Humour

The lack of humour among those who attack Christianity

If one observes the people who attack Christianity and all its values, they all seem to have many things in common; - they are sour, serious and show a profound lack of humour.

One of the reasons for these behaviour patterns is not only are they generally miserable people but they have an enormous egos to feed. Of course the paradox is also true they may be very insecure with very small egos that need continual bolstering. These often-shallow self-opinionated people dominate the media. They appear to speak with great authority, yet if one looks at the substance of what they are saying it is pretty unintelligent and badly thought out material, much of which relies entirely on half-truths and vague suppositions. They love to bring about an air of great drama over some historic document that has been unearthed basing whole suppositions of something that has had only limited examination and could be as phoney as they are. Then we also come across the quasi scientist who is usually a "has" been" in terms of science dwelling in the past before the development of quantum physics and DNA research.  Many of the most advanced scientists often have respect for religion and the concept of a creator. Whilst your anti Christian  "has been" is attached to “old science”

One thing they all absolutely hate, which is their Achilles’ heel, is humour and to be made fun of. Even the most gentle of leg pulling is totally unacceptable to them, whilst a fully developed person can not only accept humour directed against them, but more importantly can laugh at their own failings. To laugh at oneself is almost a divine gift.

So if you are fed up with the entire silly attacks on you as a Christian, go on the offensive and challenge these people. Laugh at them, their absurdity, their pomposity and their enormous conceitedness.  We need someone of Swiftian greatness to deflate these silly people. Unfortunately it is difficult to derive humour from such shallow people, because it requires people of some substance to be humorous. You can only laugh so much about crashing bores.

Remember these people are generally fearful of those with a solid faith; they show enormous discomfort in the presence of such people. So next time you have the misfortune to be in the presence of these “intellectual” media type people don’t be a shrinking violet but go in with guns blazing promoting your faith. But for holy sake do it in a cheerful happy manner. Crack a few jokes and make sure you have a large benign smile. They will get very nasty and even insulting; - we hope they do, because it means you are having an impact. But don’t give up; keep it up.  You may need to train in advance to get your stamina up to a good level and you may need to purchase some earplugs if they get too offensive. On the other hand you can derive a lot of fun from it all. Promoting our faith is what we are here to do and unlike some of the Protestant sects you don’t need to rely on “Joy through Gloom”.

By RIGBY

RTE’s support for Abortion

A report from Dublin regarding

RTE’s support for Abortion

Well, there’s been a lot that has happened since I last sent CUT a report. The ink had hardly dried on the last letter when news broke of the death of Savita Halapannavar, an Indian woman who died in hospital while pregnant. The media were ablaze against Irish pro-baby laws. This followed on the heels of an EU court ruling that Ireland must change its laws on abortion. So while the minister for health James Reilly has set up an ‘expert group’, made up mostly of pro-aborts, to review the situation, the tragic death of Savita Halpannavar occurred. This led to a stream of blood letting from the media giving over much air time to the pro-aborts calling for the minister to legislate for abortion. The ‘expert group’ has come back with its recommendations. Basically the upshot of it is that the minister will bring in regulations to permit abortion. (Notice the use of the word regulation. If it was legislation it would have constitutional implications). Prompted by a constant barrage from the media, this is what he must do to keep them happy. They are going to find overwhelming opposition from the Irish people

Pro-Life candle lit vigil outside Dail Ereann
- ignored by RTE

           The Pro-life people have not been silent. Soon after the death of Savita H the pro-abortionists held a candle lit vigil outside Dail Eireann (Irish Parliament). There were about 2000 people attending, with extensive media coverage. Possibly there were not even 2000 people there. About a week later the pro-life side held a candle lit vigil outside Dail Eireann with no aid from the media in advertising it. According to the Gardai about 10,000 attended the vigil.



Demonstrators urge Irish government to keep its
pro-life election promise



     

About a month ago the prolife people had another pro-life vigil, putting it to the government that the Irish people do not want abortion. This time over 30,000 people attended according to Gardai though people were still arriving, they turned up outside Dail Eireann holding candles; the media stated 25,000, of which I was one. A pro life group put the turnout at over 35,000 holding a peaceful yet defiant protest. I would say the latter figure was more accurateI . The pro-aborts held a counter demonstration and numbered about 200. Needless to say they got plenty of coverage from the media. Through all this campaign the media have shown their true colours and been unashamedly biased in their desire to have innocent Irish children in the womb executed. In one RTE programme there were four pro-aborts calling for a change in the pro-life laws that protect the unborn baby, with no pro-life to counter balance. There have been programmes where there have been three pro-aborts and the presenter who would side with the pro-aborts against one pro-life person, who though courageous has suffered a mauling at their hands .

       To top this off Pat Rabbitte has said that he will be introducing a household broadcasting charge to each home. He hasn’t stated when, but it looks like sometime this summer. Talk about a government and media being out of touch. One bright side: there was a by-election here last week, Pat Rabbitte’s party Labour (a rabidly pro-abortion and a rabidly pro-homosexual party) had a complete collapse in their vote. As a result they are turning in on themselves with members deserting their parliamentary party. Let’s hope and pray that this government collapses.

RTE ignore Irish Doctors' Pro-Life vote

 This morning on RTE Radio 1 there was saturation coverage of the IMO (Irish Medical Organization) annual conference, with special emphasis on the topics/motions that were coming up for discussion /debate such as abortion. There were three motions to be voted on: should the IMO support abortion in cases of

(a)Rape.

(b)Foetal abnormality

(c)Mother threatening suicide.

On RTE Radio on Friday April 5^th  gave free rein to a pro abortion doctor. On the same morning a headline in the Irish Independent stated ‘master of rotunda performed four abortions’, taking the whole thing out of context. He had intervened to save the life of the mother.

      Intervention to save life of the mother; everything medically practical is done to save the life of the baby.

       Abortion; everything is done medically to kill the baby.

       The paper is trying to drum up support and give some credibility for its favoured abortion position in the vote. With so much of the media and the European Court of ‘human rights’ stacked against the right to life, the Irish doctors defeated each motion and didn’t accept the need for or ‘right’ to abortion. Praise the Lord.

After the IMO’s vote, maybe you’ve guessed it; not a breeze from RTE saying the motions had failed. Talk about cover up. Is this serving the truth, or the Irish people, or the unborn? Is this what the Irish citizen is being forced to pay for? Cover up and deceit!

RTE interview people coming out of prison for not paying the TV licence

         On RTE Radio 1 they were interviewing people coming out of prison. One man they interviewed had been sentenced to one week in prison for not paying his TV licence. The ‘ex con’ told the interviewer that they had taken him into the prison, processed him, taken his jewellery and noted his tattoos, then given him back his jewellery and he was free. He spent one hour in the prison. I was thinking about this interview. Now they don’t normally interview people coming out of prison. The chances of getting someone coming out of prison for not paying their TV license would be quite rare. RTE had quite obviously followed the case. They would have been well aware of it. They must have been; - it was RTE who had pressed charges. This is the same RTE who has an agony uncle on every day at 1.45pm, the Joe Duffy show, where he gives airtime to people to air their grievances on all sorts of issues. People who have no money and are being let down by  government and all sorts of institutions, having to pay colossal taxes and charges etc. He acts as if he’s taking up their case. The programme before this they were interviewing the man who had been banged up by RTE. The man was unemployed, he had been made redundant and said he couldn’t afford the TV license. Why is RTE interviewing him? It’s not good publicity. Then it struck me this is not coincidental; they obviously knew he’d be out soon. The reason being, RTE, desperate for cash, wanted to send a message to its listeners: this is what happens to you if you don’t pay your TV license. They want to get the message across now that a compulsory household broadcasting charge is on its way. People were texting in saying things like, this is the way to go, one hour and it’s over, or words to that effect. The presenter said he was getting lots of texts like this. I texted in saying, ‘Now there’s a sensible man, not paying his TV licence, RTE liberal bias.’ Although he wasn’t that sensible, - he did watch TV. It makes one think of all the humorous and poignant texts I could have sent. Also worth noting: this presenter until recently was on 950,000 euros annually with also one weekly TV show. Joe Duffy was on a mere 660,000 euros per annum with maybe some cut backs since the recession. This is where the forced household broadcasting charge will be going.

Savita Halapannavar inquest update

     The update on the Savita H case is, an inquest has started into the cause of her death. This is getting saturation coverage not only here in Ireland but globally. The world’s media are camped at the inquest in Galway. It is also being viewed with interest by not only Irish pro life groups but by other pro life groups around the world because of its significance. This tragic death happened just as the EU was pressurizing Ireland to clarify its pro life laws (‘clarify’ is a euphemism, for they want Ireland to introduce abortion, with the Irish government only too ready to accommodate). Ireland is one of the safest countries in the world to have a baby, usually within the top three countries. As Ireland is in a bailout programme with the EU giving Ireland money, they want something in return, to the point of pressuring Ireland to introduce abortion. Hence the intense media focus on the case, because of its high stakes significance. The media zoning in on – did this woman die because she was refused an abortion because it’s a Catholic country. Apparently a midwife said to Mrs H when she asked for an abortion as it looked like the baby would not survive, we can’t do that this is a Catholic country. This is according to Savita’s husband. An inquest which just started was suspended today to find out who this midwife was. This is the rod the pro-aborts are using to beat the pro life people across the back. If you type in ‘Life institute Savita Halapannavar or ‘Pro life Campaign Savita Halapannavar’ you should get good updates.

    

             God bless,

Our Lady of Knock Pray for us

Crusader with St Rita - Dublin

 Editor’s Note:

Kermit Gosnell case ignored by the media

In contrast to the tragic case of Savita Halapannavar, there has been a complete lack of interest on the BBC and RTE in the trial of murderous abortion doctor Kermit Gosnell. He is being tried for an endless number of crimes including murder, abuse of corpse, infanticide abortion on a child of 24 weeks and more, and drug delivery resulting in death. We have to face it supporting the BBC and RTE by paying the licence fee is supporting abortion.                         

Is the BBC deliberately creating a culture of anti-Catholic hatred?

There have been some alarming reports reaching CUT, that the level of abuse which ordinary Catholics are having to suffer in the workplace is getting out of hand. Of course a certain amount of anti-Catholic bias has always existed in the UK, the leftovers of the Reformation. However, in recent years many Catholics have had to put up with sustained and deliberate verbal attacks and even worse. These attacks appear to reach a crescendo after the BBC has broadcast one of its notorious documentaries on child-abuse and cover-ups in the Catholic Church. We should accept that some of these documentaries and current affairs programmes are warranted; bishops should have taken action earlier.  But they now need to speak up for members of their flocks who are suffering. 

No other denomination or organization or section of the community has had the same amount of attention in this regard. Take, for example, child abuse in the Church of England.  This has a similar problem with child abuse by vicars, but the BBC do not show the same level of interest whereas almost every case in the Catholic Church has been followed up with a current affairs programme or a documentary. I do not think the BBC has made a single programme on child abuse in the Church of England. When I enquired whether the BBC has made a documentary on child abuse in the C of E this is the reply I received.

Thank you for contacting us.
I understand you feel the BBC is biased against the Catholic Church.
Impartiality is the cornerstone of all our news and current affairs output and we ensure all our correspondents and production teams are aware of this to help us deliver fair and balanced coverage for all the stories we report. We seek neither to denigrate nor promote any particular view, rather we present the relevant facts and allow our audience to make up their own minds based on them.Senior editorial staff, the Executive Committee and the BBC Trust keep a close watch on programmes to ensure that standards of impartiality are maintained.
Below is a list of Church of England abuse allegations that we have featured.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19425149
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-17284399
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-21776012
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20311843
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-20393842

Nevertheless, I do appreciate you feel strongly regarding this, and as we’re guided by feedback such as yours, I’d like to assure you that I’ve registered your comments on our audience log. This is a report of audience feedback that’s compiled daily and made available to staff across the BBC, including members of the BBC Executive Board, channel controllers and other senior managers.
Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.
Kind Regards
Michelle McGahan

BBC Complaints

There is a major difference in the way the BBC reports child abuse in the Catholic Church to the way it reports child abuse in the Church of England. For example, the above links to news reports are only a few of the child abuse cases in the C of E; these are not documentaries or specific programmes on the subject but straightforward news items that will soon be forgotten. The question I put to them was how many documentaries have they made on child abuse occurring in the C of E.  They ignored my question.

The way in which they reported that an Anglican bishop and his assistant were involved in child abuse is a case in point. When I first heard the report on Radio 4 they were merely described as priests of the Church. Here is a report we produced last year:

BBC make child abusing Vicars seem like Catholic Priests.

It is a sad fact of modern life that childhood is no longer cherished in the same way it once was. Many children can have their precious innocence taken from them by the all pervasive media as soon as they learn to speak. They are targeted by the advertising industry and many other pressure groups and turned into materialistic consumers even before the start school. Perhaps it is not surprising given that the children of today are the survivors of the holocaust of abortion. Life today, it would seem has been devalued by a culture of death that targets the most venerable at the very beginning of their life’s journey and then again if secularists get their way, towards the end of their lives or even if they are unfortunate enough to become severely disabled.

Beside all this children today must also face an epidemic of child abuse.  In England and Wales every day in secular society there are 60 cases of child abuse reported to the authorities. Of course the numbers of children being abused are proportionately very small but the reporting of these cases by the media can traumatise children. It is important therefore that when the media and especially omnipresent BBC report on these cases they not only get their facts right but also that the journalism is clear and transparent. They should under no circumstances use the victims of child abuse to support a secularising agenda.

I was therefore amazed and concerned on the 30^th of August to hear two reports on child abusing Church of England vicars that seem to make them appear as Catholic priests. How did the BBC do this you may ask? Let me explain I first heard a report on BBC radio 4 in the evening PM programme on child abuse in the diocese of Chichester however there was no mention of the Church of England. But the vicars in question were referred to as ‘priests’ and there was no mention that they were vicars. I turned over to BBC radio 5 and the same happened there was no mention of the Church of England but it was simply referred to as the ‘Church’. That this was an Anglican diocese was not explained it wasn’t until it was stated that the Archbishop of Canterbury has had to intervene that there was any clue that it of the C of E but given the Archbishop penchant for pontificating in Catholic affairs it could easily seem that he was talking about the Catholic Church again. Especially given his notorious pronouncement about the problems in the Catholic Church in Ireland in 2010 perhaps he should learn that what go around comes around.

However, what were the other clues that could make it seem too great un-Churched of the UK that this was probably the Catholic Church they was talking about? One was that the child abusing Vicars were referred to only as priests of the Church there was no mention of the Anglican Church or the Church of England in either report. How different it is when the BBC report on the cases of child abuse in the Catholic Church – they make sure that everyone knows who they are talking about in these cases.

Pantomime Religious and Ethics Programmes from the BBC

One of the main features of a pantomime is booing the baddie and cheering the goodie. There is a trend in BBC Religious and Ethics programmes to make nice little documentaries about Protestants and cutting edge ones about Catholics. For example Vicar Academy was a warm documentary series on Anglican men and women training to be vicars in a changing world. However, quite often when Catholics are featured the BBC manages to find people who oppose the teaching of the Church and want change. The BBC quite often likes to feature discordant elements in the Catholic Church in Ireland, or it reports on child abuse in Boston in the USA while ignoring the severe crisis in the Anglican Church of Australia.

There are 60 cases of child abuse reported in secular society every day in England and Wales. Should the BBC be trying to understand why there is such an abuse epidemic here? With the worship of sex and the cult of celebrity, are the BBC and other media outlets partly responsible for this? The Jimmy Savile problems and the many cases of child abuse at the BBC both by him and by other BBC employees should have told them something. But it appears that the BBC is ducking its responsibility.  A member of CUT (Our prayer Crusader under the patronage of St Gerard) has recently written to the BBC complaining about the anti-Catholic bias in News reporting.  He tells CUT that, ‘The reality is that there is no way they can argue their way out of this: 45% of their top 100 results for the term 'sex abuse' related to the Catholic Church- totally disproportionate. If the politicians are intent on preventing the press from victimizing people then they surely ought to rein in organizations like the BBC.’ He received this risible reply from the BBC:

Thanks for contacting us about BBC News.
We’re sorry to read that you feel that reports are biased against the Catholic Church and that an unfair number of online news articles relating to the church are returned when searching for the term ‘sex abuse’.

We know that not everyone will agree with our choices on which stories to cover, and the prominence that we give to them. These are subjective decisions made by our news editors, and we accept that not everyone will think that we are correct on each occasion.
Regarding the BBC News Online searches, results are returned in chronological order by the date they were published and the content of them has no bearing on the order they appear in the results. For instance, at this moment in time the same search returns a number of results at the top that are in no way connected to the Catholic Church.

Nevertheless we’d like to assure you that your complaint has been registered on our Audience Log. This is a daily report of audience feedback that’s made available to all BBC staff, including BBC News, channel controllers and other senior managers.

The Audience Logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions on future BBC programmes and content.

Once again, thank you for contacting us.
Kind Regards
Andrew Gilfillan
BBC Complaints

An important term was used in this reply by the BBC’s Andrew Gilfillan , ‘These are subjective decisions made by our news editors’. Subjective we understand from the thesaurus means slanted, biased, prejudiced, skewed, one-sided … I do not think CUT could have put it better. Should Mr Gilfillan have used the term objective? Perhaps this was a slip of the tongue or perhaps Mr. Gilfillan possesses that rarest of all qualities to be found at the BBC - honesty.

The whole point of this Blog post is to expose the sheer bloody-minded anti-Catholic bias at the BBC. We do not particularly want the C of E or the Scouts or the NHS or any other organization to be targeted in the same way that the Catholic Church has been. But we do expect balance and honest reporting. The BBC is paid for by a compulsory license fee from everyone who watches live TV therefore we as British Catholics expect to be treated in the same way as everyone else. We are part of British culture and we do not expect to be attacked in the work place because of unbalanced and bigoted reporting by the BBC.

Our Prayer Crusader under the patronage of St Gerard has requested that we all contact BBC complaints of this matter and write to our MPs.

www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

BBC's The Mystery of Mary Magdalene.

Another BBC production to help Catholics stop paying the TV licence fee was Melvyn Bragg’s The Mystery of Mary Magdalene.

At one of the most sacred and solemn moments of the Christian year the Paschal Triduum, the crucifixion of Our Lord, the BBC  broadcast the blasphemous and groundless assertion that Our Lord Jesus Christ had sex with St Mary Magdalene.  No Catholic would want to be responsible for helping to fund such a programme.

 The Wednesday Play - Up the Junction - agitprop drama

How the BBC helped to change laws and public opinion away from the Christian norm, part two

That extra flash of orange every three weeks

Two thirds of the Wednesday Play’s output was not interventionist but just conventional entertainment. However, once every three weeks or so came along a play that was so emotive and ‘progressively’ radical that it clearly had an effect on the values and beliefs of its viewers. One such play was Up the Junction (1965) it was produced by MacTaggart, and directed by Loach. Up the Junction was a direct attempt to influence public opinion and the political will on the side of David Steel’s Abortion Law Reform Bill. It did this by fusing fictional drama with a documentary feel and used the issue of back street abortions to achieve its aims. There was also a voiceover at one point by a doctor giving a sort of medical narrative in favour of legalising abortion to make it ‘safe.’ In fact the number deaths of women after the legalisation of abortion went up. The play also shamefully depicted the working class people of Clapham Junction as inarticulate, over-sexed, criminals who had no restraint and were only interested in having a good time. The production team seem to be saying through Up the Junction that without legalised abortion we will have poverty and chaos. It was almost fascist in its latent implication that these people should not be allowed to breed.

                 Up the Junction was based on the book of the same name by Nell Dunn but it was Garnett’s agenda that came through in the play. Garnett, the script editor, virtually hijacked Dunn’s script, ‘to meet his own heavily interventionist and propagandist ‘personal agenda.⁵’ Newman later gave Garnett special privileges like a higher budget and more time to make his plays. Newman “recognised in Garnett a man committed to his own brand of ‘agitational contemporaneity’ who was likely to win audiences and headlines and who would ‘provide the extra flash of orange every three weeks or so⁶.’” This mixing of conventional entertainment and the ‘extra flash of orange’ within a play strand is one of the elements shows the TV to be fundamentally flawed. Perhaps we can also say that the BBC is fundamentally flawed for it is very unlikely that a commercial channel would have been able to sell advertising space between scenes which depict as emotively as possible a screaming girl having an abortion. This play could only have been made at the BBC because of its form of funding. The BBC’s attempt to rescreen Up the Junction before Parliament was due to debate the abortion law reform bill was withdrawn due to the threat of legal action but in its place they screened 24 Hours which was a documentary on backstreet abortions, objectivity at the BBC was dead and buried.

A society changed by television programmes - The Catholic Church stands almost alone in opposing the Culture of Death

Melvin Bragg often laments that we do not have such plays today. Of course in the soap operas and in the general underlying ethos of today’s television, particularly at the BBC we do. It sustains the left/liberal ‘Politically Correct’ culture we have today particularly in education and the public sector institutions. However, the main battles for traditional values and beliefs were lost long ago. This latent left/liberal bias at the BBC not only sustains the Cultural Revolution but acts as a mopping up exercise against any pockets of traditional value resistance which survives in other institutions like the police, local government and the forces. The Catholic Church stands almost alone in her traditional values and beliefs and is often attacked by the media particularly the BBC for this reason.

ref

5.6., MacMurraugh-Kavanagh, M.K., ‘Drama’ into ‘news’: strategies of intervention in The Wednesday Play’ Screen, 1997 Vol. 38 pt. 3, autumn 1997, pp.247-259.

How the BBC helped to change laws and public opinion away from the Christian norm, an example:

The Wednesday Play’s interventionist agenda

How the BBC employed drama to circumvent objectivity and promote the legalisation of abortion and homosexuality                            

During the 1960s there were serious socio-cultural conflicts taking place within British society. There was in fact a radical division between the aggressively radical groups and those who tried to defend the status quo. All the moral certitudes that had remained virtually unchallenged since the dawn of Christendom were under attack. There was a cultural revolution taking place but the battle for traditional values and beliefs were not lost right away. The questions asked by those who study the media are: did the media and in particular the television play have a significant role in changing society’s values or did it merely reflect those changed values? However, given the conservative nature of the general public, particularly in relation to family and moral values at the time, it is doubtful that the radical factions would have succeeded without the overwhelming influence of television. By analysing one of the most influential television programme strands of the 1960s, the ‘single play’ we can see that it decisively came down on the side of the radical change. We can also see that many of those who produced, directed, and wrote many of these plays had a radical interventionist agenda. Their strategies were to influence society and government legislation on the side of radical change, and they succeeded.

                There were various institutional debates taking place in the 1960s; one of these was at the BBC. There was in place at the BBC the concept of objectivity which was laid down by the Royal Charter. This made it illegal to express opinions on matters of current affairs especially in the proximity of a parliamentary debate. There were many working in the BBC who believed that drama was the way to circumvent the concept of objectivity. Men such as Sydney Newman, Tony Garnett, Ken Loach and James MacTaggart found that they could use the Wednesday Play strand of television drama as a platform to engage in a whole range of moral issues. These ‘single plays’ were newly commissioned original television dramas, some of which directly challenged society’s norms and had an interventionist agenda regarding these parliamentary and cultural debates. Theses plays did not usually support the status quo on issues of traditional values and beliefs.

                       

The dawn of the television single play

The made for television single play started in the United States in the late 1940s and achieved much popular success by the 1950s. These plays were mostly serious dramas and employed playwrights such as Arthur Millar. They were sponsored by some of America’s biggest companies such as General Motors. However, serious plays that exposed the unsavoury underbelly of materialism or the walking wounded of the American Dream and commercial sponsorship were not compatible bedfellows. By the late 1950s the North American TV single play was in decline. As John Coughie puts it, “Seriousness was not the ingredient which advertisers believed could best oil the wheels of commerce: US television was not meant to produce sober citizens, but happy consumers”¹. What was needed was a television station that by law was funded through public subscription via a licence fee. This station should be independent of government control or commercial considerations, where those of a Left/liberal persuasion could become politically engaged and produce dramas that indulged their culturally interventionist agenda. The British Broadcasting Corporation fits these criteria perfectly. It was however ABC one of Britain’s new regional independent commercial television stations that first successfully produced original television single plays. ABC had been mindful of the success of the North American single play and had brought over a producer from Canada called Sydney Newman in 1957 and put him in charge of their Armchair Theatre strand. Here Newman produced contemporary drama that had many regional and working class characteristics. Often known as ‘Kitchen-sink drama’, these plays tended to over indulge in gritty ‘naturalistic realism’, but Newman was not yet fully politically engaged. However, Newman as foreigner could look at Britain with a fresh eye. He became utterly fascinated by her problems and tended to dwell upon them in his dramas. When Newman saw Look back in Anger at the Royal Court theatre in London he developed the notion of ‘agitational contemporaneity’. He built up a team of writers that reflected the ‘New Wave’ in British literature including Alun Owen, Ted Willis and Harold Pinter. However, commercial TV was not the place for really interventionist ‘cutting edge’ drama.

Sydney Newman and Co, as the barbarians, at the gates of the BBC

                In the early Sixties the BBC were being beaten in the ratings war by the independent commercial channels. To try and remedy this, in 1963 they poached Newman from ABC and made him head of BBC drama and gave him free rein. There were those at the BBC, as in society, who resisted change and the revolutionary Zeitgeist at the BBC that followed.  The Oxford educated, BBC trained, producer Don Taylor saw Newman as a ‘vulgarian’, someone who saw no contradiction between ‘popular’ and ‘culture.’ However, snobbish this might sound today, perhaps he had a point. Don Taylor viewed Newman’s appointment with horror and in his autobiography ‘reveals uncompromisingly some of the cultural tensions inherent in the dawning of a new age, an age in which Newman emerges, dressed in skins, as the barbarian at the gates².’ In fact, the BBC brought the barbarians into every home in the country. In their quest to chase audience ratings via contemporary drama, the BBC blurred the principles of objectivity that had been laid out in the Royal Charter.



Interventionist agendas at the BBC


Agitational Contemporaneity

                The Wednesday Play was transmitted on the BBC from 1964. In 1970 it became the Play for Today, and had been famed for producing ‘cutting edge’ ground breaking plays. With original plays such as Horror of Darkness, Cathy Come Home, and Up the Junction to name but a few. The BBC has been credited with television ‘events’ that changed society’s values that influenced the political will on issues like homosexuality and abortion. This accolade is given to the BBC through Newman and his some of his ‘radical’ team, namely Garnett, Loach and MacTaggart and their level of political and social engagement. Through Newman’s concept of ‘agitational contemporaneity’ they demonstrated the immense power of television when harnessing creative and cultural forces aligned with an interventionist agenda. Media historian MacMurraugh-Kavanagh saw this ‘agitational’ team’s power and influence through television drama devoid of objectivity as:

‘radical experimentalism in terms of form and content, venerated for its apparent refusal of public broadcasting objectivity in its direct intervention in issues of social legislation (including the legalisation of homosexuality and abortion), critics such as George Brandt conclude that ‘much of the history of British television drama is tied up with this programme spot’ Brandt’s statement expresses the widespread recognition that in the field of television drama The Wednesday Play was the genuine article.³’

When asked what is ‘agitational contemporaneity’ in drama, Newman is said to have replied that it ‘causes people to take action after seeing it’⁴.

References

1,2. Caughie, John, Television Drama: Modernism and British Culture, Oxford University Press, 2000.

3. MacMurraugh-Kavanagh, M.K., ‘The BBC and the birth of The Wednesday Play, 1962-66: institutional containment versus “agitational contemporaneity”’ Historial Journal of Film, Radio and Television, vol.17, no.3, August 1997, p367.

4. Aldgate, Tony, Unit 21 British drama: the single play, Book 5 Film and Television History, 2003, Television Genres, The Open University, Milton Keynes, 2003. Also quoting Brandt British Television Drama, Cambridge, 1981, p.17

To be continued ...

The BBC and No Popery in a digital age

Pope Francis - image Wikipeadia

 

Is the BBC’s depiction of Catholics and the Vatican similar to the treatment racists give ethnic minorities?

 

We all know that the BBC has not given the Catholic Church a fair hearing for many years now. Many Catholics believe several of the BBC’s main presenters are only interested in reporting on the Church if they can mention child abuse in the same sentence. Thus they create an association in the minds of the viewers or listeners; that words like Catholic, Vatican, hierarchy = dissidents or abuse and cover up. This has worked, as we know because it is getting thrown up in the everyday lives of many ordinary Catholics.

As Pastor Iuventus in the Catholic Herald put it “Lest their [the BBC] audience fail to make this connection they even assert the self-fulfilling prediction that these events will cause people to ask themselves whether there remains a culture of abuse and cover-up at the highest level in the Vatican. It’s the digital age’s equivalent of the most reactionary No Popery, based on innuendo and fear. For comment on such matters the BBC wheels out a succession of people who openly dissent from Catholic teaching particularly on sexuality, to give the “Catholic” reaction to the events unfolding. It’s most depressing” (Catholic Herald 1-3-2013).

It is also very frustrating that many famous media Catholics who tend to attack the Church and her teachings often appear in Catholic publications. It is these people, those who take the Pill (excuse my pun), who get wheeled out by the BBC when Catholicism is in the news, as during the recent Conclave. Each has a shopping list of changes they want to the Church’s teachings that usually agree not with the Christian standpoint but with the modern secular media. Is this another symptom of the institutional anti-Catholic bigotry that lies at the heart of the BBC? For by using many dissident pundits they are attempting to pressure the Church into accepting their own particular perversion of the human condition.

Un-dead Media Catholics and the Culture of Death

In particular media Catholics are very useful in pushing the various canons of the Culture of Death. These un-dead media-cultivated Catholics do after all speak for the ordinary un-dead Catholic who slouches in front of Satan’s Tabernacle - the TV. The un-dead Catholics have their views, knowledge and beliefs digitally transfused into their conscience by the media. The Un-dead Vampire Catholic mines the Catholic world for fame and profit, and makes a good living out of attacking the Church in the name of Luv. But didn’t Judas betray the Lord with a Kiss? Those of you who would like to do further reading on a Professional Media Catholic might like to visit the excellent blog post on Peter Stanford by Dr. Joseph Shaw, chairman of the Latin Mass Society.

Pope Francis SJ and the Counter Reformation against the secular media

The Jesuits -from Wikipeadia

There has been a media Reformation of social attitudes which began in the sixties. Homosexuality, abortion, contraceptions, ‘Gay’ adoption seem to be the post modern media-promoted norm, and traditional family values are dead even in most ordinary families. During the Reformation of the sixteenth century many countries turned away from the Catholic Church. This was not because the people of those countries wanted to stop being Catholic but because their leaders found Catholic teachings inconvenient. Hence they found it useful to support dissident Catholics. It is also noted that in those countries affected by the so-called Reformation which allowed the Catholic Church to state her case in a free and open way, the majority of the people returned to the Catholic faith. Only those countries that applied severe oppression and violence towards Catholics and their priests stopped this return to the one true faith.  The most successful priests of the Counter Reformation were the Jesuits, of course. Perhaps now that we have a Jesuit pope he will re-kindle that old Jesuit enthusiasm for Catholic teachings, and the Jesuit Order will once again regain its past glories, and we will have a Counter Reformation of the Secular Media.

12^th Prayer Crusade to start on the opening of the Conclave

You do not need me to ask you to pray for the next pope I know, but please pray that the next pope understands the media and just how powerful it is; and that he may be good and strong and able to stand up to the media and secular governments. Also that he may bring to task Catholic dissenters and Professional Media Catholics who make a living out of attacking the Church’s teachings especially on issues like abortion, contraception and homosexuality.

Members of CUT and the Crusade of Prayer regularly engage in spiritual combat to counter the effects of the media and the cult of celebrity. But anyone may join us in the 12th Prayer Crusade for the new Pope that he may fully understand the media and that through its decadence and dissipation it is ruining civilisation; a civilisation that has been built upon Christendom and truth.

The media of course are not interested in the truth they only want sensation perhaps they should follow these guidelines which have recently been published by Zenit.

The Ten Commandments of reporting on the Vatican