BBC Bias - Part 2

In-depth debate on all topical issues
Post Reply
User avatar
Darkyboy
Registered user
Posts: 2754
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:22 pm
Location: Great Britain not Rubbish Britain

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Darkyboy »

File under so ridiculous it's laughable. Lord Adonis (about as inappropriate a name as there ever was) has sent the BBC 72 tweets in 7 days attacking them - apparently they are displaying a pro-Brexit bias. He's another political failure who craves attention and cannot accept anonymity.
Free at last, free at last, thank God almighty, we are free at last.

User avatar
Robert Heenan
Winner - TOTY 2011!!!!
Posts: 2616
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:15 pm
Location: Wilmslow,Cheshire

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Robert Heenan »

From Thursday March 15 2018

Dimbleby making out the Russians were catogorically responsible for alleged Salisbury poisoning. Notice there's only one panellist going against the "definately Russians did it" rest of the panel. its like they are



Funny most the audience seems to be supportive of the BBC propaganda.

Now almost a month later - it seems the whole narrative has totally fallen apart.

BBC loses alot more trust and faith in it ...thats if there's many that have any faith in that bullshitting propaganda outfit

User avatar
Robert Heenan
Winner - TOTY 2011!!!!
Posts: 2616
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:15 pm
Location: Wilmslow,Cheshire

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Robert Heenan »

Correction above: Brian Cox actor was kinda neutral

User avatar
Darkyboy
Registered user
Posts: 2754
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:22 pm
Location: Great Britain not Rubbish Britain

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Darkyboy »

Not that the BBC has an agenda, but how many times does New Zealand feature in the news? Only when there is a hurricane or some such normally. But today, it is on the front page of their website. Apparently, a film director thinks it is a racist country, so of course, that makes headline news for the BBC. They really are determined, to make everyone who happens to be white feel guilty.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-43698313

Note the headline by the way:

"Thor director Taika Waititi says New Zealand is racist"

So, not some New Zealanders, or some parts of New Zealand, but New Zealand. Pathetic reporting, paid for (and not by choice) by the public.
Free at last, free at last, thank God almighty, we are free at last.

User avatar
Hillman avenger
Registered user
Posts: 13963
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:50 pm
Location: north and south

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Hillman avenger »

I love the way the BBC is pilloried for what the news is.
Hilarious.
Olympic levels of missing the point.
Oh and nowhere near the lead story on the website, but simply in a section which picks up what appears in blogs.
Listen to Talksport and let it be a lesson to you

User avatar
Robert Heenan
Winner - TOTY 2011!!!!
Posts: 2616
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:15 pm
Location: Wilmslow,Cheshire

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Robert Heenan »

Hillman avenger wrote:I love the way the BBC is pilloried for what the news is.
Hilarious.
Olympic levels of missing the point.
Oh and nowhere near the lead story on the website, but simply in a section which picks up what appears in blogs.


The BBC is pilloried and rightly so for the propaganda and lies it peddles.

The masses are waking up. Read the comments section of the The Guardian and Telegraph. Listen to Galloway on talk radio on Friday night. Even on Digital Spy forum there are plenty that are questioning and at the least bring skeptical of what the BBC and Government peddle.

The BBC has little if any credibility left.

User avatar
Roy Twing
Registered user
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm
Location: 51 23 46 N 0 11 56 W

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Roy Twing »

Hillman avenger wrote:I love the way the BBC is pilloried for what the news is.
Hilarious.
Olympic levels of missing the point.
Oh and nowhere near the lead story on the website, but simply in a section which picks up what appears in blogs.


Type 'new zealand racist' on google and report back as to which media source shows up first on the list. :roll:
Anyone (such as Tick) that uses 'gammon' as a racial pejorative is as much a racist as those who use the word nigger and similar pejoratively.
E & OE

User avatar
Darkyboy
Registered user
Posts: 2754
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:22 pm
Location: Great Britain not Rubbish Britain

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Darkyboy »

Robert Heenan wrote:
Hillman avenger wrote:I love the way the BBC is pilloried for what the news is.
Hilarious.
Olympic levels of missing the point.
Oh and nowhere near the lead story on the website, but simply in a section which picks up what appears in blogs.


The BBC is pilloried and rightly so for the propaganda and lies it peddles.

The masses are waking up. Read the comments section of the The Guardian and Telegraph. Listen to Galloway on talk radio on Friday night. Even on Digital Spy forum there are plenty that are questioning and at the least bring skeptical of what the BBC and Government peddle.

The BBC has little if any credibility left.


Very true Robert. Yet the naive and those burdened with Olympic levels of liberal guilt, lap it up. The BBC (and yes other news outlets) run an interview by a film director, that 99% of people have never heard of - and that is considered news? Industrial scale abuse of girls by a certain section of society isn't racist, but a film director says New Zealand is racist and that is just taken as read.

It's no wonder those who buy into the BBC style bullshit, are so surprised when the majority of people think and vote differently.
Free at last, free at last, thank God almighty, we are free at last.

User avatar
Darkyboy
Registered user
Posts: 2754
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 11:22 pm
Location: Great Britain not Rubbish Britain

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Darkyboy »

Roy Twing wrote:
Hillman avenger wrote:I love the way the BBC is pilloried for what the news is.
Hilarious.
Olympic levels of missing the point.
Oh and nowhere near the lead story on the website, but simply in a section which picks up what appears in blogs.


Type 'new zealand racist' on google and report back as to which media source shows up first on the list. :roll:


Indeed and it appears on the home page of the BBC site, despite what Hillman thinks. In other words, it is there for all to see (and the gullible to lap up) when you reach the BBC site.
Free at last, free at last, thank God almighty, we are free at last.

User avatar
Roy Twing
Registered user
Posts: 5831
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 4:20 pm
Location: 51 23 46 N 0 11 56 W

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Roy Twing »

Robert Heenan wrote:
Hillman avenger wrote:I love the way the BBC is pilloried for what the news is.
Hilarious.
Olympic levels of missing the point.
Oh and nowhere near the lead story on the website, but simply in a section which picks up what appears in blogs.


The BBC is pilloried and rightly so for the propaganda and lies it peddles.

The masses are waking up. Read the comments section of the The Guardian and Telegraph. Listen to Galloway on talk radio on Friday night. Even on Digital Spy forum there are plenty that are questioning and at the least bring skeptical of what the BBC and Government peddle.

The BBC has little if any credibility left.


The BBC is pilloried because of the 'propaganda and lies' it peddles because it is uniquely required by law not to do so.
Anyone (such as Tick) that uses 'gammon' as a racial pejorative is as much a racist as those who use the word nigger and similar pejoratively.
E & OE

User avatar
Holden Mcgroyne
Registered user
Posts: 10237
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2005 2:13 pm

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Holden Mcgroyne »

Looks like we're in for 2 years of Grenfell grief porn on PM.
There's no poem, just prose.

birdie
Registered user
Posts: 12603
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 10:17 am

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by birdie »

Holden Mcgroyne wrote:Looks like we're in for 2 years of Grenfell grief porn on PM.


I saw a few minutes of this this morning and switched off, what is the point of these public displays of grief and 'he was such a marvelous chap' , there was a picture of a plaque in the baby's memory, a picture of his ultrasound scan, a picture of the 'sleeping' baby, another bloke had his statement read by the lawyer representing the Grenfell group, he couldn't read it himself, didn't catch why, either too traumatised or his can't speak English well enough, but they were quite able to go onto the Victoria Derbyshire programme a few days afterwards and demand heads rolling, compensation, houses of their choice in the same borough, and didn't seem traumatised when they were having a mini riot in the council chamber and trying to lynch the council leader.
These personal testimonies are scheduled to take anything up to 3 weeks, but for the life of me I can't work out just what they have to do with the inquiry, isn't it supposed to find out what the cause of the fire was and how it could have been prevented, not, I hazard to suggest, a public display of an ultrasound and a stillborn baby is hardly going to go very far in determining the cause of the fire.
If the London Borough of Barnet isn't in London where is it?

I'll say soccer whenever I want to soccer soccer soccer soccer bloody soccer
Sent from my Advent Monza S200 so bloody old I can't remember when I bought it

birdie
Registered user
Posts: 12603
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 10:17 am

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by birdie »

Holden Mcgroyne wrote:Looks like we're in for 2 years of Grenfell grief porn on PM.


It seems just a tad like voyeurism to me.
If the London Borough of Barnet isn't in London where is it?

I'll say soccer whenever I want to soccer soccer soccer soccer bloody soccer
Sent from my Advent Monza S200 so bloody old I can't remember when I bought it

User avatar
Royal24s
Registered user
Posts: 9081
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 1:42 am

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by Royal24s »

Turned on the tv tonight and the BBC News was on.
Before I could mute it or change channel, I saw that they were Grenfelling it up again. Lead story, mind you, before the various disasters and news events taking place in the world
( many of which ,per usual, didn't even get a mention ).

Now, of course that event was a terrible and serious one, but it's certainly not news at this stage. Yes I know there's some enquiry or another exploring the entrails of the incident , but this would be the case for years to come after any such fatal fire or other disaster .

Like so many other of their " reports" , it seems to somehow imply that I should feel personally guilty for it and generally contrite about the fact that certain groups of people suffer the same difficulties and risks as everyone else.

What tends to go through my mind is whether they're trying to pre empt any potential negative opinion about their favoured groups which might arise from impending verdicts in particular trials, and counter other public concerns about terrorism .
'"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,
That is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know".

User avatar
carcinogen
Registered user
Posts: 13743
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: East Coast

Re: BBC Bias - Part 2

Post by carcinogen »

Royal24s wrote: Grenfelling it up again.


To quote my dear old Mum: "I know it's wrong to say it, but can you imagine how this country would deal with The Blitz if it happened now?". Yes, the Grenfell fire was awful, but for FUCKS SAKE, get things into perspective. Why has this nation seemingly fallen into a wallowing hole of self-pity? Of course, it's driven by the fucking meeja. I feel hopeful that your average Joe just 'gets on with it' ... it's only the few cunts who can't handle the shit life throws their way the BBC focus on and ram their tears down our throats. (Fuck me, I never thought I could get so many mixed-methphors in one paragraph).
“Ordinary men hate solitude. But the Master makes use of it, embracing his aloneness, realizing he is one with the whole universe.” ~ Lao Tzu.

"The world needs bad men. We keep the other bad men from the door". ~ RC, True Detective.

Post Reply