open Democracy News Analysis - Culture - Comments

J. Kates on "America through Russian eyes"

J. Kates — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 22:48:05 +0000

Who translated this piece? Whoever did made a number of minor mistakes (_e.g._, Scollay Square, not Scully Square) but Shcherbina's obserbvations are completely her own. Translations of her poems into English are available in _The Score of the Game_ (Zephyr Press) and _Life without (Bloodaxe) as well as in a number of journals. Those interested in previously unpublished translations, including some of the poems here, can get in touch with me directly.

Peter Pallai on "Debating the future of BBC’s Russian Service"

Peter Pallai — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:58:20 +0000

Nigel Chapman’s letter reads like an action replay of any or each phase of the gradual destruction of the BBC World Service. Each language service that was axed had been ‘strengthened’ before its demise in exactly the same way the Russian is meant to be now. The Foreign Office tightens the purse strings and the BBC is increasingly looking at the Middle East at the expense of all else. Why not come clean and admit it? No European in his right mind can listen nowadays to the BBC World Service in English since its network of European correspondents has been well nigh abolished. No one disputes the importance of broadcasting to Asia and Africa but, let’s face it, with it’s present priorities the name World Service is a misnomer.
Peter Pallai
of the late Hungarian Service

Vania Schittenhelm on "Debating the future of BBC’s Russian Service"

Vania Schittenhelm — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 09:09:38 +0000

I was shocked that Chapman's letter was the only one published in the Times, as I expected to see at least one other contrasting point represented. Foolishly enough, I thought newspapers used to present a balanced display of the correspondence they receive.

Even though I didn't expect them to publish the message I wrote (criticising the cutbacks to BBC's Brazilian Services and the state of their website, which lost all its relevance and distinctiveness), there's clearly such a wide gap between the alledged improvements done to the World Service in its online form and the reality of their web-based services that any half-curious journalist might be inclined to do some research on the issue. At least they printed Robert Chandler's reply - of course it would have been so much better if they hadn't edited it.

The work Robert has been doing to galvanise public opinion has been fantastic and I can only agree with Lara Pawson's words. They express the same kind of sadness that I feel about BBC's current Brazilian service, and it's also reassuring to know I'm not alone.

Keep up the good work, Robert. I'm sure this will have a positive and lasting impact on the way the World Service changes from now on.

artra on "Debating the future of BBC’s Russian Service"

artra — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:23:10 +0000

I read criticism for narrowing the scope covered by BBC. The observation that BBC News may have to over self censor its notes is unquestionable, but leaving the issue to that point, gives the impression that BBC News impartiality -to every one's opinion- is out of a question. My personal experiences and complains I read about BBC News would not go along that line at all.

It is not only its obscure method of selection of commentaries to publish them on time in the "Have your say Section" or their reasons to reject commentaries even supported by references.
It is the perception of people complaining also about their Edition and Narrow and sided Selection of events -even among their frequent flashy reports- about countries ending in distorted images of the matters aboarded, that I consider should be included, at least into question, whenever BBC's freedom of speech and freedom of press topics are put to discussion.

Lara Pawson on "Debating the future of BBC’s Russian Service"

Lara Pawson — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:28:01 +0000

What is happening to the BBC Russia service echoes what is happening - or already happened - throughout the World Service. Reading your letter fills me with regret that we were not able to produce a letter of similar weight, with similarly weighty signatories, to try and defend the BBC African services, the BBC Greek service (no longer in existence) and many others. Nigel Chapman is, yes, out of kilter, as most of BBC management have been for at least the last decade. It is deeply depressing to see what has happened to the World Service, which so many listeners around the globe have appreciated for so many years. You should hear the comments I have been told, face to face, from listeners throughout the African continent. They cannot understand why the BBC has allowed the African services to fall to such miserable standards. And yet, and yet... management insists it has all got so much better. I wish you all great luck and strength in defending the Russian service. You are all quite right to write. Well done. Bravo.

trimmerb1234 on "Debating the future of BBC’s Russian Service"

trimmerb1234 — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 07:01:03 +0000

I would like to speak in defence of the BBC. Their national radio channel, Radio 4, is regarded by its many devoted listeners with its mixture of heavyweight current affairs, plays, comedy and features continues as it has for decades to be both essential daily listening and a national treasure. What happens on their light entertainment channels is relatively unimportant - other, commercial, channels could do it equally well so the recent misjudgements on R2 should be seen in perspective.

I would also like to commend the World Service for the independence of its recent broadcast investigation of the events in South Ossetia. It took Foreign Secretary Miliband to task for misrepresenting these events as a Russian invasion. I take the Russian reaction to the brutal attack on S Ossetia to be in turn excessive and brutal and not untypical however misrepresentation of the sequence hardly serves either the cause of truth or as least as I see it British national interest.

The end of the Cold War was something to be celebrated. I regret attempts to revive it. We should though revive just one facet of it: a rational mutual fear of war and a rational approach to de-escalation, mutul confidence-building, an avoidance of unnecessary provocations and a negotiated modus vivendi.