wrote: »

Doesn't matter if they are good or not sacking someone cause they don't fit what you could call an ethnic quota is disgusting whether white or black or purple is the one sacked.

Imagine they said to a black presenter "we have enough black presenters we need to whiten up the lineup, we won't be taking you on for the next series"

There would be war.

Check your privilege.

ligerdub

newport2 wrote: »

Fair enough. My point was that if say 10% of society was a certain colour and on TV 50% were, this wouldn't add up. But if what you say is true, then ok. Wasn't really questioning it, just wondering what effect it has.

I think that's fair point, but then we'd be into quota's again.....and that's not a good thing.

pumpkin4life

BBC QUOTE wrote: »

Holmes's axing follows the BBC's April announcement of new diversity targets to ensure that women will make up half of its staff by 2020, including on screen, on air and in leadership roles. The Corporation is also aiming to increase the proportion of its workforce from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds to 15 per cent by the same date while lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender people should by then make up eight per cent of the staff

Whites are 88% of the U.K population.

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transgender people are 2% of the population.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom

Does that mean I can take a case against the B.B.C for discriminating against white, heterosexual men?

If he was actually let go to diversify, then that is nothing short of discrimination. There's no other way of putting it.

meeeeh

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

There was some period drama on BBC during the year, possibly Versailles, but they had a black woman playing a very white historical figure. (By 'very white', I mean that I checked some images/paintings of the real historical person, and she'd out-pale the Gothiest Goth.) What's the deal with that? Artistic licence? Diversity?

Actually that stuff really annoys me. Instead of making some historical drama going on somewhere in the colonies (not like they weren't harassing people there long enough to have plenty of material) they reimagine the situation in Europe to make things less white.

dav3

pumpkin4life wrote: »

Whites are 88% of the U.K population.

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transgender people are 2% of the population.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom

Does that mean I can take a case against the B.B.C for discriminating against white, heterosexual men?

If you are Irish it would be a strange case to take, but you should certainly pursue it and let us know how you got on.

What is the relevance of the demographic breakdown of the UK?

It's always good to show just how many white people there are in the UK I suppose. With all the hysteria that comes from the little englanders you'd think they were in the minority.

Fratton Fred

newport2 wrote: »

Fair enough. My point was that if say 10% of society was a certain colour and on TV 50% were, this wouldn't add up. But if what you say is true, then ok. Wasn't really questioning it, just wondering what effect it has.

TV can't fully represent real life, because there is very few areas where the overall diversity figures are the norm.

Ia school in Cornwall might be all white, whereas a school in Tottenham might be 90% black.

Television programmes just try to show that in the UK, there are people of a number of different ethnic backgrounds and they are all represented evenly.

Son Of A Vidic

Omackeral wrote: »

If replacement's not a one legged transgendered ginger midget with a pirate accent I'll be personally offended.

Nominated for Post Of The Year.:D

alchemist33

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

If the BBC were not renewing yer man's contract, they were really stupid to mention diversity as the reason.

There was some period drama on BBC during the year, possibly Versailles, but they had a black woman playing a very white historical figure. (By 'very white', I mean that I checked some images/paintings of the real historical person, and she'd out-pale the Gothiest Goth.) What's the deal with that? Artistic licence? Diversity?

You can spot a BBC historical drama by the surprise appearance of people who have a one in ten million chance of being there. I saw a black extra in an episode of Doctor Who set in a viking village a couple of years ago, and an Asian woman walked past the camera in Poldark last week!

I'm all for diversity but it has to be in the right context.

MeatTwoVeg

alchemist33 wrote:

You can spot a BBC historical drama by the surprise appearance of people who have a one in ten million chance of being there. I saw a black extra in an episode of Doctor Who set in a viking village a couple of years ago, and an Asian woman walked past the camera in Poldark last week!

I was in a church a few weeks ago and they seemed to be portraying Jesus as a blonde haired, white guy in a lot of the paintings.
What's with that?