BBC

pinarello001 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

Without a publicly... ...the hindmost.

Yeah, you can't beat a State owned media can you? North Koreans swear by theirs.

..and you say i'm a tw@t !?!?! How can you compare the two?

You are a tw@t if you thought I was seriously comparing the two. Tongue was firmly in cheek hence the



I used the Korean example to show that State owned media isn't always what you would want.
Bit of a result though if it rankled.

the playing mantis wrote:

morstar wrote:

Can those stating how biased it is please provide the evidence?
I have many frustrations with the BBC output but these are more problems with media trends rather than the BBC specifically. On the whole, it is still, imho, a great institution and I'd be sorry to lose it.

their own internal investigation said they were.

as i said i still think they do a decent job, but people canot deny they offer a liberal left of centre slant on things, such as their middle east reporting and casting of israel in certain lights and government 'cuts' and the state of the economy.

I don't know where to begin on Israel... so I'm not going there beyond stating that not following the US unquestioning approach is not left wing bias.

As for the government cuts, yes the BBC is oppositional to the government of the day. This works both ways, it's just more difficult to see when you agree with the challenges being made by the media on your behalf. This is getting close to where I see the issue. The medias job is to challenge the government but where I have a problem is when a minister answers a question on a subject and the interviewer tries to be all hard hitting investigative journalist and sensationalise what was a perfectly reasonable repsonse.
I hate it when a politician (of any persuasion) can't answer any question without a paxman-esque grilling trying to create controversy where there isn't any.
Genuinely, this works both ways in my opinion. I absolutely don't believe the bias you portray unless somebody can provide a number of specific examples. Challenging cuts is not bias. Saying labours approach is better is bias.

Labour weren't exactly getting an easy ride from anybody in the latter years of the last administration and throughout the previous Con administration, Labour were treated as a joke (rightfully) for a number of years as were the Conservatives during the Blair years (again rightfully).

Ballysmate wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

Without a publicly... ...the hindmost.

Yeah, you can't beat a State owned media can you? North Koreans swear by theirs.

..and you say i'm a tw@t !?!?! How can you compare the two?

You are a tw@t if you thought I was seriously comparing the two. Tongue was firmly in cheek hence the



I used the Korean example to show that State owned media isn't always what you would want.
Bit of a result though if it rankled.

Not rankles mate - Wrinkles!

I would happily sell my house and all it's contents to pay for the BBC

Yossie wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

pinarello001 wrote:

Without a publicly... ...the hindmost.

Yeah, you can't beat a State owned media can you? North Koreans swear by theirs.

..and you say i'm a tw@t !?!?! How can you compare the two?

You are a tw@t if you thought I was seriously comparing the two. Tongue was firmly in cheek hence the



I used the Korean example to show that State owned media isn't always what you would want.
Bit of a result though if it rankled.

Not rankles mate - Wrinkles!

We get to watch a lot of North Korean stuff - it rocks. best entertainment I've seen for ages. Its all like Thunderbirds meets Days of Our Lives on acid. Well worth an hour or two of beer drinking time.

Sit coms like this?

'Surprise attack' even though its all over tinternet

Bring Back Cleat