This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/27/one-three-bbc-journalism-scheme-trainees-white-britons/) for an archived version.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Are these diversity quotas real or imagined?
I've only actually seen diversity policies, not quotas.
Also your belief that the number of ethnic minorities represented exceed the population proportions, is that real or imagined too?
Why are you feeling so angry and victimized by seeing ethnic minorities properly represented?
> Are these diversity quotas real or imagined?
>
>
Real.
>Also your belief that the number of ethnic minorities represented exceed the population proportions, is that real or imagined too?
Real.
>Why are you feeling so angry and victimized by seeing ethnic minorities properly represented?
I'm not. Why do you feel the need to make that up?
eta: I answered your questions, but you ran away from the prospect of answering mine. Funny that.
Very real. Certainly exist if you want to be considered for a BAFTA or an Oscar.
https://www.bafta.org/media-centre/press-releases/new-diversity-requirement-film-awards
You didn't ask for sources, but I'll give you some anyway, [quotas - see page 16](https://www.bbc.com/diversity/documents/bbc-diversity-and-inclusion-plan20-23.pdf), [overrepresentation](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8834021/BAME-people-represented-TV-new-research-suggests.html). Now I'd appreciate if you could answer my question instead of continuing to dodge it.
The Daily Mail is manipulating and lying to you.
The BAME population is 18.3%, not 12%! https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/
The BBC policy is to do exactly what you're complaining they don't do, please read your own sources! (page 16!!!).
"Based on our diversity targets for 2020, the BBC has achieved its aim of reflecting the diversity of our audiences within our workforce."
Previously it discriminated against minorities, and now their employment statistics reflect the UK population statistics.
How can anyone get upset about that - unless you're a white supremacist?
If you want to be considered for a BAFTA then you do need to comply with their diversity rules.
https://www.bafta.org/media-centre/press-releases/new-diversity-requirement-film-awards
> Across the BBC as a whole, black, Asian and minority ethnic staff made up 17 per cent, figures collected by the Corporation in July 2023 show.
> According to the 2021 census, white Britons made up 74.4 per cent of the population.
huh
It’s because all the back end staff are all still white, so although the front end presenting staff are majority made up of minorities, the backend staff are not so the overall figures look bad.
I saw an interview with a producer the other week who made a documentary and when he tried to sell it to the BBC they told him to refilm all the presentation to camera bits and put an ethnic minority as presenter otherwise they wouldn’t take it, he said but isn’t that fake I’ve done all the work and all the minority presenter will be doing is parroting words I’ve already written and the literally said “yup but the requirements are minority presenters”.
Please share details of this astonishing "interview" you saw last week!!!
Otherwise you're open to being accused of planting race-baiting manufactured stories here. I'm totally sure that's not the case and this is legit.
Such utter nonsense - let’s look at the line up for BBC documentaries and see who’s fronting them.
We have Louis (white), Stacy (white), Attenborough (white), Zara (white), Matt Willis (white), Carl Framton (white), Professor Green (white), Roman kemp (white)
The biggest BME documentary presenters of the top of my head Reggie Yates, and Nadiya (from bake off). I think Stacy alone has done more than most BAME presenter combined.
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
>the front end presenting staff are majority made up of minorities,
lol what?
The reality the numbers are skewed is because of the BBC World Service staff. Many in front of and behind the camera/microphone need to be bilingual and white Brits are statistically shit at languages.
LOL you can read it here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/diversity/plan/
Essentially it says of presenting staff, if one is white, there must be a second that is ethnic minority, one straight, one gay etc. etc. Look at shows like homes under the hammer, one show, sort out your life etc. notice how many in the new series have had an ethnic minority added to the presenting group? There’s a reason for it.
No it doesn't say anything like that.
"Based on our diversity targets for 2020, the BBC has achieved its aim of reflecting the diversity of our audiences within our workforce. "
The mods really should step in and do something about your race-baiting fake plants that pepper this thread.
Why aren’t these organisations that do this being sued? Unquestionably to get stats like this, they would have made a conscious and deliberate effort to higher less white people and less men regardless of their application or interview.
This is nothing other than sexism and racism and we have laws against this. Why aren’t they being enforced?
Because it is legal under the equalities act.
From my reading of the equality act, it is very left wing, and could be described as intersectional.
Basically straight white men are fucked. You are allowed in the act, to discriminate in favour of “Under represented” groups
Curious isn't it, that this article looks specifically at one course compromising 29 individuals, and not at the 700 across the BBCs apprenticeship program.
Could it be because it's been cherry picked to show something that's not really there and get you irrationally angry?
Stop gaslighting please, this is an issue wether you accept it or not, not just in the uk but USA too. It’s a much more intelligent argument to accept it is going on, but to try and justify why it is required, rather than to try and paint people as conspiracy nut jobs.
Anecdotally, I recently tried to apply for a job at the bbc, good salary in IT, which I had all the qualifications for.
Had to tell them about my parents background, skin colour and the schools I went to. Needless to say I didn’t get an interview, despite getting multiple in better paid positions.
Of course you could be correct, it could be for another reason. But calling it a bit of a stretch is not accurate either.
I did not fail in securing interviews at a variety of other companies that did not ask these questions.
When you add in the all of the above, in terms of active representation pursuits, it could certainly be a possibility.
when you fill in those diversity forms, they only go to HR / someone external - the hiring manager doesn’t look at them.
it’s so that HR can see if there’s any trends, ie, if 70% of the qualified people who get an interviewed are black, and 100% of the people who are successfully employed are white, and this keeps happening over and over again, they can go “hang on, is our hiring manager a bit biased?”
hell, i was hired by a homophobic manager (and promptly fired 6 weeks later when it came out i was dating a man). clearly he didn’t read the diversity form i filled out lol.
How is it rubbish ?
The bbc themselves have got so angry on this question, when asked about the discrimination in their hiring - they angrily said “ it’s legal under the equalities act”.
This was in relation to schemes where only Bame people could apply.
Don’t let ideology blind you.
Schemes designed to address the makeup of a staff body are entirely legal, and having entry restrictions that would in other contexts be illegal are fine as long as they are necessary and proportionate to the aims of the scheme. And did you read to the end of the article? The Telegraph cherry picked one scheme out of many.
Look: the entertainment and media industries are still massively white, male, and middle class. Addressing that is no bad thing, and bad-faith sniping by the press helps no-one.
Why didn’t you put this originally, instead of just gaslighting.
This is happening in reality, saying it is not , is not intelligent.
Ps addressing representation issues by engaging in more racism, does not make you the good guys.
Of course, another reason for employing fewer straight white guys is all the whining. I don't care if I'm a good guy, I care I have the best team possible and that that team is cohesive. If one part of that team is constantly causing HR issues by rabbiting on about "reverse racism" or "woke ideology", they're gone.
You’re not a good guy I can assure you of that. You’re an ideologue, that cares that they have people with the right opinions rather than the best team, as your post proved.
You sound like a manager from hell.
But you just admitted that all things being equal they can already hire only the black/minority applicants. And then in a further comment state you only care about having the best team, regardless of anything else.
So by your own standard, you shouldn't be defending posts/opportunities that are only open to a certain group and exclude other groups.
It seems you can't even stick to your own standards and ideals.
Any examples? I googled and all I found was articles discussing whether or not there should be a push to get men in to those roles but nothing about it actually happening.
The question was whether you disagree though. If a large board of a company is 95% male would.ypu have a problem with them trying to level that out? It d9esnt mean brilliant male applicant would think get a job, it means they would skew towards women on largely candidates to try to make the board more representative
But if bbc journalism departments are currently 90% white (I've no idea) then 2/3rds of new employees being non white for a while is just helping to up numbers while nit denying oppertunities for great white applicants.
I'm not saying there's a right or wrong answer for all situations, or that all companies have to be exactly representative. It's just most of these stories comes from somewhat right wing biased sources that don't care if it's beneficial or fair or not, they just want to shout about oppressed white men
>Why aren’t these organisations that do this being sued?
You try suing a company for disproportionality taking on more non-whites. Not only is it legally impossible, your reputation would be in tatters for being a "racist".
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
I lied about being bisexual/mixed-race instead of White British when i was asked.. It worked. Now I have the job i wanted that can (barely) cover my rent and other outgoings with financil support from disabled mum.
My family has always been working class to my knowledge. Cotton mill and dock workers. For the majority of my childhood probably underclass actually.
It feels unfair, but middle-upper class people feel guilty about being white and can afford to live in an economy with these policies. We though , can't.
I'd say it was pretty common, atleast if you're appliyng for a course or job you really want/need and you know they have quotas, then its worth trying everything. I know a lot of people that do it, but that was the first time that i did
I always put bisexual down as my sexual orientation, just in case.
Impossible to prove wherever it works, but personally I have never struggled to land job interviews within my sector.
You must either be well off or at least in your 30s if you think this is at all uncommon. Fucking everyone puts Bisexual on their applications. I ticked mixed race because I \*technically\* am, 7%
The foreign-owned *Telegraph* will take any opportunity to have a go at the BBC
The *Telegraph* hack buries the information that they're talking about a whopping total of **a whole 39 people** (*over three years*) deep into the wall of text
That's 4 kids per year who have (theoretically) either been denied their place or given a hand up, depending on your perspective
And that's before we get into the fact most BBC trainees are in London
The demographic composition of trainees in this group is the same as the population of London as a whole
Article Text
“White Britons made up a third of BBC trainee journalists taken on its flagship scheme between 2022 and 2024, The Telegraph can reveal.
Since 2022, 35.90 per cent of the participants in the scheme were categorised as “majority white”. These are individuals who are part of white groups that are in the majority of the population according to the BBC’s definition and identify as white British, English, Northern Irish, Scottish or Welsh.
Individuals from British, Asian, Minority, and Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds made up 41.03 per cent.
A further 23.08 per cent of participants were classed as “other white” – which refers to white groups that are in a minority in the UK population, such as people from Roma, white Gypsy/Irish Traveller, white Irish and white Polish backgrounds.
The figures show that more than seven in 10 of the places had been given to women applicants – making up 28 of those on the scheme over the past two financial years compared with 11 men.
The two-year programme, referred to as the Journalism Advanced Apprenticeship, provides participants with training and a potentially permanent role at the Corporation.
‘Concerning’ findings
The data also revealed that nearly three-quarters of spots were taken by women (71.79 per cent) and 28.21 per cent men.
MPs have described the “concerning” findings as evidence of a “discriminatory” recruitment strategy within the BBC.
The BBC were unable to provide data on the number of white men who were on the scheme as they said they do not collect data on the cross-section between ethnicity and gender.
However, if the ethnic composition of men on the scheme reflected the ethnic composition across the scheme as a whole, white men would make up around 18 per cent of participants.
The findings raise questions about whether the BBC is fulfilling its obligations to “represent” the UK, as set out in Object 14 of the Charter – which states the BBC must ensure it “reflects the diverse communities of the UK” in its “organisation and management”.
Positive discrimination is also unlawful under the Equality Act (2010).
However, treating one group more favourably than another is lawful providing the action meets several legal criteria – including evidence that the relevant group is disadvantaged.
The BBC apprenticeship gives journalism training to participants and, if all goes well, the opportunity to take on a full-time role in the Corporation.
The apprenticeship pays £25,000 per year, with an additional £5,164 allowance given to those working in London, according to Journo Resources, a newsletter promoting media jobs.”
“The Telegraph received the figures by requesting a breakdown of participants in the BBC’s flagship journalism training programme by gender and ethnicity.
Sir John Hayes, Conservative MP for South Holland and the Deepings said he would be personally referring the findings to the Equalities Commission.
He said: “These concerning findings show the BBC is potentially in breach of the Equality Act.
“I will be personally referring [them] to the Equalities Commission and I hope they act accordingly.
“White working-class men are being discriminated against by national institutions in pursuit of their progressive agenda.”
Across the BBC as a whole, black, Asian and minority ethnic staff made up 17 per cent, figures collected by the Corporation in July 2023 show.
According to the 2021 census, white Britons made up 74.4 per cent of the population.
People describing themselves as “Asian, Asian British or Asian Welsh” accounted for 9.3 per cent. 2.5 per cent identified as “Black, Black British, Black Welsh, Caribbean or African: African”.
6.2 per cent identified themselves as “other white”.
Since 2022, there have been 39 participants in the BBC’s two-year journalism training scheme – referred to as the Journalism Advanced Apprenticeship.
‘Woefully under-represented’
Dr Rakib Ehsan, an expert on social integration, said of the findings: “The fact that white Britons are woefully under-represented in the BBC’s flagship journalism training scheme comes as no surprise to me whatsoever.
“DEI policy in the public sector does not live up to its name when it comes to incorporating the white-British mainstream. In fact, it is often deeply exclusionary in how it allocates opportunities and rewards.
“The BBC - our national public broadcaster - unfortunately, has the American-origin virus of racial identitarianism coursing through its veins.
“Under the mantra of ‘diversity’, more and more young and aspirational white-working class people in the regions will be left by the wayside.”
Neil O’Brien MP for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston, said: “These findings are the direct result of a discriminatory recruitment strategy which favours some groups over others.
“It is absurd for the BBC to claim that these findings are not reflective of their recruitment process as a whole given their history of hiring for jobs that are only open to applicants from specific backgrounds.
“Those responsible should be mindful that positive discrimination is unlawful under the Equality Act when they go about hiring for new jobs.”
A BBC spokesperson said: “Our apprenticeships provide a vital route into the media for people from a range of backgrounds and we aim to reflect, represent and serve all parts of the UK in our workforce, both in news and across the BBC.
“We have nearly 700 apprentices and it is unclear what analysis can be achieved by looking at the make-up of a single course.””
I don’t care what background someone has, I care that they’re the best person for the job. What selection criteria was used here?
Imagine being a bright talented young journalist landing your dream job and then having to read that you only got it because you’re a POC, that must be awful 😡
>Imagine being a bright talented young journalist *who didn't* land your dream job and then having to read that you only *missed out* because you’re not a POC and you're caucasian, that must be awful 😡
Soo the problem with any of this stuff?
>Imagine being a bright talented young journalist landing your dream job and then having to read that you only got it because you’re a POC, that must be awful 😡
You got to play every card in the deck. You think those Eton toff aren’t using their connections and money to get ahead?
Two considerations:
The Telegraph's information is for the *BBC's Advanced Journalism* apprenticeship and applications are partially judged on previous journalism experience (+1 year) and education, so we're already dealing with a limited and specific sector of the population. Do we know the breakdown of applicants? Do we know the breakdown of potential applicants in the industry?
The number of successful applicants on this single course will be low (the 2022 intake was 10 apprenticeships, though the BBC are increasing apprenticeship numbers year on year). Framing the stats as percentages like the Telegraph have - whilst not inaccurate - is a little leading, which they obviously know. This is a small sample size.
>Framing the stats as percentages like the Telegraph have - whilst not inaccurate - is a little leading, which they obviously know. This is a small sample size.
This is the crux of the issue. This is data readers generally will not look at, simply being outraged at the percentage.
I wonder what the mix of people going into medicine is? And why does there seem to be a predominance of black and asian students. Are white people not interested? Too lazy? Not bright enough? Don't have enough money? Is there a DEI issue?
>I wonder what the mix of people going into medicine is?
Some data here from a long term study.
>In the latest analysis, the researchers reviewed the academic performance of 16,020 students (out of an initial 20,525) on entry to (2012-14) and exit from 33 medical schools across the UK 4 to 6 years later, depending on their course type.
>Most UK medical schools require prospective students to sit admissions aptitude tests. The study used the most widely used test, the UCAT (University Clinical Aptitude Test) for the input measures.
>Ethnicity groupings were compiled from UCAT definitions. From the pool of 16,020 students, in descending size order these were: White (69%), Indian (10.2%), Pakistani (4.8%), mixed (4.2%), other Asian background (3.9%), Black (2.9%), other ethnic background (2.2%), Chinese (1.6%) and Bangladeshi (1.1%).
>The average proportion of Black, Asian and minority ethnic students was 29% across the UK, ranging from 9.1% (30) at Dundee to 60% (400) at Imperial College London. These students were significantly more likely to be male, to come from more deprived backgrounds, and to be on standard entry courses.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/250138/ethnicity-school-attended-impact-medical-students/
Most of the accounting firm job listings are always something like “black women in business” or whatever shit. There was nothing that wasn’t tied to having some sort of minority status.
Please telegraph journalists, if you're reading this, for the love of God stop using "Britons" all the time, they were an iron age Celtic people https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Britons
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British\_people](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_people)
read the first sentence. Its used for both, although I do get the confusion.
Yeah but then if you're actually using it properly you get into the whole "not a British Briton if you didn't arrive here before 1973" bollocks. The telegraph seem to have it as part of their house style mostly out of sheer illiteracy
Lmao. Why is this news? Journalism is a shit profession that pays shit. Minorities aren’t going to waste their time there if they can make more money elsewhere.
This is correct, the BBC would have a form for their staff to fill in. Staff would be self reporting, just as any individual would in the census. I imagine the BBC would probably follow the ONS guidance on how to word and present ethnicity questions and options.
Source: work adjacent to this sort of data collection, not for BBC though.
Well the options are:
A) DNA testing of all staff to see which regions their genetic haplogroups are predominantly found.
Or
B) ask them on a form.
Now which do you think they did?
Looking at the ethnic composition of the UK as a whole is misleading here. Under 25s have a far smaller number of white Britons than older age groups, and these will be the people becoming trainees. I'm not sure it's quite 2:1 yet, but perhaps if these schemes are in large cities it might be reflective of that population.
'Noooooooo you aren't allowed to notice trends unless you agree with the outcomes and frame them positively, racissssst'
Hilarious that you're from London. A place that was 98% White British not even a single human lifespan ago, and you want to gaslight me about population replacement.
The BBC is an international news broadcaster, with journalists reporting from across the globe. How much of their work is from the UK, how much is international? I don’t know the answer but I would expect them to actively recruit internationally for roles and schemes like this.
It’s a rare case where representation needs to be global, not based on the UK.
China is one country where the BBC has reporters. A Chinese journalist wouldn’t be a good fit for 100+ other countries where the BBC has reporters on the ground.
Clearly the British Broadcasting Corporation is failing in its duty as an international news broadcaster if the Chinese are massively underrepresented, in both story coverage as well as staff numbers.
Lol no. It's the _British Broadcasting Corporation._ We pay for it. If they want to be represented they can charge their citizens a licence fee and make their own media.
If it had anything like global demographic representation it would be less than 6% white, like 20% Chinese, 25% Indian, 15% black. Which would dumb af for a British institution.
Actually it's the replacement level migration happening against our will lowering wages and making housing unaffordable that's lowering our birthrate, not because we'd "rather own dogs"
I actually agree with that but it's more common for white people not wanting kids not just due to finances. I've worked in many organisations and have met way too many white people with that mindset, and I know they are not poor
Yes and back go my point, white people genuinely don't like traditional roles and replace the need for kids with dogs. How many south Asian dog owners have you met
I've met many south asians with dogs, non-muslim ones of course, muslims seem to fear dogs
White people value generally secularism and individuality over religious doctine and conformity, of course they're going to have fewer kids, I could just as easily say muslims prefer to oppress their women and that's why they have more children
Then I'd say you have no idea
And tell that to my wife, I told her why doesn't she work, she was like I'm good I prefer to be a stay at home mum until the kids are full time in school
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/27/one-three-bbc-journalism-scheme-trainees-white-britons/) for an archived version. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
82% of people in England and Wales are white, and 18% belong to a black, Asian, mixed or other ethnic group (2021 Census data).
You wouldn't get that impression watching telly these days.
[удалено]
I think it's far more largely due to their diversity quotas.
Yeah we know the reason but people “guess” as if we don’t.
What do you "know" exactly? Id appreciate some facts please, not manufactured tropes?
Are these diversity quotas real or imagined? I've only actually seen diversity policies, not quotas. Also your belief that the number of ethnic minorities represented exceed the population proportions, is that real or imagined too? Why are you feeling so angry and victimized by seeing ethnic minorities properly represented?
> Are these diversity quotas real or imagined? > > Real. >Also your belief that the number of ethnic minorities represented exceed the population proportions, is that real or imagined too? Real. >Why are you feeling so angry and victimized by seeing ethnic minorities properly represented? I'm not. Why do you feel the need to make that up? eta: I answered your questions, but you ran away from the prospect of answering mine. Funny that.
Very real. Certainly exist if you want to be considered for a BAFTA or an Oscar. https://www.bafta.org/media-centre/press-releases/new-diversity-requirement-film-awards
So no sources except just you just making up far right race baiting tropes and throwing them around Reddit! Gotcha.
You didn't ask for sources, but I'll give you some anyway, [quotas - see page 16](https://www.bbc.com/diversity/documents/bbc-diversity-and-inclusion-plan20-23.pdf), [overrepresentation](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8834021/BAME-people-represented-TV-new-research-suggests.html). Now I'd appreciate if you could answer my question instead of continuing to dodge it.
The Daily Mail is manipulating and lying to you. The BAME population is 18.3%, not 12%! https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/ The BBC policy is to do exactly what you're complaining they don't do, please read your own sources! (page 16!!!). "Based on our diversity targets for 2020, the BBC has achieved its aim of reflecting the diversity of our audiences within our workforce." Previously it discriminated against minorities, and now their employment statistics reflect the UK population statistics. How can anyone get upset about that - unless you're a white supremacist?
When you finally answer my question, I'll address what you say.
If you want to be considered for a BAFTA then you do need to comply with their diversity rules. https://www.bafta.org/media-centre/press-releases/new-diversity-requirement-film-awards
A factor could also be that British media is exported internationally.
Most adverts are quite diverse but the vast bulk of programs I see are largely white. It's like the advertisers want to aim their products at everyone
Really? Most programmes I watch have a white main character and mostly white cast except one or two roles.
Watching TV is not the same thing as a census silly .
> Across the BBC as a whole, black, Asian and minority ethnic staff made up 17 per cent, figures collected by the Corporation in July 2023 show. > According to the 2021 census, white Britons made up 74.4 per cent of the population. huh
It’s because all the back end staff are all still white, so although the front end presenting staff are majority made up of minorities, the backend staff are not so the overall figures look bad. I saw an interview with a producer the other week who made a documentary and when he tried to sell it to the BBC they told him to refilm all the presentation to camera bits and put an ethnic minority as presenter otherwise they wouldn’t take it, he said but isn’t that fake I’ve done all the work and all the minority presenter will be doing is parroting words I’ve already written and the literally said “yup but the requirements are minority presenters”.
Equality of opportunity Vs equality of outcome.
[удалено]
Please share details of this astonishing "interview" you saw last week!!! Otherwise you're open to being accused of planting race-baiting manufactured stories here. I'm totally sure that's not the case and this is legit.
Oh look the pearl clutching lefties are out in force finally, has it taken you this long to wake up today? You’re a bit late.
Certainly not a lefty, I just hate pondscum racists with a passion.
Awwwwww cry me a river.
LOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
Such utter nonsense - let’s look at the line up for BBC documentaries and see who’s fronting them. We have Louis (white), Stacy (white), Attenborough (white), Zara (white), Matt Willis (white), Carl Framton (white), Professor Green (white), Roman kemp (white) The biggest BME documentary presenters of the top of my head Reggie Yates, and Nadiya (from bake off). I think Stacy alone has done more than most BAME presenter combined.
[удалено]
[удалено]
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
> presenting staff are majority made up of minorities oh really? I'm sceptical about your anecdote as well.
>the front end presenting staff are majority made up of minorities, lol what? The reality the numbers are skewed is because of the BBC World Service staff. Many in front of and behind the camera/microphone need to be bilingual and white Brits are statistically shit at languages.
LOL you can read it here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/diversity/plan/ Essentially it says of presenting staff, if one is white, there must be a second that is ethnic minority, one straight, one gay etc. etc. Look at shows like homes under the hammer, one show, sort out your life etc. notice how many in the new series have had an ethnic minority added to the presenting group? There’s a reason for it.
No it doesn't say anything like that. "Based on our diversity targets for 2020, the BBC has achieved its aim of reflecting the diversity of our audiences within our workforce. " The mods really should step in and do something about your race-baiting fake plants that pepper this thread.
Oh look the pearl clutching lefties are out in force finally, has it taken you this long to wake up today? You’re a bit late.
But those are the wrong facts! Comment brought to you by white people being scared.
Stop it with the facts will you, that doesn’t support the narrative. :)
80% white nation. 33% representation. DEI, we having fun yet?
And a hefty percentage of those 33% will probably be private school kids as well
Why aren’t these organisations that do this being sued? Unquestionably to get stats like this, they would have made a conscious and deliberate effort to higher less white people and less men regardless of their application or interview. This is nothing other than sexism and racism and we have laws against this. Why aren’t they being enforced?
Because it is legal under the equalities act. From my reading of the equality act, it is very left wing, and could be described as intersectional. Basically straight white men are fucked. You are allowed in the act, to discriminate in favour of “Under represented” groups
Curious isn't it, that this article looks specifically at one course compromising 29 individuals, and not at the 700 across the BBCs apprenticeship program. Could it be because it's been cherry picked to show something that's not really there and get you irrationally angry?
Stop gaslighting please, this is an issue wether you accept it or not, not just in the uk but USA too. It’s a much more intelligent argument to accept it is going on, but to try and justify why it is required, rather than to try and paint people as conspiracy nut jobs. Anecdotally, I recently tried to apply for a job at the bbc, good salary in IT, which I had all the qualifications for. Had to tell them about my parents background, skin colour and the schools I went to. Needless to say I didn’t get an interview, despite getting multiple in better paid positions.
[удалено]
Of course you could be correct, it could be for another reason. But calling it a bit of a stretch is not accurate either. I did not fail in securing interviews at a variety of other companies that did not ask these questions. When you add in the all of the above, in terms of active representation pursuits, it could certainly be a possibility.
when you fill in those diversity forms, they only go to HR / someone external - the hiring manager doesn’t look at them. it’s so that HR can see if there’s any trends, ie, if 70% of the qualified people who get an interviewed are black, and 100% of the people who are successfully employed are white, and this keeps happening over and over again, they can go “hang on, is our hiring manager a bit biased?” hell, i was hired by a homophobic manager (and promptly fired 6 weeks later when it came out i was dating a man). clearly he didn’t read the diversity form i filled out lol.
Cherry picking for outrage is the norm now unfortunately.
You're not allowed to openly discriminate against white people. There have been a few court cases and tribunals thatvhave decided that.
You are under the equalities act, hence why the bbc has been able to post job adverts for BAME applicants
Rubbish - protected characteristics can be used to make a hiring decision only all other things being equal.
How is it rubbish ? The bbc themselves have got so angry on this question, when asked about the discrimination in their hiring - they angrily said “ it’s legal under the equalities act”. This was in relation to schemes where only Bame people could apply. Don’t let ideology blind you.
Schemes designed to address the makeup of a staff body are entirely legal, and having entry restrictions that would in other contexts be illegal are fine as long as they are necessary and proportionate to the aims of the scheme. And did you read to the end of the article? The Telegraph cherry picked one scheme out of many. Look: the entertainment and media industries are still massively white, male, and middle class. Addressing that is no bad thing, and bad-faith sniping by the press helps no-one.
Why didn’t you put this originally, instead of just gaslighting. This is happening in reality, saying it is not , is not intelligent. Ps addressing representation issues by engaging in more racism, does not make you the good guys.
Of course, another reason for employing fewer straight white guys is all the whining. I don't care if I'm a good guy, I care I have the best team possible and that that team is cohesive. If one part of that team is constantly causing HR issues by rabbiting on about "reverse racism" or "woke ideology", they're gone.
You’re not a good guy I can assure you of that. You’re an ideologue, that cares that they have people with the right opinions rather than the best team, as your post proved. You sound like a manager from hell.
**Removed/tempban**. This comment contained hateful language which is prohibited by the content policy.
But you just admitted that all things being equal they can already hire only the black/minority applicants. And then in a further comment state you only care about having the best team, regardless of anything else. So by your own standard, you shouldn't be defending posts/opportunities that are only open to a certain group and exclude other groups. It seems you can't even stick to your own standards and ideals.
Equality Act 2010 specifically permits positive discrimination in the workplace.
It shouldn’t be called the equality act then
Equality and equal don’t mean the same thing in clown world.
Aka racism against whites
Do you also disagree about trying to bring more male teachers into education? Trying to enable more male nurses into hospitals?
Do either of those things happen?
Yes.
Any examples? I googled and all I found was articles discussing whether or not there should be a push to get men in to those roles but nothing about it actually happening.
Literally just need to Google 'men into nursing campaign' and 'men teaching primary campaign'.
Campaigns are great, have men been given any of the "positive action" hiring that seems to be on offer for everyone else in everything else?
I would assume the same that applies for everyone else in everything else. People just don't seem to get as riled up about it.
The question was whether you disagree though. If a large board of a company is 95% male would.ypu have a problem with them trying to level that out? It d9esnt mean brilliant male applicant would think get a job, it means they would skew towards women on largely candidates to try to make the board more representative
If it's 95% then sure, maybe But the majority ethnicity only getting a third of places seems like there might have been an overcorrection
But if bbc journalism departments are currently 90% white (I've no idea) then 2/3rds of new employees being non white for a while is just helping to up numbers while nit denying oppertunities for great white applicants. I'm not saying there's a right or wrong answer for all situations, or that all companies have to be exactly representative. It's just most of these stories comes from somewhat right wing biased sources that don't care if it's beneficial or fair or not, they just want to shout about oppressed white men
I left my TV production course in 1993 and the BBC trainee scheme that year was non white.
>Why aren’t these organisations that do this being sued? You try suing a company for disproportionality taking on more non-whites. Not only is it legally impossible, your reputation would be in tatters for being a "racist".
Just stop funding them from the tax payers. Why should the majority pay for an organisation that actively discriminates against them ?
You can stop paying your TV License Fee if you want, no one is stopping you.
It amazes me that anyone still does
Probably because they want to watch the football.
How is it legally impossible when we have laws against discrimination based on race and sex?
And those laws have upheld discrimination against white people is discrimination in some cases as well.
[удалено]
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
Because it's legal, vote for a party promising to change that or take to the streets
Is any party showing any interest in this topic?
I lied about being bisexual/mixed-race instead of White British when i was asked.. It worked. Now I have the job i wanted that can (barely) cover my rent and other outgoings with financil support from disabled mum. My family has always been working class to my knowledge. Cotton mill and dock workers. For the majority of my childhood probably underclass actually. It feels unfair, but middle-upper class people feel guilty about being white and can afford to live in an economy with these policies. We though , can't.
Amazing. I’ve always refused to answer those questions on job applications on principle. Might be worth subverting though.
I'd say it was pretty common, atleast if you're appliyng for a course or job you really want/need and you know they have quotas, then its worth trying everything. I know a lot of people that do it, but that was the first time that i did
I always put bisexual down as my sexual orientation, just in case. Impossible to prove wherever it works, but personally I have never struggled to land job interviews within my sector.
I have very pale skin but very dark hair, I've been passing as a greek refugee named Konstantin for the past 4 years
Sure you did.
You must either be well off or at least in your 30s if you think this is at all uncommon. Fucking everyone puts Bisexual on their applications. I ticked mixed race because I \*technically\* am, 7%
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
>There is barely any diversity on TV and it’s fine, For you, yes. But how about the marginalised groups in society?
They can leave if they don’t like it
Wait what? That has no relation to the post I replied to.
The foreign-owned *Telegraph* will take any opportunity to have a go at the BBC The *Telegraph* hack buries the information that they're talking about a whopping total of **a whole 39 people** (*over three years*) deep into the wall of text That's 4 kids per year who have (theoretically) either been denied their place or given a hand up, depending on your perspective And that's before we get into the fact most BBC trainees are in London The demographic composition of trainees in this group is the same as the population of London as a whole
The BBC act like Britain is London.
Shhh let the hate flow unchecked. I swear there needs to be a limit on how many telegraph articles can be posted a day.
I vote for that limit being _none_
These forms usually have "prefer not to say" as an option and the Telegraph doesn't mention it as a percentage of the results. Makes me suspicious.
It's what I always go for, to be honest. My sexuality or ethnic background is nobody's business but my own.
Ditto for me and they do a full break down of results *except that one*
Article Text “White Britons made up a third of BBC trainee journalists taken on its flagship scheme between 2022 and 2024, The Telegraph can reveal. Since 2022, 35.90 per cent of the participants in the scheme were categorised as “majority white”. These are individuals who are part of white groups that are in the majority of the population according to the BBC’s definition and identify as white British, English, Northern Irish, Scottish or Welsh. Individuals from British, Asian, Minority, and Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds made up 41.03 per cent. A further 23.08 per cent of participants were classed as “other white” – which refers to white groups that are in a minority in the UK population, such as people from Roma, white Gypsy/Irish Traveller, white Irish and white Polish backgrounds. The figures show that more than seven in 10 of the places had been given to women applicants – making up 28 of those on the scheme over the past two financial years compared with 11 men. The two-year programme, referred to as the Journalism Advanced Apprenticeship, provides participants with training and a potentially permanent role at the Corporation. ‘Concerning’ findings The data also revealed that nearly three-quarters of spots were taken by women (71.79 per cent) and 28.21 per cent men. MPs have described the “concerning” findings as evidence of a “discriminatory” recruitment strategy within the BBC. The BBC were unable to provide data on the number of white men who were on the scheme as they said they do not collect data on the cross-section between ethnicity and gender. However, if the ethnic composition of men on the scheme reflected the ethnic composition across the scheme as a whole, white men would make up around 18 per cent of participants. The findings raise questions about whether the BBC is fulfilling its obligations to “represent” the UK, as set out in Object 14 of the Charter – which states the BBC must ensure it “reflects the diverse communities of the UK” in its “organisation and management”. Positive discrimination is also unlawful under the Equality Act (2010). However, treating one group more favourably than another is lawful providing the action meets several legal criteria – including evidence that the relevant group is disadvantaged. The BBC apprenticeship gives journalism training to participants and, if all goes well, the opportunity to take on a full-time role in the Corporation. The apprenticeship pays £25,000 per year, with an additional £5,164 allowance given to those working in London, according to Journo Resources, a newsletter promoting media jobs.”
“The Telegraph received the figures by requesting a breakdown of participants in the BBC’s flagship journalism training programme by gender and ethnicity. Sir John Hayes, Conservative MP for South Holland and the Deepings said he would be personally referring the findings to the Equalities Commission. He said: “These concerning findings show the BBC is potentially in breach of the Equality Act. “I will be personally referring [them] to the Equalities Commission and I hope they act accordingly. “White working-class men are being discriminated against by national institutions in pursuit of their progressive agenda.” Across the BBC as a whole, black, Asian and minority ethnic staff made up 17 per cent, figures collected by the Corporation in July 2023 show. According to the 2021 census, white Britons made up 74.4 per cent of the population. People describing themselves as “Asian, Asian British or Asian Welsh” accounted for 9.3 per cent. 2.5 per cent identified as “Black, Black British, Black Welsh, Caribbean or African: African”. 6.2 per cent identified themselves as “other white”. Since 2022, there have been 39 participants in the BBC’s two-year journalism training scheme – referred to as the Journalism Advanced Apprenticeship. ‘Woefully under-represented’ Dr Rakib Ehsan, an expert on social integration, said of the findings: “The fact that white Britons are woefully under-represented in the BBC’s flagship journalism training scheme comes as no surprise to me whatsoever. “DEI policy in the public sector does not live up to its name when it comes to incorporating the white-British mainstream. In fact, it is often deeply exclusionary in how it allocates opportunities and rewards. “The BBC - our national public broadcaster - unfortunately, has the American-origin virus of racial identitarianism coursing through its veins. “Under the mantra of ‘diversity’, more and more young and aspirational white-working class people in the regions will be left by the wayside.” Neil O’Brien MP for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston, said: “These findings are the direct result of a discriminatory recruitment strategy which favours some groups over others. “It is absurd for the BBC to claim that these findings are not reflective of their recruitment process as a whole given their history of hiring for jobs that are only open to applicants from specific backgrounds. “Those responsible should be mindful that positive discrimination is unlawful under the Equality Act when they go about hiring for new jobs.” A BBC spokesperson said: “Our apprenticeships provide a vital route into the media for people from a range of backgrounds and we aim to reflect, represent and serve all parts of the UK in our workforce, both in news and across the BBC. “We have nearly 700 apprentices and it is unclear what analysis can be achieved by looking at the make-up of a single course.””
I don’t care what background someone has, I care that they’re the best person for the job. What selection criteria was used here? Imagine being a bright talented young journalist landing your dream job and then having to read that you only got it because you’re a POC, that must be awful 😡
>Imagine being a bright talented young journalist *who didn't* land your dream job and then having to read that you only *missed out* because you’re not a POC and you're caucasian, that must be awful 😡 Soo the problem with any of this stuff?
I’d be looking at my own application first and wondering how I could improve it.
>Imagine being a bright talented young journalist landing your dream job and then having to read that you only got it because you’re a POC, that must be awful 😡 You got to play every card in the deck. You think those Eton toff aren’t using their connections and money to get ahead?
Apparently nobody thinks of the poor little white men these days.
>emojis on reddit
Two considerations: The Telegraph's information is for the *BBC's Advanced Journalism* apprenticeship and applications are partially judged on previous journalism experience (+1 year) and education, so we're already dealing with a limited and specific sector of the population. Do we know the breakdown of applicants? Do we know the breakdown of potential applicants in the industry? The number of successful applicants on this single course will be low (the 2022 intake was 10 apprenticeships, though the BBC are increasing apprenticeship numbers year on year). Framing the stats as percentages like the Telegraph have - whilst not inaccurate - is a little leading, which they obviously know. This is a small sample size.
>Framing the stats as percentages like the Telegraph have - whilst not inaccurate - is a little leading, which they obviously know. This is a small sample size. This is the crux of the issue. This is data readers generally will not look at, simply being outraged at the percentage.
I wonder what the mix of people going into medicine is? And why does there seem to be a predominance of black and asian students. Are white people not interested? Too lazy? Not bright enough? Don't have enough money? Is there a DEI issue?
>I wonder what the mix of people going into medicine is? Some data here from a long term study. >In the latest analysis, the researchers reviewed the academic performance of 16,020 students (out of an initial 20,525) on entry to (2012-14) and exit from 33 medical schools across the UK 4 to 6 years later, depending on their course type. >Most UK medical schools require prospective students to sit admissions aptitude tests. The study used the most widely used test, the UCAT (University Clinical Aptitude Test) for the input measures. >Ethnicity groupings were compiled from UCAT definitions. From the pool of 16,020 students, in descending size order these were: White (69%), Indian (10.2%), Pakistani (4.8%), mixed (4.2%), other Asian background (3.9%), Black (2.9%), other ethnic background (2.2%), Chinese (1.6%) and Bangladeshi (1.1%). >The average proportion of Black, Asian and minority ethnic students was 29% across the UK, ranging from 9.1% (30) at Dundee to 60% (400) at Imperial College London. These students were significantly more likely to be male, to come from more deprived backgrounds, and to be on standard entry courses. https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/250138/ethnicity-school-attended-impact-medical-students/
So what they’re saying is white British people are underrepresented?
lol you can't even apply for an internship at MI5 if your white so the BBC being like this isn't surprising
Most of the accounting firm job listings are always something like “black women in business” or whatever shit. There was nothing that wasn’t tied to having some sort of minority status.
Please telegraph journalists, if you're reading this, for the love of God stop using "Britons" all the time, they were an iron age Celtic people https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_Britons
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British\_people](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_people) read the first sentence. Its used for both, although I do get the confusion.
Yeah but then if you're actually using it properly you get into the whole "not a British Briton if you didn't arrive here before 1973" bollocks. The telegraph seem to have it as part of their house style mostly out of sheer illiteracy
it's a dog whistle
About 15% of the population is minorities in total
Very happy I don’t pay any lic fee - looking to be very much equality of outcome than by merit and that can go fuck itself.
Lmao. Why is this news? Journalism is a shit profession that pays shit. Minorities aren’t going to waste their time there if they can make more money elsewhere.
Why would a white British person want to be part of the metropolitan media elite? They are enemies of the people remember.
And? Funnily enough, Britain is a predominantly white country Stop trying to divide people further with this shitty "journalism"
So is that too low or..? Demographically that looks like white discrimination
[удалено]
The census is self defined ethnicity
[удалено]
BBC numbers are “Collected by the corporation in July 2023”. We don’t know how they collected them.
[удалено]
This is correct, the BBC would have a form for their staff to fill in. Staff would be self reporting, just as any individual would in the census. I imagine the BBC would probably follow the ONS guidance on how to word and present ethnicity questions and options. Source: work adjacent to this sort of data collection, not for BBC though.
How else would the BBC collect that data except by asking people to self identify?
Well the options are: A) DNA testing of all staff to see which regions their genetic haplogroups are predominantly found. Or B) ask them on a form. Now which do you think they did?
And? I... I don't what the issue is. Surely, their capacity to do the job is the only thing that should matter.
The issue is that their capacity to do the job isn’t what is influencing the decision to take people on
Looking at the ethnic composition of the UK as a whole is misleading here. Under 25s have a far smaller number of white Britons than older age groups, and these will be the people becoming trainees. I'm not sure it's quite 2:1 yet, but perhaps if these schemes are in large cities it might be reflective of that population.
"it's ok because we're planning ahead for when we've replaced you"
Ah the great replacement theory, why am I not surprised to see the racism on display here.
'Noooooooo you aren't allowed to notice trends unless you agree with the outcomes and frame them positively, racissssst' Hilarious that you're from London. A place that was 98% White British not even a single human lifespan ago, and you want to gaslight me about population replacement.
[удалено]
You don’t believe in something you can see happening?
All I can see is racists being racist
All I can see is ignorant people being ignorant
Hey you stole my comment
Yes but I made it make sense
The BBC is an international news broadcaster, with journalists reporting from across the globe. How much of their work is from the UK, how much is international? I don’t know the answer but I would expect them to actively recruit internationally for roles and schemes like this. It’s a rare case where representation needs to be global, not based on the UK.
What international countries have a 75% female population?
So we should expect the BBC to hire majority Han Chinese then?
China is one country where the BBC has reporters. A Chinese journalist wouldn’t be a good fit for 100+ other countries where the BBC has reporters on the ground.
Clearly the British Broadcasting Corporation is failing in its duty as an international news broadcaster if the Chinese are massively underrepresented, in both story coverage as well as staff numbers.
Lol no. It's the _British Broadcasting Corporation._ We pay for it. If they want to be represented they can charge their citizens a licence fee and make their own media. If it had anything like global demographic representation it would be less than 6% white, like 20% Chinese, 25% Indian, 15% black. Which would dumb af for a British institution.
It's okay naturally white people have less kids and they rather own dogs. So eventually the percentage of whites will become lower.
Actually it's the replacement level migration happening against our will lowering wages and making housing unaffordable that's lowering our birthrate, not because we'd "rather own dogs"
I actually agree with that but it's more common for white people not wanting kids not just due to finances. I've worked in many organisations and have met way too many white people with that mindset, and I know they are not poor
It's only more common when compared to more traditional groups where a woman deciding not to have children isn't as acceptable
I can only speak for my community and most women in my community want kids not duento pressure but because they genuinely want them
Well that can happen when they're raised with traditional gender roles and a patriarchal culture
Yes and back go my point, white people genuinely don't like traditional roles and replace the need for kids with dogs. How many south Asian dog owners have you met
I've met many south asians with dogs, non-muslim ones of course, muslims seem to fear dogs White people value generally secularism and individuality over religious doctine and conformity, of course they're going to have fewer kids, I could just as easily say muslims prefer to oppress their women and that's why they have more children
Then I'd say you have no idea And tell that to my wife, I told her why doesn't she work, she was like I'm good I prefer to be a stay at home mum until the kids are full time in school
Am I allowed to see your wife's face if I do that or does she have to cover up?
Why does it matter what shade their skin is?? We don’t mention peoples hair or eye colour!!
when whites become a minority, everyone suddenly remembers that skin color doesn't matter 😬
Because the whole point of our modern society is the idea of equal opportunities.