The BAI rejected my complaint about the Joe Duffy Show on Life Loans

03-07-2021 4:38pm

Looking through some of the recent BAI complaints determinations, one thing that crops up pretty often is a line like this " the Code acknowledges that some current affairs programmes are synonymous with personalities and, in these cases, the style of the programme and presenter are key factors in engaging audiences. The Committee noted that the presenter’s style is well known to
audiences, therefore, listeners are likely to expect robust debate."

Sure that's a nonsense. That just means 'Oh you know what s/he's like, it's a breach of the code but is cancelled-out because that's just they way they are"

One of these cases involved Ivan Yates interviewing a doctor (who turned out not be a physician, but had a PhD) talking about mixing sleeping tablets and alcohol, which Ivan endorsed as a sleeping aid, apparently without opposition from the PhD.

I don't really buy this "That's just Ivan, you can't take anything from him seriously" attitude -- if it's not supposed to be serious, why has he an expert on in the first place?

Some of the complaints are indeed ridiculous, but it seems to me that when a complaint is in any way borderline, the presumption swings in favour of the broadcaster each time. The Committee doesn't say what its standard of proof is (balance of probabilities? overwhelming? beyond doubt?), but it seems to be quite a high bar to reach.

The Complaints Committee has a few former journalists and one or two 'media trainers' on it; not sure if that's relevant or what.

Former Former Former · 04-07-2021 8:04am

Maybe it just means that a lot of the complaints are groundless. I could well believe that tbh. This thread is a nice example.

grassylawn · 04-07-2021 11:50am

So a lifetime loan means that you never have to repay it unless you sell your house, but they get your house when you die?

Not sure what is wrong with that? If I had no dependants that would be perfect. Free money, for all intents and purposes, assuming I planned to stay in the house.

Not suitable if you're concerned about providing for someone beyond your death, but that has no effect on its validity as a product for other cases.

bossdrum · 04-07-2021 12:19pm

grassylawn wrote: »

So a lifetime loan means that you never have to repay it unless you sell your house, but they get your house when you die?

Not sure what is wrong with that? If I had no dependants that would be perfect. Free money, for all intents and purposes, assuming I planned to stay in the house
.

It's actually better than that as the bank only get their loan amount back plus whatever interest has accrued at the agreed rate.
In most cases there is still money leftover for all those concerned relatives.

Elmo · 04-07-2021 12:39pm

Former Former Former wrote: »

Maybe it just means that a lot of the complaints are groundless. I could well believe that tbh. This thread is a nice example.

It also means that complaints are less likely to happen.

There will always be some complaints that are groundless but that shouldn’t stop people from complaining.

We really don’t like complaining in this country.

04-07-2021 2:34pm

Former Former Former wrote: »

Maybe it just means that a lot of the complaints are groundless.

It could be that, although I personally find it difficult to believe that radio stations, despite anyone's hardest work, could be so near-flawless.

It might otherwise be that the BAI are extremely reluctant to interfere with the freedom of media expression, but if so, they should set that out clearly. Instead, they seem to occasionally admit that a broadcaster breached the code, whilst grappling around for reasons to dismiss the complaint anyway.

It would be better if they just established a consistent standard of proof like most Determination Bodies, or described what level of seriousness a complaint must meet.

The BAI rejected my complaint about the Joe Duffy Show on Life Loans

Comments