The Name Game

The BBC is in another spot of bother over place names. Having successfully bamboozled the British media into following its refusal to use Bombay in any respect it is now in a muddle over a Swiss town. Is it Basle or Basel? On the Today programme, Robert Peston insisted on saying Basel, with emphasised diction into the bargain. "Whatever happened to Basle?", said John Humphrys, seemingly envisaging defeat in this contest.

We used to say Basle as a country. Then Basel came up on the rails as a loose runner of sorts. Is it French or is it German? Does it matter? I think it does for the BBC. They are the arbiters of placenames. Firenze isn't on their list yet, but should the European Commission decree it is you can bet your bottom lira that the BBC will be first to defend Firenze. As for the other countries? Well, it will be Londres et al as usual.

From Bombay to the BNP

It strikes me that certain people, whatever their background, have a propensity to think they know better than others when it comes to an opinion on racial matters. We have the prize example of Trevor Phillips, head of the Equalities Quango, going off to the courts in the hope of giving the BNP a fatal dose of legal judgement. He was hoping that the law would assist him in getting the BNP to implode. It backfired. All it did was to get the BNP writing him endless letters asking what he intends to do about the National Black Police Association and their non-white membership criterion. This is now being used by the BNP as a bit of propaganda.

So the BNP welcomes ethnic minority members and the more fired up they are against Muslims the better. Take Rajinder Singh, who is in his late 70s, and is quite open about his criticism of Muslims. He thinks they acquire a collective identity. "The Muslim answer to reasoned argument is knife, dagger and bomb," he says, neatly lumping them all in a collective identity. So he's going to do well in stirring things up.

Now I've long known that deep-seated resentments emanating from the sub-continent can flare up like a latent volcano. I've witnessed first hand a verbal insult session between a Muslim and a Hindu. Not a pretty sight. Only today I read in the Daily Mail (must be true!) that a BT customer who is of Pakistani background came in for a tongue-lashing from a BT call centre worker in India. He was called a 'Pakistani b******' and a 'mother****** and bombarded with hundreds of sinister silent calls. India is full of people keen to give others a bit of racial abuse. Egged on by the BJP, they have a go at the likes of McDonalds for opening hamburger restaurants, they round up Christians and others for being so-called "non-Indian" and they encourage the PC sycophants in the BBC to accept their name changes for cities like Bombay.

Racists are all over the world. It's a kind of base level one-upmanship. But surely we are above the level of dogs sniffing bottoms in the park. I've seen that too. A disparate group - a poodle, a Jack Russel, an odd cur and an overweight bitch. All seems sweetness and light until one sniff too many and all hell lets loose with teeth bared and a canine punch-up is in full flow.

If we kept the PC brigade and the racists at bay perhaps we might all get along quite nicely.

BBC in word play scam!

The BBC gives me the impression that they are "leaders" in the way English words and phrases are used. It was the BBC that led the way in imposing a new name for Bombay on us, whilst steadfastly refusing to do the same with European cities. The corporation has a distinct power in the land when it comes to the way we speak. Although it is not down to them alone, there are other contributors, it seems that the BBC is at the heart of it. They took to speaking only in meters. Woe betide anyone who dares to say feet for a measurement. They will be upbraided, often on screen.

Now the BBC is stubbornly using "gender" instead of "sex". Sometimes it sounds too stupid for words. The thought of athletes having "gender tests" renders the language a fortune to hostage as far as the politically correct brigade are concerned. This is not about pronunciation, or bad grammar as such. Rather it is the insiduous elevation by a thought police of a control system. At one time such behaviour would be countered. Now it seems we don't have the stomach to resist.

Bombay bonanza!

The Oscars have been celebrated and the Brits have done very well. It takes the mind off the depressing aspects of the recession. However, two things were a little off putting. The first was that the winners' list was leaked and Kate Winslett was spending the weekend trying not to sound like a person who had been told Santa Claus had hung up his boots. The second was that the Bombay urchins who were deemed to be the real thing and therefore necessary to the success of Slumdog Millionaire have been returned to the slums without the generous payoff they were offered. Apparently the producers say it is all hogwash and nobody has been left without the financial settlements they agreed to.

I think it is a pity that the press publish all kinds of tittle tattle without appreciating the results of their actions. Kate Winslett won an Oscar. That's great news, but I'd prefer to hear it from the personality tearing the envelope open rather than a front page scoop designed to spoil. Equally, the biggest publicity night Bombay has had since the bombings and the gilt is sliced off the gingerbread in a cunning way.

Spoilsports is a term that comes to mind.

A battering for Bombay in the nomenclature stakes!

The Times is starting it's first Mumbai day, having succumbed to the merciless pressure to resist describing the Indian city as Bombay. It's all rather sad I think. It's just pandering to the rather noxious sentiments of the PC brigade.

This modern righteousness of the "liberal elite" tells us what we should be doing and thinking. I cannot for the life of me see why it is so. The BBC tried saying Myanmar for Burma, but were told that the regime there was despotic and evil, so they desisted. They do not consider it an affront to fellow European countries to continue with anglicised versions of their place names. In fact, each European country has a different name for London. I don't hear the BBC rebuking the French for Londres!

No, it is all a parody of the facts. Most Indians who speak English in Bombay do not describe Bombay as Mumbai. They are not shaken to the core if they hear the word. Neither is it disrespect.

When all this has died down I am fairly certain it will be the case that Bombay remains the name that most Britons think of when that city comes to mind. Anyway, I've said my piece, probably too much, but I am glad that blogging does allow us a few pin pricks against the pomposity and puffed-up importance of those claiming that they know best!

BBC wins - The Times loses - It's Mumbai!

The BBC, with its slavish attachment to calling Bombay Mumbai, has caused The Times to bow out gracefully and, from 1st December, refer to the city “formerly known as Bombay” as Mumbai.

Richard Dixon, chief revise editor of The Times, says, "Key to policy at The Times on the usage of place names is that they are adjudged to be recognisable to a majority of our readers. After the events that started on Wednesday the name Mumbai has been used extensively in other media to which our core British readership is exposed. It would be foolish to ignore that context. We also have a global online audience to consider." I would think that when all this has died down, many in the UK will still think of Bombay as Bombay.

I wonder if anybody who said Bombay on a BBC broadcast would be corrected or whether it would be allowed to pass. Maybe there's a naughty room for those who prefer to say Bombay. It is a sad reflection that such an insiduous adherence to this perceived political correctness has caused The Times to consider this move. I'm not convinced that a "majority of our readers" at The Times are helped by the change.

If the BBC is of the opinion that this name-changing is important, let them revise every Italian city for starters. That would be a sign of consistency. They won't, though.

I realise that this is of minute importance compared with the other problems in the world, not least the outrage in Bombay itself. However, I am miffed by the ever-so-slightly pompous way this has been brought about in this country.

I think The Times should have stood firm, but there you go!

PS - Another interesting take on this in The Guardian. And this gem from a BBC blog - "As a regular traveller to Bombay, it has been impressed on me many times by Bombayites, that Mumbai is a politically invented name and as such is deemed by a large majority of Indians to have racist conotations. General chit-chat in the bars of Bandra or Worli will always refer to the Anglicised Bombay when English is the language being used." So much for the BBC's local knowledge!!

What's with this Mumbai ya stuff?

Here's a man after my own heart. He quotes Winston Churchill as saying "Everybody has a right to pronounce foreign names as he chooses".

So how come the BBC is so slavish to all this Mumbai talk? Would Indians be offended if we said Bombay? I suppose some would, but as Paul Battley says, "I don’t call Paris ‘Paree’ unless I’m speaking French."

I see The Times Online refers to Bombay still. Funny old world!

A tale of two cities - Bombay and Bangkok

I was struck by the happenings in two cities of Asia and how different they the appear. The first was the taking of the airport in Bangkok by demonstrators fed up with the shenanigans of the Thai government. These people wore yellow headbands and clothing to show that they were peaceful people. They were just stating that they wanted real democracy in their country. Apparently all flight passengers were treated well and got on with their "captors" who gave them food and sustinence. As one Brit said "It's the airlines who are telling us nothing!".

Contrast this with Bombay, now renamed Mumbai and described by the BBC as "The Indian city of Mumbai" as if we don't know where it is! "Mumbai? It's Bombay, mate! Ah!" is a typical snippet of conversation you might hear down the pub. I'm still waiting for the BBC to speak of The Italian city of Firenze, but I'm not hopeful. Anyway back to Bombay. Here we have automoton terrorists trying to destabilise a democracy by attempting to round up American and British citizens whilst scaring the living daylights out the city as a whole.

Democracy is worth fighting for. Not with weapons or warfare but with words and wisdom. The Bangkok demonstrators have left their mark by being firm but fair with their cause. Al Queda is neither firm or fair. They have a self-righteous narrow view of life based on hatred and the desire to hurt in order to control. In this they should be resisted absolutely.

The Indian government is handling the situation well it seems. However the US and British governments should not be tempted to intervene. The Indian authorities are quite capable of flushing out these terrorists and bringing matters to a satisfactory conclusion.


PS. This film is nicely titled - Bombay to Bangkok! One up to the Bollywood producers.