BBC bias in question (which way do they lean?)

The bomb thing was a careless reporter, from memory, not a deliberate thing. In the same way that the Paras coming off-axis and advancing on Goose Green caused Col Jones to threaten to sue when he made it back to the UK - because it endangered lives.

Careless, not deliberate. The BBC was a lot more on-side back then (in fact, sitting thinking about it, a comparison in my mind of then and now shows just how far it's drifted).

The general acceptance among the Argentinian military, from what I've read, is that the Belgrano was a legitimate act.
My recollection is that the BBC said it used material given out at an MOD briefing in London rather than being reported from the Falklands.

Re the Belgrano; I don't remember whether it was generally accepted at the time as a legitimate target by the Argentine military. However, the CO of Belgrano, the late Captain Hector Bonzo, certainly did think so.

 
Packham was on Beeb 2 earlier in the week banging on about overpopulation but I noticed that he did not volunteer to do anything about it............personally
As he likes men, he should do the decent thing and not get a surrogate
 
I thought he carried a straight bat?
I have no idea but I just hoped I was right. The few seconds I see him, before turning over, he looks happy
 
Well according to google he does.
I had to google as I had never heard of him.
I had, but I didn't bother to Google.. Nice Daily Mail rumour?
 
Last edited:

skeetstar

Old-Salt
The bomb thing was a careless reporter, from memory, not a deliberate thing. In the same way that the Paras coming off-axis and advancing on Goose Green caused Col Jones to threaten to sue when he made it back to the UK - because it endangered lives.

Careless, not deliberate. The BBC was a lot more on-side back then (in fact, sitting thinking about it, a comparison in my mind of then and now shows just how far it's drifted).

The general acceptance among the Argentinian military, from what I've read, is that the Belgrano was a legitimate act.
Yet that clown who did the daily bulletins, referred to uk forces as 'the British'' as in, ' today, the british advanced on Port Stanley'. That was a firm decision to distance itself from the military forces of the nation that financed the bbc . Unforgivable in my view.
 
Yet that clown who did the daily bulletins, referred to uk forces as 'the British'' as in, ' today, the british advanced on Port Stanley'. That was a firm decision to distance itself from the military forces of the nation that financed the bbc . Unforgivable in my view.
Sorry, I don't follow your argument. (And I haven't even had a drink yet.....)
 

skeetstar

Old-Salt
Watching the bulletins at the time, it seemed to me that the BBC made a conscious effort to be completely non partisan when reporting. They could not bring themselves to say that 'the navy did this' or 'our soldiers have achieved such and such'. Why? Couldn't they accept that they are the national broadcaster of a nation at war, and celebrate our victories, and mourn our defeats along with the rest of the nation?
 
Yet that clown who did the daily bulletins, referred to uk forces as 'the British'' as in, ' today, the british advanced on Port Stanley'. That was a firm decision to distance itself from the military forces of the nation that financed the bbc . Unforgivable in my view.
Ian McDonald.

 
Yet that clown who did the daily bulletins, referred to uk forces as 'the British'' as in, ' today, the british advanced on Port Stanley'. That was a firm decision to distance itself from the military forces of the nation that financed the bbc . Unforgivable in my view.
What did you expect? references to "Our Boys" or "3 Para gave Johnny foreigner a good kicking this afternoon"
If those reports were being syndicated to other international news outlets a non specific noun would be more appropriate.
 
Watching the bulletins at the time, it seemed to me that the BBC made a conscious effort to be completely non partisan when reporting. They could not bring themselves to say that 'the navy did this' or 'our soldiers have achieved such and such'. Why? Couldn't they accept that they are the national broadcaster of a nation at war, and celebrate our victories, and mourn our defeats along with the rest of the nation?
I understand your point now. But to be fair to the BBC, as mentioned by @vvaannmmaann , this would not have been treated as objective reporting by other international news outlets.

Ian McDonald, though. His slow, paced delivery was not to the taste of many listeners. The late, great writer Keith Waterhouse had two comments on him:

"The warm-up man to the Lutine Bell", and "The only man who I have ever heard to speak in Braille."
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
I understand your point now. But to be fair to the BBC, as mentioned by @vvaannmmaann , this would not have been treated as objective reporting by other international news outlets.

Ian McDonald, though. His slow, paced delivery was not to the taste of many listeners. The late, great writer Keith Waterhouse had two comments on him:

"The warm-up man to the Lutine Bell", and "The only man who I have ever heard to speak in Braille."
I think Robert Peston is trying to copy him!
 

TamH70

MIA
I think Robert Peston is trying to copy him!
What's the difference between Robert Peston and God?

God doesn't think he's Robert Peston.
 

Latest Threads

Top