Manx Radio

[TheTeapot]

"I like Stu so he can't have been wrong" - much of this thread.

[gettafa]

42 minutes ago, manxman1980 said:

On the subject of the alleged "ambush"...

A phone in radio show normally has a topic or topics that are being discussed that day.  I presume that on the day Jordan called in the discussion was in relation to the BLM Protest (I wasn't listening so please do correct me if that is incorrect).

 

'It' wasn't the prescribed topic. Stu Peters was probably thinking he'd have Quirky on about the 370 Disco again and what model of Ford Cortina he used in  his Castletown courtin' days (possibly too much information there).

The ambush thing isn't an excuse, but it just was. Surely that is obvious.

Which brings me to Roger's post:

 

22 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

"This is a local show for local people" - the Royston Vasey of radio[1].

You have no way of knowing if those who rang in were regular listeners to Stu's show.  That's not how the wireless works you know.  Anyone can just 'tune in'.  The vast majority of people who listen will never ring in to contribute and a majority of those who do ring in will not do so regularly, but very occasionally when there's a particular topic that they know about and feel strongly enough about to break their usual habits and ring in.  This means that most contributions come from a tiny minority of listeners, but there will be many times that out there.  If there isn't and Stu is actually only getting half a dozen listeners, they'd take him off air pretty quickly.

It's the same for Manx Forums.  At the moment it shows as having 282 readers online, but only 20 are shown as logged in and even some of those have only contributed on a handful of times over the years.  Most of the time the vast majority of MF users are happy just to read what others have written.

But you know what?  Even if they had never listened to Stu's show before or read MF, they are perfectly entitled to contribute.  These things are open access, not the preserve of some tiny, self-appointed elite.

Similarly believing that, because people with similar views happen to ring in at the same time about a currently controversial topic, it must be some sort evil plot, is pretty much a definition of a  paranoid behaviour.  On the contrary it's exactly what you would expect to happen - and what a radio station would actually hope for[2]. 

To think otherwise is like the accusations of sock-puppetry that you  get on MF - because some people seem unable to believe that more than one person in the universe could disagree with their views.  Of course people only complain when it's views they disagree with.  If three of Stu's supporters post on here in a row, no one is then saying that they must have ganged up to do it.

But again, even if those callers had some sort of pre-arrangement, it wouldn't matter.  Any more than if a couple of Stu's regulars had chatted and agreed to bring up a particular topic.  Stu is a professional - he's supposed to be able to cope.

 

[1]  Until I googled it to check the spelling, I'd completely forgotten that Royston Vasey is Roy 'Chubby' Brown's real name.

[2]  It's worth pointing out that to some extent Stu's programme was set up to fail.  Without a separate producer to balance the calls you're very likely to get a pattern of views all going one way and then another.  But Stu insisted on this format so he can't really complain.

I am tempted to do a 'whooosh!' but the last time I did that, another poster called Declan replied to it with a curt "Fuck Off". Which  I have never understood.

So I won't do a "Woosh!" again to Rogers post, albeit well thought out and interesting as ever.

 

[gettafa]

8 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

"I like Stu so he can't have been wrong" - much of this thread.

I've known Stu via the airwaves for 20 years, and the guitars.

I don't always agree with him, climate change for example, and what he says about that sweet little Swedish girl with the plaits and that. And Coronavirus. And the population of the Isle of Man, and lots of other stuff.

But he's not a racist. He is not a thug. Jordan and the mystery gang would have loved him to have been one so they could have paraded his  effigy up and down Prospect Hill. Just when they needed a gammon to focus on.

This is the Isle of Man and no matter how they dressed it up and whinged like bastards they couldn't quite find what they wanted.

 

 

[manxman1980]

50 minutes ago, Gladys said:

That is not how it unfolded.  There was no topic out for discussion. 

 

27 minutes ago, gettafa said:

'It' wasn't the prescribed topic. Stu Peters was probably thinking he'd have Quirky on about the 370 Disco again and what model of Ford Cortina he used in  his Castletown courtin' days (possibly too much information there).

The ambush thing isn't an excuse, but it just was. Surely that is obvious.

As someone who doesn't listen to Stu's show can you explain to me what the format is?  When I used to listen to the Moanin Line it used to be based around the news topics of the day/week but I appreciate that Stu's show may have been different.

If the format is just to call in and have a chat about whatever is on your mind then it just reinforces my view that Manx Radio and Stu were significantly under-prepared to deal with a potentially controversial topic.  Stu has already explained that Manx Radio does not have a producer or researchers filtering calls prior to them being put on air.  You are therefore going to increase the likelihood of having a caller or caller(s) getting on air and challenging the host with inflammatory comments.  That of course becomes worse if the host is following a "shock-jock" model and has there own strong views on the subject.

Even LBC with their set-up sometimes find that people slip through the net and have to be cut off before the calls get out of hand. 

[Gladys]

23 minutes ago, John Wright said:

I fully agree.

I’m not being critical of Stu, or the callers, or BLM/PoC IoM.

I am critical about the MR preparedness and poor response.

Its something that I know a number of posters, many of whom I respect, will not agree with, but I think they are confusing the Broadcasting Standards referral to Comms Comm and the Stations own internal response, which in these heightened times could avoid the issue rumbling on and coming back to bite.

There should have been language sensitivity and awareness training already in place. I’m talking about inclusion here, across all minority groups. It’s not snowflake or PC gone mad. It’s basic common sense in an audience consumer facing service organisation.

Offering to meet doesn’t do anything really. It’s not suitable for mediation at this stage.

But finding out exactly what they want, and ensuring you’ve done everything you can to resolve a fairly common and widespread issue about lack of awareness in relation to inclusion is good business sense.

I keep on trying to depersonalise my responses. I see that many posters can’t do that.

Its not specifically about Stu, or BLM/PoC IoM it’s about a wider societal issue of thoughtlessness in how we treat minorities, how we perceive them, how we can be as inclusive as possible. It’s not something we should question in the days of Equality legislation.

John, I have a great of respect for you, I think you know that.  But, you know, MR did not just offer to meet but to give them a platform on which there could be a debate.  MR have also given airtime to POC in the news to describe their instances of racism. Also  we don't know what other machinations went on behind the scenes at MR in response, or what they already had in place.

This all kicked off in response to a post by Stu on the BLM thread.  Go and look at it, it is one of the first few.  To be honest,  his questions as to why a BLM demonstration here had relevance in response to events in the US and why don't all lives matter, were questions that a very many people also had.  They were points up for discussion.  He also quoted some stats on the inter-racial basis of crime in the US.  Again, another point for discussion.  

That was the trigger for Jordan et al to phone in with deep outrage and offence. Stu criticised the murder of Flloyd at the hands of US police.  He also said he was not saying there shouldn't be a demo here, just that he didn't understand why. The alternative interpretations to the stats he posted along the lines I mention above, weren't even discussed.  None of the callers even tried to discuss these issues in a calm way, it was all very highly charged.  

In truth, we in the IOM are very well placed to have that calm, considered, empirically supported debate, as we do not have the overt and extreme issues that are in the US, even the UK. But, this episode has really just served to postpone that discussion and has polarised opinion on how true racial equality can be achieved. Both sides will have accept that there are some uncomfortable truths that will come to light in that discussion, and I do wonder if POC are really open-minded enough to accept that with their current "on transmit" default.

We are repeatedly told to go educate ourselves about racism  and I have been doing, not only has it educated me as to the inadvertent ways racism can impact, but it has also strengthened my underlying view that individuals, black or white, must take responsibility for themselves, become self-determinated and deal with the lot dealt to them with maturity, whilst the state should ensure that there is no scope for discrimination within its processes, structures and laws. 

 

[Declan]

1 hour ago, Gladys said:

How has he played the victim?  How do you know he doesn't care, and what doesn't he care about? I guess you will have to ask him as none of us can answer those questions.  

He's played the victim by saying "he was ambushed"  (he did that in the message to me that getafe posted in this thread).

As to the other question, yes, it is my subjective opinion that it looks like he doesn't give a shit. I'm basing that on the fact he offered the daft ambush vindication, and hasn't offered an apology or any recognition that he could have handled the situation better.

Initially, I'd have been happy with a half-apology "I'm sorry if I inadvertently upset people, I recognise the sensitivities here and will attempt to do better going forward." Lesson learnt lets move on. Quilp is right I'm only describing my feelings on the matter, and I know the racists and non-racists amongst Stu's supporters won't share it but, for me, the handling of the issue has caused more damage to my opinion of Stu and Manx Radio than the original issue.

 

 

Edited July 9, 2020 by Declan

[TheTeapot]

You could argue that his vindication post 'to my detractors - have a nice day' shows that he doesn't give a shit.

[Shake me up Judy]

They're just an echo chamber of a movement 3000 miles away. There is no systemic or structural racism on the IOM. Isolated incidents certainly, but the Island is not a racist society or community. There have always been other types of discrimination here; some of which we've dealt with; but these people need to travel more and they'll see plenty of what they're looking for elsewhere. It's student politics, raising a banner, on the march and looking for a fight. The mistake is to engage with them and give them the oxygen of attention like several posters on here want to do. 

[gettafa]

  

2 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

You could argue that his vindication post 'to my detractors - have a nice day' shows that he doesn't give a shit.

"All You Need Is Love"

 

Edited July 9, 2020 by gettafa

[Shake me up Judy]

Indeed. AYNIL was the first record he played on his return show. I've been tuning in to the show lately and Stu has been nothing but conciliatory. Are people looking for a scapegoat to justify their belief ? Now where have we seen that before...

[Gladys]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

 

[2]  It's worth pointing out that to some extent Stu's programme was set up to fail.  Without a separate producer to balance the calls you're very likely to get a pattern of views all going one way and then another.  But Stu insisted on this format so he can't really complain.

Again, how do you know he insisted on the format without a producer? 

The programme is described as "shock-jock",   but it wasn't really.  I only listened to it a few times, it is on too late for me, when there is good telly on.  It was more banter with a few current topics thrown up by callers for a (not very in-depth, incisive) discussion. 

[Declan]

19 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Again, how do you know he insisted on the format without a producer? 

 

I think he was probably prepared to go ahead without one rather than insisted.

TBH this is the strongest bit of mitigation for Stu, that his employers rather left him out to dry, without production support, without (perhaps) proper sensitivity training, and billed as "Live, Loud and Unleashed".

[Roger Mexico]

19 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Again, how do you know he insisted on the format without a producer? 

The programme is described as "shock-jock",   but it wasn't really.  I only listened to it a few times, it is on too late for me, when there is good telly on.  It was more banter with a few current topics thrown up by callers for a (not very in-depth, incisive) discussion. 

At the time Stu said on MF that he had wanted a late night slot and referenced various 'shock-jock' programmes that he saw as models for what he wanted to do.  I'm sure he would have liked a producer to handle callers, but it was never going to happen for cost and scheduling reasons and would have been have been made clear to him that he was on his own if he wanted to do that sort of show.

I agree it didn't end up as a classic 'shock-jock' show and I don't think Stu is nasty or dishonest enough to do that sort of thing 'successfully' anyway.  The problem is that when he got what he thought he wanted and people rang in and started being controversial, he couldn't cope - and having no producer would have made it near impossible anyway.  I suppose it's the old story that you should be careful about what you wish for because you might get it.

[piebaps]

But, Jordan and the others wouldn't have rang at all about BLM only for Stu's personal post on here where he chooses to use his own name. 

He makes it clear that his views are his own, but they chose to ring up his workplace to bait him about it. A PM on here would've been the most appropriate way forward for meaningful discussion or even engaging in the thread debate. The way they went ahead was despicable IMHO and they've definitely lost my support.

[gettafa]

44 minutes ago, Gladys said:

The programme is described as "shock-jock",   but it wasn't really. 

 

15 minutes ago, Declan said:

and billed as "Live, Loud and Unleashed".

I kid you not, the most exciting it generally got of late was David Quirk, former MHK and a plumber be trade, divulging his old CB handle.

Buster was good value and his unintentional growling down the phone (he were on oxygen I think) might frighten any kids listening but there wouldn't be many of them, not with the choice of sounds they have these days. Besides, every horror film and that ever made is easily accessible on putlocker or equivalent. So I doubt the Manx Radio Late Show was/is ever the topic of conversation around the equivalent of the water cooler up at St Ninians (Do they still do Coke® machines in school? The last time I was in one they gave 'em free computers provided they could sell the wee brats as much fizzy drink as they could imbibe)

So anyway, the above quoted descriptors are surely more than a little bit tongue in cheek