Why Is This Person Still Allowed To Broadcast?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3530187/Channel-4-News-reporter-reprimanded-calling-British-Muslims-sell-outs-Uncle-Toms-attend-government-organised-Islamic-events.html

Had this had been a white presenter, he would have been sacked on the spot.

[Zacs-Master]

Because it happened prior to him being a channel 4 presenter.

[naomi24]

Had a white journalist ever said this, I think his application for employment would have been rejected.

[Zacs-Master]

I'm betting Ch4 didn't vet him properly.

[cassa333]

Because ethnic minorities are allowed to say anything about their own ethnic minority. It is just everyone else that can't.

Anyway sell out to what? What is he implying? Is he saying that to be part of the country you live in is a sell out?

[Gromit]

Tweets are personal edicts and nothing to do with his job. If he every submitted a report with those views, it would not be broadcast.

Whilst I do not agree with his comments, he has a right to say them. Terminating his employment because of them would be pandering to the thought police.

[douglas9401]

The enemy within the multicultural experiment.

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

/// Whilst I do not agree with his comments, he has a right to say them. Terminating his employment because of them would be pandering to the thought police. ///

There are many who have had their employment terminated for saying the wrong thing.

Here is just one.

*** Mr Page was last week removed from the bench after 15 years for saying in a TV interview that it was better for children to be brought up by a mother and a father. ***

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3489676/JP-sacked-gay-adoption-row-sues-Michael-Gove-failing-stand-rights-Christians.html

[woofgang]

I do think that the time gap makes a difference. I suspect that many of us held views five years ago that we do not hold now....and the younger a person is, the more likely this is to happen. I’d be interested to hear what his views are now.

[Gromit]

AOG
That is different. Mr Page's personal opinion was contrary to the law, and the law is what he was susposed to be impartially dispensing.
The Channel 4 presenter is expressing an opinion which is not contrary to any law and so far this has not impacted on his work.

It is impossible for journalists not to have an opinion, but if they work for an impartial news broadcaster, they have to filter out their personal views.

That is the same for every reporter, they may have to report what for example Sajid Javid is doing, whilst having a personal opinion that he doesn't know his arze from his elbow.

[anotheoldgit]

Gromit

There are many more who have lost their jobs, just carry out your usual Google searches.

And you don't think a white reporter would not have lost his job if he had used the 'Uncle Tom' description?

[Gromit]

// And you don't think a white reporter would not have lost his job if he had used the 'Uncle Tom' description? //

I doubt it if the circumstances were the same.

BTW, guess who posted this...?

// Avatar Image
anotheoldgit
Suprise, suprise how the tables are turned.

http://www.independen...ce-tweet-8056897.html

// John Terry, not guilty, Ferdinand guilty. Anyone for Choc-Ices? //

Fri 17th Aug 2012. And the post wasn't removed.

[mushroom25]

//Tweets are personal edicts and nothing to do with his job//

here's someone else who's used their twitter account to make a personal point.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-36009544

are the labour party unjustifiably getting involved, eh gromit?

[-Talbot-]

His latest Tweet



AssedBaigVerified account
‏@AssedBaig
Like many others, my views have evolved over time and I apologise for the offence caused.