O/T. The Government's handling of Covid

[Andy_Faber]

Its one of the reasons why AF's favourite gripe - "over representation of BAME in the media" - based on what? His perception? Fine but its highly likely that his perception does not equate with reality. .

Here's the reality

The (pro-BAME) Creative Diversity Network (CDN) published its Third Cut report after surveying over 30,000 diversity forms relating to over 600,000 TV production contributions.

The CDN found that “BAME [Black and Minority Ethnic] on-screen representation” is a remarkable 23% — far above the BAME share of the British general population, estimated at 14%''.

they (CDN) see that as a good thing. I personally don't, despite having a BAME former family member and still close friend who is part of that on-screen cohort. You may also see it as a good thing, and if so, explain it. But if you want to keep bringing it up, don't persist in denial of it. Confront it and discuss it

[Trickytreesreds]

Here's the reality

The (pro-BAME) Creative Diversity Network (CDN) published its Third Cut report after surveying over 30,000 diversity forms relating to over 600,000 TV production contributions.

The CDN found that “BAME [Black and Minority Ethnic] on-screen representation” is a remarkable 23% — far above the BAME share of the British general population, estimated at 14%''.

they (CDN) see that as a good thing. I personally don't, despite having a BAME former family member and still close friend who is part of that on-screen cohort. You may also see it as a good thing, and if so, explain it. But if you want to keep bringing it up, don't persist in denial of it. Confront it and discuss it

Andy, it's over compensation as we all know.
The equality needed addressing, but it went past reality and kept going.
Look at the BBC's fgures alone. 22% representation.
Yet I object to the term BAME any way. The ASIAN part really. Asian as in Russian/ middle east/Indian/ Far east?
I certainly don't see many far east ethnicities and we do have them.

Problem with the media is, it is exactly that in the public eye. You switch the telly on and the face you see, is what you see.
Such has been the drive to correct a wrong, every effort is made to put BAME figures in the spot light.
It makes the media look bad, instead of just trying to make it normal.

NB, has anyone tried looking at films/ box sets lately from staions like Disney/ Netflix?
I have seen several recreation scenes, that have included black people in historical events, that couldn't possibly have been there.
US WW2 scenes, have been doctored to show black service personal, to be in far greater numbers than they actually were, due to the restrictions placed on enlistment and the roles given to them.
Many wrongly went under the radar for their service, including the native American Navaho indians, and their uncracked codes.
Many wrong doings needed retold. But don't make up untruths about the reality.
The young today believe what they are told as the facts.

Thats put a target on my back

[swaledale]

Here's the reality

The (pro-BAME) Creative Diversity Network (CDN) published its Third Cut report after surveying over 30,000 diversity forms relating to over 600,000 TV production contributions.

The CDN found that “BAME [Black and Minority Ethnic] on-screen representation” is a remarkable 23% — far above the BAME share of the British general population, estimated at 14%''.

they (CDN) see that as a good thing. I personally don't, despite having a BAME former family member and still close friend who is part of that on-screen cohort. You may also see it as a good thing, and if so, explain it. But if you want to keep bringing it up, don't persist in denial of it. Confront it and discuss it

Ah touched a nerve I see, done a little bit of research to try and support your initial comment, which was made months before that report, but yes that seems to be the reality, so what?

The reason I keep bringing it up, is because its such a strange comment to make and is quite revealing about you, it rather removes the impression of reasonable respectful bloke you try to convey.

One I'd ask why it bothers you? What is it about race and identity that creates this concern? The race of the person on the TV or any other media is not something I would register to the extent that the question would even form in my head. My only judgement would be are they good at what they are doing.

Secondly, why if there is a degree of over representation now, is that a bad thing? Is that not just readdressing the imbalance that was the case in the previous 4 or so decades, when there was very little representation of anybody other than white people?

Surely the proportion of BAME people working in the media does not have to be the same as that in the working population? It only matters if its significantly less, which would suggest an issue, though not prove there was one, of access to that work.

I'm just amazed you find it such an issue you actually posted about it!

[Geoff Parkstone]

Ah but then you see thats the problem with anecdotal evidence, it depends upon the judgement (good, bad or indifferent) of the observer. A 1,000 anecdotal stories will not actually prove anything, too many variables and yes the age range may well have been greater, maybe I just noticed the over 55's not wearing masks? Thats one of the big problems with anecdotal "evidence"? Most people don't give very accurate accounts of what they have seen.

Its one of the reasons why AF's favourite gripe - "over representation of BAME in the media" - based on what? His perception? Fine but its highly likely that his perception does not equate with reality.

Reminds me of a course on taking witness statements I attended aeons ago, the first rule of which was - don't take what your told at face value, 5 different people will see the same incident and each account will be different. This was very clearly demonstrated by a practical demonstration which was very illuminating.

Also I think you must have misread my post, I stated that less than 5% of the largely white audience were wearing masks and thats a generous assessment! So not sure how my observation ties in with yours? Or was that just a slip on your pat willing there to be some connection?

Anyway the gig wasn't in Derby, haven't lived anywhere near Derby for the best part of 5 years.

Actually nowhere did I reference your data with Derby, quite specifically since you didn't say where the gig was.

Again as with rA example, your anecdotal evidence (and no I didn't misread the low mask count stat) in no way influences or changes my observation concerning zero compliance within a black sample. Had you said you'd been to see a Dre Dre tribute act with 95% black fully masked up attendance, then it would.

But you didnt

[swaledale]

Actually nowhere did I reference your data with Derby, quite specifically since you didn't say where the gig was.

Again as with rA example, your anecdotal evidence (and no I didn't misread the low mask count stat) in no way influences or changes my observation concerning zero compliance within a black sample. Had you said you'd been to see a Dre Dre tribute act with 95% black fully masked up attendance, then it would.

But you didnt

Your right you didn't you were referring to rA's post.

Given that you made this statement "Let's keep observing, the greater the anecdotal data base, the greater the sample size becomes and the greater credibility of any conclusion." I can only assume your knowledge of how data is used properly to arrive at a conclusion is something your not familiar with.

I doubt whether you would be taking a vaccine based on a large sample size of anecdotal accounts that nobody died! So I'm puzzled as to why you think your statement has nay merit?

[Geoff Parkstone]

The rewriting of history is a difficult thing Tricky. If an Asian actor took a prominent part in a new version of Robin Hood, should we say "that's wrong as there were no Asians in the country then" or should we say "that's right because an actor is an actor regardless of appearance" ??

Do we accept anachronistic appearance or what?

[Trickytreesreds]

The rewriting of history is a difficult thing Tricky. If an Asian actor took a prominent part in a new version of Robin Hood, should we say "that's wrong as there were no Asians in the country then" or should we say "that's right because an actor is an actor regardless of appearance" ??

Do we accept anachronistic appearance or what?

Personally - NO.
Can you imagine a white man portraying Nelson Mandela/ M.L.King?
No of course not, the outrage would be massive.
It wasn't true and neither should it be altered. #
Perhaps, we can remake the Vikings as all being black next? Kirk Douglas move aside, Danny Sapani has the main role.

There was lot that needed correcting. But I just don't like this re writing of past events which couldn't possibly be true.

[ramAnag]

Personally - NO.
Can you imagine a white man portraying Nelson Mandela/ M.L.King?
No of course not, the outrage would be massive.
It wasn't true and neither should it be altered. #
Perhaps, we can remake the Vikings as all being black next? Kirk Douglas move aside, Danny Sapani has the main role.

There was lot that needed correcting. But I just don't like this re writing of past events which couldn't possibly be true.

Were there lots of Vikings from New York and Beverley Hills then?

[Trickytreesreds]

Were there lots of Vikings from New York and Beverley Hills then?

they could trace their DNA back to Norse men, that's for sure

[ramAnag]

they could trace their DNA back to Norse men, that's for sure

Lol...so a guy from New York of Jewish/Russian origins can trace his ancestry back to Scandinavia. Really?
You seem a tad obsessed by colour.