feeling listless

TV The BBC viewer complaints findings are always good for a laugh. Not in a chocolate ice-cream down the front of a white t-shirt way, but it does give an idea of what the British public will moan about if given the chance. For example, I wonder how this meeting went between Radio One bosses and one of their top DJs:

Sara Cox
BBC Radio 1, 10 February 2004

The complaint
A listener complained that Sara Cox had endorsed the support for Senator Kerry’s bid for the US presidency expressed by Chris Martin of Coldplay at the previous night’s Grammy Awards ceremony.

Finding
In unscripted comments intended to express enthusiasm for a British success in the Grammy Awards, Sara Cox went beyond reporting Chris Martin’s remarks and in effect endorsed them.

Further action
The management of Radio 1 reminded Sara Cox of the importance of maintaining due impartiality on controversial matters.

Which should possibly have read...

Further action
The management of Radio 1 asked Sara Cox to get a personality transplant.

Elsewhere we see them in a rather sensitive position...

BBC News (10pm)
BBC One, 12 November 2003

The complaint
In introducing a piece on the bombing of an Italian base in Iraq, the newsreader said the attack had been carried out by “those still loyal to Saddam Hussein”. A viewer complained that there was no basis for this statement.

Finding
In fact, the affiliations of those who carried out the attack were unknown (as the report itself went on to say).

Further action
Programme teams have been reminded of the need for accuracy in reporting the complex situation in Iraq.

Understatement. And finally an example of what happens when you don't read those pesky emails you keep harranging viewers for before you put it out on air:

Breakfast
BBC One, 9 November 2003

The complaint
Two viewers complained that an invitation to suggest names for the new baby of the Earl and Countess of Wessex had attracted inappropriate and hurtful messages which should not have been broadcast.

Finding
Most of the suggestions for names were serious, and those which were more light-hearted were innocuous. But the suggestion that the baby be named 'Leech' and a subsequent message suggesting a connection between her premature birth and the controversy surrounding Prince Charles were inappropriate in such a context, and at a time when there was concern about the well-being of the baby.

Further action
The Editor of Breakfast reminded the programme team of the particular issues of taste which arise in relation to stories about the Royal Family and children.

See also repeated complaints about Only Fools And Horses which fail to be about how its not funny any more...