Re: Gay channel
 

Which takes me back to a post I made earlier. Why not just ensure gays are better represented in mainstream media?
One employee who is better placed to know what is going on @ ntl than either of us..

Re: Gay channel
 

Oh and while i'm on my high horse (for I know I am) why does a really crap channel like Men & Motors get channel space? It's not a premium channel and I doubt it has that high an audience?
Men & motors is an insult to inteligent men and panders to the base interests of the hetero male.

Re: Gay channel
 

I am sure ntl (corporately or on an individual level) are not homophobic or discriminatory.

Any special interest audience are free to petition any provider for specific content.

Given that cable/satellite broadcasters are not public licence fee beneficiaries and therefore commercial entities, then the petitioned level of subscription would need to be commercially viable.

I deliberately avoid the term 'minority' and substitute 'special interest'

I am sure if enough followers of (for example) 'advanced techniques in macrame and crochet patterns in blue silk' pooled their rescources, then a 2 minute slot in a generic lifestyle programme once a quarter could become a dedicated channel.

Re: Gay channel
 

Oh come off it...
If there are channels for children (CBBC etc), men (men and motors), women (LivingTV originally), even channel for scifi fans etc, why not one for gays?

Just one, thats not too much to ask for, is it?
And not just cuz its economical to do it.

Re: Gay channel
 

Ahh but there you are so wrong, being gay isnt a special interest, its a way of life and equating it with croching just shows the amount of misunderstanding due to lack of media coverage.
Gays are a minority, thats not being PC or using positive discrimination, its a fact.
And minorities need fair coverage in the media.
My argument being that minorities can never be economically viable compared to majorities.

Re: Gay channel
 

I cannot argue with that.

I am not unsympathetic.

I was not making an equation.

But if thats the argument, does it not render the whole thread rather pointless?

Re: Gay channel
 

No that's my argument not the thread starters one.

'My argument is that if gays are in a minority. Then how are they expected to get a fair representation if the only way they can get their own channel is by becoming rich enough to pay for one. Being a minority would mean they would have to raise more money per person than a hetero person would have to.'

The other reason I think that gays need a channel for their own, is because of the discrimination that has been going on for too many years and can only be redressed by a little saturation from the other side.

Re: Gay channel
 

Fight fire with fire, you mean?

Re: Gay channel
 

I think that answers the thread starter's question. I am not taking issue, or picking a row - I really do sympathise - the world is not a fair place.

Maybe someone high up in channel selection will take all this on board - but I do not have a solution - and its bed time.

Re: Gay channel
 

Well I wouldnt call a gay related channel 'fire' in the same way I'd call kidnapping and hanging someone on a fence after beating them near to death, fire.

Re: Gay channel
 

Neither would I. But there is no such thing as positive discrimination. It's like saying because women have been opressed by men for so many years, it justifies women treating men like dirt.

Unless of course I've totally misread your intentions, after all, it's 2:36am and I'm knackard :spin:

Re: Gay channel
 

The link below is why we need a gay channel.

http://www.uua.org/news/hatecrime/globe.html

Re: Gay channel
 

So if there was a dedicated gay channel, all that wouldn't have happened?? Wishful thinking perhaps?

Re: Gay channel
 

Well i've already said its not positive discrimination.
Also how do you equate a channel about gay lifestyle with women treating men like dirt?
Gay programing doesnt mean taking the mick out of heteros.

Re: Gay channel
 

No not NEVER happen, but happen LESS.