Jump to content

Sikhtv Channel 848, Doesn’T Exist


Recommended Posts

Probably lack of funding.

Its not good to be spreading around the Sangat's money to three different channel.

Wouldn't is be 10 times better to have one singular channel that would get a lot of funding and in turn provide proffesional coverage to all of Europe?

I think that would be cool

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no connection to the theives who are bringing Sikh TV down or Bhai Gagandip Singh Ji's family/friends The thieves Manpreet n Co who moved in after Gagandip's Death as opportunists have been seen removing all the equipment from the TV Station in West Bromwich.Gagandip's family gave this Manpreet a 50% Share in the Channel after Gagandip was murdered - all of a sudden Manpreet & his thugs,turned on Gagandip's Family & Bhai Gursevak Singh Ji who was with Sikh TV from the Start ,Manpreet and Co then sacked the majority of the Staff atfer doing stupid programmes on Kabbaddi - We ALL know that Kabbaddi is linked to thugs in our community thats why they keep showing it again and again, Since Gursevak Singh Ji was thrown out by the thieves the channel has been going downhill all his work and Gagandip's work has been put to the drain - They have destroyed Gagandip's legacy & continue to do so. As of now certain groups run the 'religious programming' ,had Gagandip been alive he would have never allowed these people near the station not only due to their views but also due to the fact they HATED Gagandip with a passion they have now teamed up with these thugs to be the 'religious side' while the thugs go around filming Kabbaddi/Football matches and so on.This is the reason you see so much Kabbaddi ,dodgy Baba's and only certain Jathebandia being promoted, when Gursevak Singh Ji was running the Channel it was under the Maryada of Akal Takht Sahib ji and no jathebandi or group or people were given preference ,now they sacked Bhai Sahib its clear for all to see. Don't these people have shame? What would Gagandip think?This is the sad state of our community

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no connection to the theives who are bringing Sikh TV down or Bhai Gagandip Singh Ji's family/friends The thieves Manpreet n Co who moved in after Gagandip's Death as opportunists have been seen removing all the equipment from the TV Station in West Bromwich.Gagandip's family gave this Manpreet a 50% Share in the Channel after Gagandip was murdered - all of a sudden Manpreet & his thugs,turned on Gagandip's Family & Bhai Gursevak Singh Ji who was with Sikh TV from the Start ,Manpreet and Co then sacked the majority of the Staff atfer doing stupid programmes on Kabbaddi - We ALL know that Kabbaddi is linked to thugs in our community thats why they keep showing it again and again, Since Gursevak Singh Ji was thrown out by the thieves the channel has been going downhill all his work and Gagandip's work has been put to the drain - They have destroyed Gagandip's legacy & continue to do so. As of now certain groups run the 'religious programming' ,had Gagandip been alive he would have never allowed these people near the station not only due to their views but also due to the fact they HATED Gagandip with a passion they have now teamed up with these thugs to be the 'religious side' while the thugs go around filming Kabbaddi/Football matches and so on.This is the reason you see so much Kabbaddi ,dodgy Baba's and only certain Jathebandia being promoted, when Gursevak Singh Ji was running the Channel it was under the Maryada of Akal Takht Sahib ji and no jathebandi or group or people were given preference ,now they sacked Bhai Sahib its clear for all to see. Don't these people have shame? What would Gagandip think?This is the sad state of our community

Mandela asks who is this Manpreet, he should be exposed with a picture on here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No big loss!

Unless there's a radical change in programming, I personally don't see the need to get excited about Sikh TV. Sikh TV's quality of programming is much weaker compared to the other 2.

There is Sikh TV. Sangat TV, what is the other one?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are weaknesses in ALL 3 channels, but by far Sikh TV has to be the weaker one because of some of the programming it broadcasts.

Is it not better to have ONE channel? Why do we need 3 it becomes competition all for the wrong reasons. Then they all ask for direct debits but if one person supports one channel how do you expect that same person to pay for the other 2? So it's better to have ONE channel overall because then problems like this arise, going off air etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

there is a huge risk with having one channel where sangats money has been poured in.

Imagine it gets taken over, or people get bought out or sell-out to certain parties, individuals, agents, rss.. etc etc..

These things happen very often in gurdwara managements, its a huge risk ploughing all our resources and money into one channel.

Davy Bal.. can you guarantee his long-term loyalty to the panth?

Knock knock.. morning mr bal.. i have been sent over from india, please do not mention these things (khalistan, human rights.. etc etc) on your channel, and do not invite these people on your channel, and here's £££'s for your troubles.

katchies in dehli are watching everything that goes on here, they will have their eyes on the channels.

Media is by far the biggest tool we have for parchar... We cannot risk having all our eggs in one basket.

And if a channel gets too powerful, and THEN starts avoiding certain topics, covering up certain things.. then how you going to close it down?? things we need to think about.

I think more channels the merrier..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Daas also has to agree that SikhTv is the weakest channel out of the three. No live broadcasts, no studio, not even an appeal to protect gurdwareh during the riots.

But personally i would rather have 2 channels and not just one. But there should be no competition between the two. And they should work TOGETHER!

And another reason for two channels is, if one shows a discussion and the other shows kirtan, then everybody would be happy. Because if we have only one channel and there is a discussion, which somebody doesn't want to watch, what other channel can they watch?

This will only work if both channels work side by side.

What do you think?

Any improvements expected? Or do we have to go through a weeks of kabadi repeats!

LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

More channels will lack funding, I read what your saying but from what I have seen nearly all 3 channels have been showing some anti Sikh programmes do we really need more channels that the sangat won't even watch? Waste of money. This will create greed and more people to copy and set up. We should focus upon what we have and how we can improve it that's why the channel is going off air even Sikh channel maybe the wider Sikh community would rather drop direct debits because they are not agreeing with whats going on in the channels.

When Sikhism began Guru Nanak didn't need any media to promote Sikhism. A channel can be good but if the people behind aren't good and don't have Sikh interests at heart then obviously we are going to have a problem regardless of having one channel or numerous channels.

We already have other types of media to spread sikh news such as panthic.org YouTube for videos, this forum. Most of the time the channels are not meeting the needs of the Sikh community by promoting anti Sikh stuff, bringing in people who don't have a interest in Sikhism at all.

Lack of direct debits, the channel going off air (Sikh channel and Sikh tv) shows it all, tells it all.

Plus the repeats are not good, showing the same stuff over again espcially the kabaddi programme how boring is that?Zzzzzzzzzz.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • No problem veerji.It is night at my place and i was doing some school work.So i misunderstood 😂🙏🙏🙏 Bhul Chuk Maf 🙏
    • I would attach a pic but then it would have to be approved first so just click on the link in the OG post to know what I meant ji
    • Sorry ji I didn't mean dastaar I meant like the paghs mentioned in the link b4. Im all for singhni's wearing dastaar and dumalla but I meant when a woman is wearing a nok pagh and her hair is out. Looks so weird and looks like a topi   Sorry for the confusion ji, when I say pagh i usually refer to nok pagh and dastaar for any   Bhul Chuk Maaf Ji🙏
    • Vaheguru ji ka khalsa Vaheguru ji ki fateh Veerji, Guru Sahib gave Daastar di daat to every sikh, regardless if the sikh is a male or a female.So many great examples of Singhanis who wear daastar such as Mata Sahib Kaur Ji, Mata Sundri ji, Mata Gujri Ji,Mai Bhago ji, and countless others.When we take amrit and become Guru Wale,we can all wear Daastars, regardless of Gender. Bhul Chuk Maf 🙏 Vaheguru ji ka khalsa Vaheguru ji ki fateh
    • 1. First of all, I said "singhs who lead a decent lifestyle." A "singh" who commits domestic violence (or is abusive in any other way) does not lead a decent lifestyle. 2. I was commenting on someone else's comment where they wondered why women marry men in the entertainment industry who are known to be unfaithful. If you are so triggered by me using "singhs who lead a decent lifestyle" as a contrast to such men, then please just accept the following more general point: human being have a tendency to be attracted to power/money/fame/glamour/physical attraction and value those things over modesty/decency/piety. That's why you see a lot of people end up with partners who don't treat them well. At some point, they probably had a choice where they could have gone with someone who treated them better, but the person who would have treated them better was not attractive enough to them.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use