• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread BBC news reporting

The BBC Radio 4 news programme, the World at One, has just reported that 'Mountbatten Windsor' is now to be 'Mountbatten-Windsor'. It's had a hyphen added.

I generally have little problem with how the BBC reports, but damn they need to have a look at what they report on.
 
smartcooky said:
People should have been in the dock for the wrongful imprisonment of the Guildford Five.... Were they? Ever?
People should have been in the dock for the wrongful imprisonment of the Birmingham Six.... Were they? Ever?
People should have been in the dock for the wrongful imprisonment of the Maguire Seven.... Were they? Ever?
People should be in the dock for the Post Office scandal.... Will they be? Ever?

There is plenty of evidence to show that the BBC knew what Savile was doing, and missed multiple opportunities to put a stop to it because of a "culture of fear" The same culture that led them to miss Stuart Hall's offending as well.

Here, from the BBC themselves, about 9 years ago, when their reporting was more fair and balanced

www.bbc.com

Savile and Hall: BBC 'missed chances to stop attacks'

The BBC missed opportunities to stop "monstrous" abuse by DJ Jimmy Savile and broadcaster Stuart Hall because of a "culture of fear", an inquiry says.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com


No, that is incorrect. Michael Prescott, the independent advisor, wrote to the BBC Board numerous times to warn them about their bias in transgender issues, and their Gaza reporting, and specifically, about Panorama program. If you believe that Davie (Director General) and Turness (CEO of News) didn't know about it, then I have a bridge to sell you.
Click to expand...
From your reference,
Certain junior and middle-ranking individuals had been aware of Savile's inappropriate sexual conduct, but there was no evidence the BBC as a corporate body had been aware
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
Of course The Fat Orange Turd intended to incite a coup!! Anyone who has a brain between their ears can see and understand that is what he was trying to do. But that does not make what the BBC did acceptable! The BBC claim to set the highest standards of journalism for themselves - fair, balanced, politically and socially unbiased, to be the most respected media platform in the world. But media platforms that like to call themselves fair, balanced and unbiased do NOT do dodgy editing like this. It is the journalistic equivalent of a cop planting evidence to frame a suspect he was 100% sure is guilty.... even if the suspect did actually commit the crime, framing them is wrong, completely wrong.

The end NEVER justifies the means!
Click to expand...
The BBC did not do the editing.

The BBC bought in a program made by an external production company.

They may be criticised for not going through and checking that the quotation was exactly as made, but not for doing the editing.
 
Last edited:
Planigale said:
They may be criticised for not going through and checking that the quotation was exactly as made, but not for doing the editing.
Click to expand...
It appears that the editing, knowing what was known about Trump at the time, was so trustworthy that it didn't occur to anyone that it was actually an edit.
 
Gulliver Foyle said:
Wasn't Maggie the Milk Thief one of Saville's biggest fans. He was a staunch right winger for definite.

PS is this whole latest furore over a report where segments of TACOs incitement to treason speech were spliced together for brevity's sake and gave an accurate representation of the tenor of said speech? Because that's what it seems to me just catching the edges of it.
Click to expand...
Maggie had him round for Christmas a few times, He campaigned for the Tories.
 
Last edited:
Andy_Ross said:
Maggie had him round for Christmas a few times, He campaigned for the Tories.
Click to expand...

He definitely supported the Tories, and was close to Thatcher (and the then Prince Charles as I'm sure his brother has frequently mentioned!) but did he actually campaign for them? I've seen several pictures, but they're fakes where the Tory logo has be put over other symbols and slogans on T-Shirts and the side of a van/minibus.
 
smartcooky said:
Of course The Fat Orange Turd intended to incite a coup!! Anyone who has a brain between their ears can see and understand that is what he was trying to do. But that does not make what the BBC did acceptable! The BBC claim to set the highest standards of journalism for themselves - fair, balanced, politically and socially unbiased, to be the most respected media platform in the world. But media platforms that like to call themselves fair, balanced and unbiased do NOT do dodgy editing like this. It is the journalistic equivalent of a cop planting evidence to frame a suspect he was 100% sure is guilty.... even if the suspect did actually commit the crime, framing them is wrong, completely wrong.

The end NEVER justifies the means!
Click to expand...
What utterly hypocritical tosh!

You support Donald Trump suing the BBC because of your belief that they have let their standards slip, and yet you don’t believe there are any real grounds for saying they defamed him at all. You don’t seem to care that it should be none of the US president’s business how the BBC is funded or that it should not be the place of the US president to tell people in Britain where they get their news from or the obviously outrageous assault on the free press by the president where he gets to sue any and every media station he dislikes on spurious grounds (such as the claimed “election interference” by CBS over the Kamala Harris interview).

And your laundry list of whining about making the baby Netanyahu cry is just an extremely obvious tipping of your hand that it is you who thinks the ends justify the means. You want to see the BBC abolished because it is insufficiently obsequious to right-wing narratives and you will allow any means necessary to get there.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
You're getting carried away. No, it isn't.

They didn't attribute anything to Trump he didn't actually say in that speech. They juxtaposed two parts which made his incitement sound much more blatant than it was.

If I say Trump told them we were going to go to the Capitol and in the same speech he said we were going to fight like hell against fraudulent elections, that is me making his incitement sound more blatant than he made it, and yet I do not consider I am "planting evidence".
Do you?
Click to expand...
That is you reporting what you heard - you are in fact making that argument, but that is not the same as taking video or audio using a person's actual words, spoken almost an hour apart, and concatenating them together in a way that purports them to have made it as a single statement. That is using using fraudulent means to make a person look (more) guilty. Anyone who can't see that is being blinded by their political bias.

If Fox News or GB News did that to someone like Obama or Starmer, lefties would lose their friggin' minds over it. In fact Fox did exactly that with a number of leading Dem figures including Biden where they deliberately edited speeches to make Biden look confused and mentally fragile, and when they were caught doing it, Democrat brains exploded all over the US.

We have come to expect that sort of fraudulent editing from Fox news... we do not expect it from the BBC!!
 
Last edited:
Andy_Ross said:
Surprised at the number of people calling for the abolition of the BBC who have Hitchhikers, Doctor Who, Alan Partridge, Red Dwarf, Python, Del Boy, Blackadder and other similar avatars
Click to expand...
Strawman - no-one is calling for the abolition of the BBC. What they are asking for is that BBC NEWS be held accountable for their politically biased reporting.
 
Planigale said:
The BBC did not do the editing.

The BBC bought in a program made by an external production company.
Click to expand...
....and they were REPEATEDLY WARNED about it, but did nothing.
If you are warned, and take no action, you are deemed to be just as much at fault.

Planigale said:
They may be criticised for not going through and checking that the quotation was exactly as made, but not for doing the editing.
Click to expand...
Indeed, and...

- it has cost two executives their jobs
- BBC chair Samir Shah has apoligized for the edit (you don't apologize for things you didn't do)
 
sphenisc said:
The BBC Radio 4 news programme, the World at One, has just reported that 'Mountbatten Windsor' is now to be 'Mountbatten-Windsor'. It's had a hyphen added.

I generally have little problem with how the BBC reports, but damn they need to have a look at what they report on.
Click to expand...
Fake news! Everyone knows the family name is Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg!
 
smartcooky said:
Strawman - no-one is calling for the abolition of the BBC. What they are asking for is that BBC NEWS be held accountable for their politically biased reporting.
Click to expand...
Yes they are calling for its abolition, Reform policy is to defund and break it up, Tory MPs want it closed down as does every patriotic gammon on social media.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom