Comments on: Handling Ross/Brand in an open way

By: Alec

Alec — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:21:43 +0000

I hear the decision not to run the DEC Gaza appeal has attracted 10,000 complaints already. Do you think we can look forward to a similar handling of those responsible?

By: Edmund O'Connell

Edmund O'Connell — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 00:55:52 +0000

It is obvious that the BBC as an organisation has totally underestimated the level of outrage that is being felt at the decision to reinstate Jonathon Ross. Blaming the Daily Mail for reporting on systematic failures at the BBC misses the point, the public are tired of financing an organisation that does not have the slightest interest in our views. I for one am boycotting the BBC license fee and will continue to do so until appropriate action has been taken. I invite all of you to join me.

By: Ross/Brand - how not to let a molehill become a mountain (version 2,137) | Greyhead.co.uk

Tue, 18 Nov 2008 16:02:02 +0000

[...] BBC Common Platform: Handling Ross/Brand in an open way [...]

By: Daniel Weir

Daniel Weir — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 18:19:12 +0000

My comments have gone ! Was I too troublesome in what I said . . . I’m confused.

DW x

By: Steve Bowbrick

Steve Bowbrick — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 11:58:40 +0000

I know I’m being naive about the institutional issues but I do disagree:

* the severity of the problem actually supports my argument: the more severe the problem, the more openness and spontaneity will help – think Cadbury’s and the poisonous chocolate frogs and dozens of other major corporate nightmares. It’s not about statements and apologies, it’s about simple, informal messages from informed voices (like yourself).

By: Bowblog: Brand and Ross are innocent

Bowblog: Brand and Ross are innocent — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 18:09:33 +0000

[...] enemies at The Mail to control the story for days. But I’ve written about all that over at Common Platform. Have I got this wrong? Should the BBC really have caved in so cravenly? Could Thompson not have [...]

By: Nick Reynolds (BBC)

Nick Reynolds (BBC) — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 11:12:04 +0000

There are some good ideas here, which I obviously agree with.

But I’m not sure they would have worked in this case.

This story was broken by and led by The Mail. There was nothing about it on blogs before they picked it up.

If you have a problem you have to go to the source and try and fix it there.

On a blog you can enter into a dialogue through comments easily. It’s much harder to do that with a national newspaper.

I would have apologised earlier and through a full page statement in the Mail and on its website – and then done any TV interviews.

The other problem was that Brand’s first apology, where he attacked the Mail, came over as insincere and just made things worse. If he’d done this on a blog it would have been just as bad, if not worse.

The fundamental problem was the message, not the medium!

My personal views obviously)

By: Jemima Kiss

Jemima Kiss — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:10:32 +0000

If Ofcom was also as open as it should be, it would release a feed from the complaints database that could be plotted on that very graph. Likewise complaints to the BBC itself – assuming complaints *are* logged in a database and not just on Post-It Notes.

By: Steve Bowbrick

Steve Bowbrick — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:57:14 +0000

Doesn't it sound like the perfect opportunity for a bit of open linked data?

By: Roo Reynolds

Roo Reynolds — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:21:14 +0000

Best I’ve found so far: the timeline at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7694989.stm