Thursday, January 18, 2007

Big Brother is watching, but not listening
Everyone has an opinion, here's mine.
Racism, yes. Note that the weasels of Channel 4 state that there has been no OVERT racism on their piece of shit programme. Translation - yes, there's racism, but we're not seeing it.
Then there's this word "culture" that's suddenly become fashionable. Not racism, it's a clash of cultures. Cobblers! Haven't the BNP been using this expression lately in reference to their anti-Islamic propaganda? It's not racism, it's cultural. Pure coincidence that 95% of British Muslims are Asian in origin.
I have to confess, shamefacedly that I was one of the alleged million extra viewers who tuned in on Tuesday evening to see what was going on. The answer - nothing. I've always avoided the Big Brother bearpit/cesspit before, and it seems I haven't missed much. I kept switching back and forth but all I saw was people sitting around looking bored; all I heard was a hissing noise intended, I think, to prevent the public hearing what was being said (covert racism?).
Neither Enemadol, the makers, nor Channel 4 are expressing any regret, contrition or intent to reform. Ofcom says it's up to Channel 4 to listen to the public. Is that it, Ofcom? What a parcel of moral bankrupts. All the public can do is switch off en masse. We won't miss anything. The liveliest parts get shown on the news.

The above statement that 95% of BritishMuslims are Asian is just a guess on my part, but it can't be far wrong. I daresay it's as reliable as the pollsters' count of Big Brother (Big Bully) viewers.
Tuesday's Guardian had a good headline; "One in five Home Office statistics are unreliable, says department head." Confusing, n'est-ce pas? Leaving aside that it should read, one in five ... is unreliable, it has to be a leg-pull. The head of the department of unreliable statistics issues a statistic on the unreliability of its statistics. It's like the Cretan claiming all Cretans are liars, or Pascal (was it he?) claiming that all generalisations are false, including his generalisation about generalisations. That way lies madness.
Luís Buñuel on statistics -
"It is impossible to read a single page in a newspaper without finding at least a dozen of them, most of which are blatantly false." Was he exaggerating? Was he generalising?
I'm no fan of Buñuel. I find his output rather seedy, but I'll except "Los Olvidados" and "Nazarín", to avoid accusations of generalisation.

No comments: