Channel 4 wokes up

Channel 4 posted its annual report in June, revenues were up by £15m in 2018 and its digital audience had increased by a quarter. Strangely Channel 4 News viewing figures are down by almost a tenth, nine percent year on year. They blamed ‘Brexit fatigue,’ as many of us do. But there is probably a more obvious reason staring them in the face.

There was no Channel 4 News interview with Boris Johnson from Biarritz, as a few days earlier Dorothy Byrne, their head of news and current affairs, called him a liar and a coward, and compared him to Mr Putin.

She was giving the MacTaggart Lecture at the Edinburgh TV Festival. Only 66, but winsomely calling herself as ‘an old lady’ and ‘The Methuselah of TV,’ after forty years in broadcasting her speech harked back to a time when journalists, ‘Challenged the authority of those who ran our institutions, and their own bosses.’ TV companies such as Granada employed ‘radical thinkers,’ who, ‘passionately believed in the power of television.’ They invested in programme making and carried out ‘extraordinary investigations.’

She also deplored ‘a loss of a sense of belonging as society fragments,’ which is where her words were puzzlingly contradictory; she doesn’t like the US style capitalism we have now, where audience ratings come first, but she readily adopts US style identity politics which is all about fragmentation. Her identity seems to be above all, ‘fourth wave’ feminist. Invented in 2013 this left-wing phenomenon is also called, intersectional feminism, and asserts how different aspects of social and political identity oppression, overlap ‘intersect’ with ‘gender.’ What seemed to anger Ms Bryne most about Boris was that he’s a man not a woman, and being a woman seems like a social injustice inflicted on her.

‘We old ladies are not proud,’ she began. ‘Decades of cervical smears destroy all pride.’

Some feel lucky to get them but perhaps she was practising for a stand- up act at the Edinburgh Festival. Most female comedians are preoccupied by basic biology.  

‘The problem barely discussed,’ she said, ‘is the menopause.’ Like a committed member of #MeToo she was going to name names; ‘Kevin Lygo is an inspirational leader,’ she said, ‘but his knowledge of middle-aged women’s medical matters is perhaps wanting.’

Hopefully the man who brought us Wogan, Men Behaving Badly, Comic Relief, and poached Richard and Judy for Channel 4, was not in the audience. She was ruthless: ‘One day he remarked that I looked ill and should go home. I returned to my desk and announced that I was leaving for the day, ‘because my boss has never heard of the menopause.’ ‘Recently he told me he thought I was too young to be going through it. What a charmer!’

She then slashed into her ‘illustrious predecessors,’ on the rostrum: ‘Kevin Spacey. He proved to be a good choice. James Murdoch. Let’s delight ourselves by remembering how Ofcom described him just three years later…’

Let’s not, but she was determined: ‘He patronised and dismissed me. Hey James, now I patronise and dismiss YOU. Tonight, there’ll be no shortage of sexist bastards, possibly among you in the audience.’

She even recommended a career in TV ‘to any young woman,’ as a good weapon to use in the battle against the patriarchy. ‘In what other line of work,’ she said, ‘when some bastard annoys you, can you say to yourself, ‘I’m going to make a programme exposing that and put a stop to it!’

Her male colleagues were not merely annoying. ‘A quick tip for men,’ she said. ‘Don’t take your trousers off unless invited to do so.’

She’s now round as a Scottish bannock, but seems to have had a remarkable effect on men. A large part of the speech described her experiences of avoiding rape, by men in taxis and at World In Action. And she says things haven’t changed. Panorama reporter John Ware was recently reckless enough to call her, ‘Sweetie.’

‘At once the room fell silent,’ she said, ‘Time stood still and then in the vaguely threatening tone I’ve polished over the years, I said, ‘I am not your sweetie.’

‘Yes you are he replied.’ Courageous irony in probably the biggest danger he’d faced since he filmed Scotland Yard Flying Squad officers setting up an armed robbery. She told that story to answer her own fundamental question about Ware, ‘Is he politically correct?’

Something you need to know about any brave news reporter, at least they do on Channel 4. Essential to Ms Byrne in her battle against male totalitarianism which allows women’s careers to be, ‘blighted by having children.’

Another problem she has with the harassing, raping patriarchy, is that in the UK it’s largely posh and white. She agreed with Rupert Murdoch, who gave the lecture in 1989, that TV is, ‘Controlled by like-minded people who know what’s good for us, reflecting the values of a ‘narrow elite.’

She wants quality programmes, but not from ‘pales, stale’ men. At Granada she was Union ‘equality officer,’ and reported, she said, the lack of black staff. The response, she said,  was appalling working-class racism. Nearly 3% of TV directors are black or Asian, 25% are women, but that is, she said, ‘The most disappointing failure of my career.’

She fears current ‘fragmentation’ but doesn’t want cohesion through a British identity. In 2008 she defended Channel 4’s invitation to the President of Iran to deliver their ‘Alternative Christmas Message,’ saying he had a valuable ‘alternative viewpoint.’ In this speech she expressed fury at journalists, Remainers and enemies of Trump, being called, ‘unpatriotic,’ and at Brexiteer Andrea Leadsom for saying on Newsnight that, ‘We all need to pull together.’ On the EU she told her audience to ‘forget the idea that the public (Rupert Murdoch’s audience) can judge what is true.’

This report from the world of WOKE was confusing and contradictory but at least it revealed why Channel 4 News is now unwatchable.

Liked this Blog ? Why not post it to a friend ?

Subscribe To Quarterly Digital Edition

Subscribe To Quarterly Traditional Print Magazine (delivered to your door)

7 Comments on Channel 4 wokes up

  1. Channel 4 News is unwatchable just as the insufferably righteous Guardian is unreadable by all but the snowflake generation who’s struggle against an evil non-egalitarian world gives their lives as semblance of real purpose.

    Why then, do these institutions so lacking in popular support that they could not survive commercially, have such influence?

  2. Thank you Jane Kelly. Only a woman could say that! If a man tried it he would be instantly consigned to the nether regions by no less than that awful Byrne. Thought: Byrne, nether regions? Burn? My apologies, I shouldn’t think like that. Or should ?! Things are very confusing these days. Maybe that’s deliberate. There I go again. I must stop.

  3. The sooner there’s an all-female cabinet of euro-zealots the sooner we can benefit from the sort of puritanism that Cromwell would have implemented if he had not suffered the defect of being a man.

  4. Dorothy Byrne’s appalling racist comments bring to mind another media white liberal racist’s comment: ‘hideously white’ (Greg Dyke).

    Byrne doesn’t appear to have lived anywhere else in the world during her long bitter life, or have any familiarity with foreign cultures or languages, as far as I can gather.

    If she had traveled a bit more, she might have realized that most white Brit males (certainly the ones we come across in EastAsia) are remarkably open-minded and tolerant compared with most men in RoW.

    (I can’t imagine anyone in China’s media saying ‘there are far too many Chinese people on TV.’ No one here thinks in the least bit odd, and why should they? Besides, we minorities don’t want to be matronized by her; we want to be judged on merit, not the color of our skin.)

    Or maybe she wouldn’t have as she appears to be as thick as ‘shyte in a bottle’, as her fellow Scots put it.

    • Do minorities really want to be judged on merit and not the colour or their skin? There are many well established advantages to playing “the race card” and blaming “the system” for your failure to succeed. I guess if you come up a winner on merit alone then judgement by merit is deemed to be a good and fair process. What happens if some minorities show consistent low scores on the merit scale? Committed egalitarians will, of course, discover that the method used to judge merit is fatally flawed and must be scrapped and replaced with a method which gives the “correct” outcome.

      There are certain “disadvantaged” minorities who (it seems) can never really fail. Rather, they are always failed by society.

  5. “we minorities don’t want to be matronized by her; we want to be judged on merit, not the color of our skin.”

    Well said. I like the word “matronized” and, with your permission, will use it at the earliest opportunity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.