I really wish so-called journalists on the radio who are paid by the public would not wish people well with their campaigns at the end of the interview. Those employed by private broadcasters can pretty much do and say what they want. But when I'm paying the journalist's wages, I don't want them endorsing any campaigns. There are often two sides, if not more, to any story and quite frankly many of the so-called journalists today will obviously believe anything they are told without question or further investigation. Some of the people I have heard endorsed and encouraged on programmes on state-financed broadcasting systems are pretty obviously cranks and sometimes even dangerous cranks. The last thing they should be is endorsed by an organisation I am forced to pay to support. Last week I heard a film maker interviewed and, as far as I could make out, what made the movie interesting was that it was produced by an all-female crew. This was because the women felt more comfortable working that way and the "journalist" doing the interview seemed to think this was a praiseworthy way to operate. Would she have applauded a film maker who refused to employ Chinese or African staff because she was not entirely "comfortable" with them on the set? I think not. But I'm sure the journalist wished the film maker the best of luck with her project at the end of the interview. Coverage of an issue; yes. Endorsement and implied support; a definite Big No.