Metropol

Alexia wrote:Anyone noticed Jon nee Wells has slowly and surely descended into David-esque territory recently?

Isn't he just called 'Jon' now?

EDIT: Oh nevermind, that's what the 'nee' was for.

Alexia wrote:Anyone noticed Jon nee Wells has slowly and surely descended into David-esque territory recently?

He's a Zombie and I claim my £10.

ITV News thread.

Macalolo wrote:I don't think Nina should present weekends, after all she's the main anchor of Londons evening news bulletin, and even Natasha I would doubt want to do weekends. Nina for example presented Fridays program, something uncommon, if the pair do end up sharing London Tonight then Ben Scotchbrook, Charlene and Faye would have less opportunity to present which would be a shame, especially if it's just to keep a TV news bike on screen.

Posted two days ago, with a feeble (prompted) apology a day later, but the post remains.

The member has attempted to explain that his, "feathers were ruffled", but the likening of this broadcast professional to a whore or slut (because she's moved from one employer to another) speaks to something extremely sinister, and utterly inappropriate.

What makes things worse is that, such is the general malaise of the Newsroom due to the obsessive scheduling chatter, the comment has gone unnoticed by even the moderators and administrator - which begs the question why the hell such threads are allowed to continue. The place is a total turn off even to those who run it.

Sort it out for fuck's sake, before you end up with another lawyer's letter.

I completely missed that.

Surely reproducing that message here goes against the point of your post?

Philip wrote:I completely missed that.

Surely reproducing that message here goes against the point of your post?

No of course it doesn't - I'm condemning the post and highlighting the pitfalls of the endless drone-threads.

Moreover, the technique of silent moderation, i.e. deleting offending posts with no direction to users, means that often no lessons are learned and similar behaviours are repeated.

Unlike the thread featuring an accusation of drug taking (which prompted legal threats), this user has used a derogatory sexual term. Its not that the phrase can't be repeated, but that the continuing personal insults are straying into a very disturbing place and absolutely shouldn't be tolerated.

Gavin Scott wrote:What makes things worse is that, such is the general malaise of the Newsroom due to the obsessive scheduling chatter, the comment has gone unnoticed by even the moderators and administrator - which begs the question why the hell such threads are allowed to continue. The place is a total turn off even to those who run it.

Sort it out for fuck's sake, before you end up with another lawyer's letter.

See, it's not just a general nuisance, such discussion has always come accompanied by a creepy underbelly that exposes itself every so often, as above. It's inexcusable and indefensible...

...yet it's allowed to continue, why?

Jonny wrote:...yet it's allowed to continue, why?

Asa moves in mysterious ways.

He's posted! Basically they keep up the creepiness Rota Discussion could be banned

Does anyone really care that Twitter's stupid guidelines are being broken? It's already getting annoying each time it's mentioned. Certain members that always get frustrated about brand guidelines being broken are also getting agitated about this.

I do hope I'm not in the minority thinking it isn't a broadcaster's duty to uphold the brand guidelines of another company, especially not the BBC.

bilky asko wrote:Does anyone really care that Twitter's stupid guidelines are being broken? It's already getting annoying each time it's mentioned. Certain members that always get frustrated about brand guidelines being broken are also getting agitated about this.

I do hope I'm not in the minority thinking it isn't a broadcaster's duty to uphold the brand guidelines of another company, especially not the BBC.

How many times has it been mentioned? I only count two, and (my) second one was only a sardonic aside. Sadly the usual suspects have bitten.

I almost wish I could go down the David route and become a professional WUM if only for the fact I know Asa would ban me instantly. I'm on his list.

Alexia wrote:

bilky asko wrote:Does anyone really care that Twitter's stupid guidelines are being broken? It's already getting annoying each time it's mentioned. Certain members that always get frustrated about brand guidelines being broken are also getting agitated about this.

I do hope I'm not in the minority thinking it isn't a broadcaster's duty to uphold the brand guidelines of another company, especially not the BBC.

How many times has it been mentioned? I only count two, and (my) second one was only a sardonic aside. Sadly the usual suspects have bitten.

I almost wish I could go down the David route and become a professional WUM if only for the fact I know Asa would ban me instantly. I'm on his list.

Was that aimed at me? my response was also sarcastic as I already saw your initial opinion about the Twitter guidelines in the c5 topic.

I'm a supporter of the BBC guidelines yes but not necessarily the Twitter guidelines