BBC bias

[git-intae-thum]

1 minute ago, welshbairn said:

Don't think we know which videos Youtube objected to, so all theory at this point.

Not related to this, but infowars style videos proclaiming that the Sandy Hook killing of primary school pupils was faked by the Government, sending grieving parents into hiding, certainly should be censored.

ouch...c'mon thats splitting chips. You know that is not what is happened here. 

[Peppino Impastato]

Just now, welshbairn said:

I'll leave you to back that up this time, especially the last bit about elsewhere in the UK.

Didn't see you doing the same.  Tbh it's impossible to respect you cause of this.  A shame.

[Peppino Impastato]

3 minutes ago, git-intae-thum said:

lol....surely you cannae mean mad max!!

He's brilliant, one of the best journalists in the world.

[git-intae-thum]

1 minute ago, Peppino Impastato said:

He's brilliant, one of the best journalists in the world.

hmmm.... no so sure, but he is an interesting listen....He definitely gives a good alternative view of financial systems......After listening to him in my younger days and buying a wee bit silver....I am still waiting on the price rocketing.......8 years later 

[welshbairn]

5 minutes ago, git-intae-thum said:

ouch...c'mon thats splitting chips. You know that is not what is happened here. 

I did say it's not related.  Just came to mind when you said nothing should be censored.

[git-intae-thum]

Just now, welshbairn said:

I did say it's not related.  Just came to mind when you said nothing should be censored.

yeh...fair enough...it felt a sair wan tho

[J_Stewart]

I like to get my political news in advance of it actually happening by just reading a Daily Mash article or watching an episode of The Thick of It and then waiting for the current cabinet to make a similarly shambolic mess of things.

Works every time. The wait is usually only a week or two.

[Savage Henry]

15 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

Exactly.

Which is why those constantly defending the BBC need their heid examined. It is every bit the instrument of state that Russia today is....... Only much better at it.

The beeb is the master, where the likes of RT and Fox are just apprentices. The BBC (or those behind it) have had years more practice in the dark art, have managed to become much more embedded within the national psyche and have therefore become much more skilled in fooling a gullible population. 

Anyone who takes what is broadcast from the beeb in relation to politics, at face value, is naive or a simpleton.

That isn't remotely true.

RT is quite literally the propaganda wing of the Kremlin.  It was created for that specific function.  It's very existence is to promote the Russian government, in the same way that Press TV is the Iranian government's mouthpiece.

You can criticise the BBC for its editorial biases if you want (though not if, say, you read The National, because that would be staggeringly hypocritical), and declining standards and cost-cutting among very many things,  but it was never, except for a period during the war, serving that specific and overt purpose.

It always boils down to this:  they're all as bad as each other - except the one I like.  

[Baxter Parp]

2 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

You can criticise the BBC for its editorial biases if you want (though not if, say, you read The National, because that would be staggeringly hypocritical),

Yes, a small newspaper with a limited circulation is exactly the same as a two tv channel multi radio station online corporation guided by the government, isn't it?

[DA Baracus]

4 TV channels (BBC4 and BBC News still air on Freeview).

[git-intae-thum]

3 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

That isn't remotely true.

RT is quite literally the propaganda wing of the Kremlin.  It was created for that specific function.  It's very existence is to promote the Russian government, in the same way that Press TV is the Iranian government's mouthpiece.

You can criticise the BBC for its editorial biases if you want (though not if, say, you read The National, because that would be staggeringly hypocritical), and declining standards and cost-cutting among very many things,  but it was never, except for a period during the war, serving that specific and overt purpose.

It always boils down to this:  they're all as bad as each other - except the one I like.  

This is deluded.

No one is white knighting RT. They obviously have their agenda....but to suggest that the BBC is markedly different is just daft.

They are just a bit better at pretending to be fairer and fooling the gullible.... or indeed keeping those with britnat tendencies content in their own wee world view. 

[pandarilla]

This is deluded.
No one is white knighting RT. They obviously have their agenda....but to suggest that the BBC is markedly different is just daft.
They are just a bit better at pretending to be fairer and fooling the gullible.... or indeed keeping those with britnat tendencies content in their own wee world view. 

They are different though.

The BBC is not bias free by any stretch but it is a globally respected source of news and there is no direct connection with the government of the day.

RT do some interesting stuff, and certainly provide a different perspective - but they are much closer aligned to the Russian government.

Nuanced, but important differences.

[NotThePars]

They are different though.

 

The BBC is not bias free by any stretch but it is a globally respected source of news and there is no direct connection with the government of the day.

 

RT do some interesting stuff, and certainly provide a different perspective - but they are much closer aligned to the Russian government.

 

Nuanced, but important differences.

 

 

The government, and intelligence services, can and do exert influence over the BBC’s hiring and programming. Tom Mills covers it really well in his book. I think the BBC probably does retain more independence than RT but it’s still ultimately subject to the government if it strays too far from the establishment consensus.

[lichtgilphead]

4 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

You can criticise the BBC for its editorial biases if you want (though not if, say, you read The National, because that would be staggeringly hypocritical)

Here's a quote from the BBC website. Remember, it has a duty to be "impartial"

"Impartiality lies at the heart of public service and is the core of the BBC's commitment to its audiences.  It applies to all our output and services - television, radio, online, and in our international services and commercial magazines.  We must be inclusive, considering the broad perspective and ensuring the existence of a range of views is appropriately reflected."

By contrast, the National pins it's colours to the mast. Every edition I've ever seen states (on the front page , in capital letters).

"THE NEWSPAPER THAT SUPPORTS AN INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND"

As a newspaper, it has no need to pretend to be impartial. You know what you're getting when you buy it.

Accordingly, your charge of hypocricy is patent nonsense

 

[Peppino Impastato]

4 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

That isn't remotely true.

RT is quite literally the propaganda wing of the Kremlin.  It was created for that specific function.  It's very existence is to promote the Russian government, in the same way that Press TV is the Iranian government's mouthpiece.

You can criticise the BBC for its editorial biases if you want (though not if, say, you read The National, because that would be staggeringly hypocritical), and declining standards and cost-cutting among very many things,  but it was never, except for a period during the war, serving that specific and overt purpose.

It always boils down to this:  they're all as bad as each other - except the one I like.  

When it comes to Scottish independence you're simply wrong.  The BBC is legally duty bound to promote social cohesion in the UK and the British state.  It can lose its license if it fails to do so.  

It is staffed by raging British nationalists, and views and treats Scottish nationalists like the nazi party in the 30s.  We are the enemy within and the BBC is engaged in an ongoing attempt every day to prevent Scottish independence. 

It does this by lies and smears and inventing stories, censoring unhelpful information and twisting facts.  Just last week the BBC reported prescription Costs in Scotland have 'soared' by 25% under the SNP, when in fact when you factor in inflation they have reduced by 15%!!!!! That's the extent of the lying.

As for RT I am an intelligent educated person, I watch pretty much all news channels.  It's beyond question RT is number one.  I don't believe any intelligent person could watch it and disagree.  It also wins more awards than any others.  If they're talking about the actions of the Russian government they are biased, but the BBC is biased in favour of the neoliberal consensus and the Tory party.  Everyone is biased.  Watch them all and make your own mind up.  RT wipes the floor with all of them.

[sophia]

6 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

That isn't remotely true.

RT is quite literally the propaganda wing of the Kremlin.  It was created for that specific function.  It's very existence is to promote the Russian government, in the same way that Press TV is the Iranian government's mouthpiece.

You can criticise the BBC for its editorial biases if you want (though not if, say, you read The National, because that would be staggeringly hypocritical), and declining standards and cost-cutting among very many things,  but it was never, except for a period during the war, serving that specific and overt purpose.

It always boils down to this:  they're all as bad as each other - except the one I like.  

That’s all very well but it doesn’t even begin to explain Eleanor Bradford does it?

 

[sophia]

and Raymond Buchanan.

as already stated, the subtle and devious central control pervades

[dirty dingus]

There is a BBC Protest at Pacific Quay on the 11th Aug at 1pm.

Come along.

[Glen Sannox]

The BBC is clearly a deeply corrupt institution now desperately trying to cover up their long-standing  hypocrisy and bias.
Amazes me that some folk buy into the pish about good old "Auntie" and are horrified at the thought of watching a state sponsored news channel like RT.
Bit of perspective is needed here. RT might very well be a load of old Kremlin tat....but is a channel that we can only watch live, if we first pay our own state broadcaster over £150 or face having the law on us.
Old "Auntie" needs a mass boycott of their yoon broadcasting tax.
 

[Glen Sannox]

still waiting on the tory, labour and various U-KOK youtube channels being hit with beeb copyright notices btw. Surely in the interests of political impartiality we won't be waiting too long. Or was it all just a big misunderstanding blown out of proportion by those nasty nats:lol:

You need to go and seek help, very quickly. I’m led to believe that “mental health issues” are the latest big thing. Against this background no doubt there will be services available for the likes of you. Good luck.