Shows how untrustworthy the BBC are

[Odds]

The Ugly American will find he hasn't a leg to stand on in court. The world can see how big a bully Corporate America really is.

Foreigners’ favorability ratings of the US plummeted in a Pew poll, and 51% of Europeans see Trump as an enemy of Europe, according to a Le Grand Continent/Cluster 17 survey. In a diplomatic loss to the US, Vietnam is embracing Russia as a partner because its leaders are so upset with Trump’s tariffs and other policies. For similar reasons, India is rushing to improve ties with China.

 

[Murdochcat]

The Ugly American will find he hasn't a leg to stand on in court. The world can see how big a bully Corporate America really is.

Foreigners’ favorability ratings of the US plummeted in a Pew poll, and 51% of Europeans see Trump as an enemy of Europe, according to a Le Grand Continent/Cluster 17 survey. In a diplomatic loss to the US, Vietnam is embracing Russia as a partner because its leaders are so upset with Trump’s tariffs and other policies. For similar reasons, India is rushing to improve ties with China.

Ugly American or NOT the BBC has been caught misrepresenting the truth.

That’s the issue, and what else have they been misleading us on?

 

[diy_fun_uk]

Although this goes beyond the Trump edit, I wonder how those involved in facilitating that edit are feeling after all this fallout. i.e. the person who first suggested it and whoever was responsible for okaying it.

 

[Lower]

which is the most important, the edit or the insurrection?

For the purposes of this conversation, the edit.

Whether trump is right or wrong in what he did is irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. If he genuinely encouraged dissent in his speech, the BBC would have had no need to edit together separate sections and make it appear as original footage.

The crux of it for me is that the BBC is put on a pedestal as an unbiased news source. I, for one, have had the feeling for quite some time that the 'unbiased' BBC has a left wing agenda and this internal memo demonstrates it to be correct. If not left wing, there is certainly an agenda to some of the reporting that is not neutral, as its supposed to be.

What's even more telling, is that the people that have fallen on the swords don't accept there is anything wrong with the BBC other than occasional 'mistakes'.

 

[Odds]

Ugly American or NOT the BBC has been caught misrepresenting the truth.

That’s the issue, and what else have they been misleading us on?

In what way is using Trump's own words 'misrepresenting the truth'?

 

[Odds]

sticking with the snake theme though.

Wozz it sssssumthinng i sssssaid?

 

[motorbiking]

Ugly American or NOT the BBC has been caught misrepresenting the truth.

That’s the issue, and what else have they been misleading us on?

 

[Odds]

On the Today programme, Christopher Ruddy, CEO of Newsmax, a rightwing news organisation in the US, and someone who has been a friend of Donald Trump for years, was interviewed about Trump’s threat to sue the BBC. Here are the main points he made.

• Ruddy said that, if the BBC were to fight the case in the Florida courts, they would probably win. He explained:
  The fact is, I’m from the state of Florida. I’m very familiar with the Florida libel laws.
  I have no doubt the BBC misrepresented what the president said. And that’s pretty clear. I think everybody agrees, otherwise you wouldn’t have had those resignations.
  I’m also very assured that if the BBC took the case to court, they would prevail. They would prevail because the state of Florida has pretty strong libel laws that defend media companies and free speech.

 

[blup]

Wasn't just one typo, was it.
The BBC has been getting away with this sort of behaviour for decades.
The Panorama programme in particular should been scrapped years ago.
After John Sweeney got the boot for his attempted hatchet job on Tel Aviv Tommy Robinson, I thought they would have learned something.
I'm no fan of Robinson but fair play to him, he knew Sweeney was trying to set him up and in the end it was Sweeney who was set up by Robinson.

That is the nature of journalism, political power without accountability, why aren't we seeing more prosecutions for phone hacking? There seems to be something in the reports imo that this was a coup and an inside job.

 

[Koolpc]

Hundreds arrested in High Street crime crackdown

The illicit tobacco seized accounts for more than £3.5m worth of duty evaded, the NCA estimates.

www.bbc.co.uk

This one bit of news is 100% true!!!

Every town is affected by these immigrant/illegal immigrant gangs/people...

Where i live, the town has rows of mini markets, vape shops, barbers...and then loads of car washes strewn around the city.

Even a woke lefty could see whats going on...

 

[blup]

Nonsense absolute nonsense to suit yer narrative as per usual

Why have they resigned than

Mind you are you not one of the people who edits others quotes to suit yer narrative ?

Yes exactly

You run with the fox and hunt with the hounds

( hypocrite)

They have resigned because they were set up and were fed up. As for editing, there's selective editing and there's selective editing. Are you suggesting that everything should be quoted verbatim every time. Do you quote for your customers by listing every single process you went through verbally?

 

[Notch7]

I, for one, have had the feeling for quite some time that the 'unbiased' BBC has a left wing agenda

you read the Telegraph and support the Tory party

it is your bias that forms your opinion, its not based on fact

maybe you might like to consider

1) Tim Davie was a Tory plant put there by Boris Johnson -they also stuffed the board with Tories where they could
2) Laura Kuenssberg is well know to give soft ball questions to Tories -esp people like Johnson
3) Farage has been on QT 32 times
4) they have guests from places like Institute of Economic Affairs - a libertarian lobby group (they influenced Liz Truss trickle down budget)
5) they give way too much air time to Farage and his clan of grifters

but apparently they are "left wing" D'oh!

For the purposes of this conversation, the edit.

If he genuinely encouraged dissent in his speech, the BBC would have had no need to edit together separate sections and make it appear as original footage

ah yes a strawman argument thats been spread around right wing media in last few days

Trump did indeed encourage dissent in his speech, he mentioned "fight" or "fighting" no less than 20 times

he used endless and repeated inflammatory rhetoric
he repeatedly stated that the election had been stolen

What's even more telling, is that the people that have fallen on the swords don't accept there is anything wrong with the BBC other than occasional 'mistakes'.

again another strawman

you are implying they are denying reality, you want to claim the BBC is institutionally left wing biased -but thats your bias, its not evidence

The crux of it for me is that the BBC is put on a pedestal and an unbiased news source.

so you are taking the example of Panorama, a current affairs' programme and claiming that means the whole of the BBC output is biased


the problem is that no matter what media outlet produces, the listeners will see bias based on their own bias

the BBC is as good as any media outlet in terms of delivering accurate news

 

[motorbiking]

It’s funny to see so many on here still in denial

 

[motorbiking]

On the Today programme, Christopher Ruddy, CEO of Newsmax, a rightwing news organisation in the US, and someone who has been a friend of Donald Trump for years, was interviewed about Trump’s threat to sue the BBC. Here are the main points he made.

• Ruddy said that, if the BBC were to fight the case in the Florida courts, they would probably win. He explained:
  The fact is, I’m from the state of Florida. I’m very familiar with the Florida libel laws.
  I have no doubt the BBC misrepresented what the president said. And that’s pretty clear. I think everybody agrees, otherwise you wouldn’t have had those resignations.
  I’m also very assured that if the BBC took the case to court, they would prevail. They would prevail because the state of Florida has pretty strong libel laws that defend media companies and free speech.

It’s not about freedom of speech.

 

[noseall]

On this forum if you quote and edit a post you get banned from the thread

Not true.
If you substantially alter a post, then yes. The mods have already explained.