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

Joker62

ADC
Book Reviewer

ExREME.TECH

War Hero
1. No, whether someone is a 'victim' should be ascertained before broadcast. Let me put that another way: if someone is professing to be a victim then their (alleged) persecutor should be provided with an equal, unbiased, right of reply.

What we're seeing the BBC do too often is present a narrative rather than an opportunity to debate an unfairness and so reach some form of remediation/conclusion.

Too often, victim status is asserted on behalf of the victim in order to reinforce a narrative. In fact, one could reasonably at the moment, I think, go as far as to assert that the BBC is seeking out 'victims' who suit its narratives. The fair responses which should be allowed are either simply not invited/aired, or those who attempt to respond are shouted down or vilified.

To refer to one of my recent posts, that's why I've lost trust.

2. Racism is not a meaningless word. Yes, it's about hatred and bias but it has as its base ethnicity so it's a specific form of hatred/bias.

However, it is well on its way back to becoming a meaningless word because of the way it is used in the MSM, which includes the BBC. I thought we'd got past the meaningless/perverted use of the word when Labour got itself unelected but what we're seeing at the moment is an attempt to reassert 'racism' as a useful catch-all term with which to stifle debate.

My black lady friend has moved out of the South London echo chamber into the (relatively) leafy suburbs and has brought with her her constantly reasserted assertions. She's now having to learn a) that not nearly everyone in the suburbs is a white racist b) that 'white privilege' is a catch-all and therefore derogatory term which some people quite rightly are offended by and c) that some of those 'privileged' white people haven't had it as easy as her, and that to assert white privilege to such people is going to provoke a reaction.

The problem is that if you're steeped (or have been) in PC-speak, generalisations flow only one way. So-called 'white fragility' is just another construct designed to deflect from what is actually righteous indignation over being pigeon-holed.

The conversation ended with her in tears and asking me if I thought she was intelligent. My response was that my opinion doesn't, or shouldn't matter to her. My sole right, or role, is to judge her as a person and how she behaves towards me and others - and her ambition, in fact both of our ambitions, should be to see people as people and not use skin colour as the first and overriding criterion.
And then she stabbed me uour Honour
 

ExREME.TECH

War Hero
1. No, whether someone is a 'victim' should be ascertained before broadcast. Let me put that another way: if someone is professing to be a victim then their (alleged) persecutor should be provided with an equal, unbiased, right of reply.

What we're seeing the BBC do too often is present a narrative rather than an opportunity to debate an unfairness and so reach some form of remediation/conclusion.

Too often, victim status is asserted on behalf of the victim in order to reinforce a narrative. In fact, one could reasonably at the moment, I think, go as far as to assert that the BBC is seeking out 'victims' who suit its narratives. The fair responses which should be allowed are either simply not invited/aired, or those who attempt to respond are shouted down or vilified.

To refer to one of my recent posts, that's why I've lost trust.

2. Racism is not a meaningless word. Yes, it's about hatred and bias but it has as its base ethnicity so it's a specific form of hatred/bias.

However, it is well on its way back to becoming a meaningless word because of the way it is used in the MSM, which includes the BBC. I thought we'd got past the meaningless/perverted use of the word when Labour got itself unelected but what we're seeing at the moment is an attempt to reassert 'racism' as a useful catch-all term with which to stifle debate.

My black lady friend has moved out of the South London echo chamber into the (relatively) leafy suburbs and has brought with her her constantly reasserted assertions. She's now having to learn a) that not nearly everyone in the suburbs is a white racist b) that 'white privilege' is a catch-all and therefore derogatory term which some people quite rightly are offended by and c) that some of those 'privileged' white people haven't had it as easy as her, and that to assert white privilege to such people is going to provoke a reaction.

The problem is that if you're steeped (or have been) in PC-speak, generalisations flow only one way. So-called 'white fragility' is just another construct designed to deflect from what is actually righteous indignation over being pigeon-holed.

The conversation ended with her in tears and asking me if I thought she was intelligent. My response was that my opinion doesn't, or shouldn't matter to her. My sole right, or role, is to judge her as a person and how she behaves towards me and others - and her ambition, in fact both of our ambitions, should be to see people as people and not use skin colour as the first and overriding criterion.

And then she stabbed me your Honour
Sorry
 

Grownup_Rafbrat

LE
Book Reviewer
In the name of arse, why?!

I hadn't seen that. FFS.
So he's celebrating immigration? Could he do some Romans, preferably their army, the Syrian soldiers stationed at Vindolanda? Or some Hugunots making lace? Or some Jews sewing clothes - highly appropriate in the East End? Or some Normans, Danes....
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
So he's celebrating immigration? Could he do some Romans, preferably their army, the Syrian soldiers stationed at Vindolanda? Or some Hugunots making lace? Or some Jews sewing clothes - highly appropriate in the East End? Or some Normans, Danes....
Or some Poles, or some Bulgarians, or some Serbs, or...
 
TRY READING THESE Hacked Documents: Soros Funded Black Lives Matter
AND THIS
AND THIS
Follow the money back to its sources and you find most of the anarchist movements, seemingly, are funded by very rich people.... Its a case in history, that the wealthy have funded eugenicists back in the early 20th century and without funding, or a state backer, its nigh on impossible to overthrow a nation as revolution costs a lot of money.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Front page news right now. Note the wording. Not just straight reporting but a deconstruction.

Valid, perhaps, but it's a shame that the same forensic approach isn't applied to some favourite organisations of our impartial national broadcaster.

 
So he's celebrating immigration? Could he do some Romans, preferably their army, the Syrian soldiers stationed at Vindolanda? Or some Hugunots making lace? Or some Jews sewing clothes - highly appropriate in the East End? Or some Normans, Danes....
Or even the most significant immigrant group to these isles Angles and Saxons.
 
Front page news right now. Note the wording. Not just straight reporting but a deconstruction.

Valid, perhaps, but it's a shame that the same forensic approach isn't applied to some favourite organisations of our impartial national broadcaster.

I thought the same about the article, you beat me to it!
 

wheel

LE
I, with others, very peacefully protected my local war memorial a couple of weeks ago because there was a BLM protest 100 metres away, the Cenotaph had been vandalised by them a few days before and the local paper predicted the memorial was a target.

The price of this is that my 19 year old daughter has now disowned me, and what was already a very fragile relationship, thanks to her mother filling her head with lies, now appears to be irrevocably damaged.

I hope BLM burn in the fires of hell.
I am sure that she will mature and mellow with age. We were all teenagers once upon a time ans knew better than anyone else.
 

wheel

LE
The outgoing bloke, Tony Hall, had reached the end of his tenure and they decided to recruit from within, albeit from BBC studios, one of the business arms of the BBC. This group made £243million for the BBC last year.

One of Tim Davies' tasks will be to shave £175 million off the budget for the whole of the BBC. Maybe he'll sack a few managers and look at the talent's salaries.
Lets hope that he puts new talent in front of diversity targets. Lets be honest most of the BBC presenters salaries are way above their talent.
 
Monuments are so last week, the BBC are coming after the Countryside chaps get out the side locks. Unbelievable, am I allowed to say I feel threatened in Brixton or Leicester am I bollox.
The BBC programme aired an episode last night in which Dwayne Fields, above, investigated a DEFRA report saying some ethnic groups felt the UK's national parks are a 'white environment'
BBC: "The trees & virus are racist man, they are saying black lives don't matter" - Oh the horror

Is the countryside racist? BBC sparks race row after claiming BAME community feel unwelcome
Phone in Simon was good too

Charity boss Nick Buckley MBE has stood by his comments criticising the Black Lives Matter organisation after his views cost him his job

White man loses his job because he made a justified comment about the BLM. Yet black Cambridge Gopal tweets a comment “white lives don’t matter” and not only does she keep her job, she gets a promotion

It's whites not non-whites who face discrimination

Nigel nails it
Boris Johnson needs to get out of this woke PC agenda
 
Sticks and stones, child, sticks and stones.

I do indeed use my measly pension to ignore companies I dislike, for various reasons. I also think your mummy and daddy must be very proud that when you're losing a debate you insult the speaker rather than accept they may have a point.

Now, off you go, it's playtime and grownups are discussing the dreadful decline of a taxpayer funded national institution.
You had a point? Seemed more like a rant against Murdoch. Which other brands do you boycott? Was your pension holding shares in any of them?

Ahem, you posted "I won't watch Sky News UK because Murdoch" despite Murdoch's company not owning it

Being factually wrong is not 'winning debate'

Playtime? If only. My father died aged 49 when I was 19; I went part-time at Uni to work and support family

imo BBC, C4, C5, ITN/ITV and Sky UK news are biased Left wing PC SJW & mostly opinion broadcasts not news

What little news there is cannot be trusted due to the constant bias by omission

BBC & C4 are worst as we're compelled to pay for them
 

Grownup_Rafbrat

LE
Book Reviewer
You had a point? Seemed more like a rant against Murdoch. Which other brands do you boycott? Was your pension holding shares in any of them?

Ahem, you posted "I won't watch Sky News UK because Murdoch" despite Murdoch's company not owning it

Being factually wrong is not 'winning debate'

Playtime? If only. My father died aged 49 when I was 19; I went part-time at Uni to work and support family

imo BBC, C4, C5, ITN/ITV and Sky UK news are biased Left wing PC SJW & mostly opinion broadcasts not news

What little news there is cannot be trusted due to the constant bias by omission

BBC & C4 are worst as we're compelled to pay for them
Child, the definition of rant does not include mildly observing that one will not give him money.

Go and learn how to converse, debate and discuss without leaping to incorrect conclusions, insulting people who have a different opinion, and generally behaving childishly. In the meantime you're off to ignore.
Be happy that of the broad and multi-faceted membership of 30,000 arrsers you are in an elite group numbering fewer than ten.
 
My OH is wondering where her TV licence fee is going, she's a bit of a soap fan, Emmerdallas, Corry Strasse and Deadenders. Now, during lockdown, Emmer and Corry have managed to keep a couple of episodes a week going, Stenders seems to have run out and it'll be ages before they manage to catch up. Could you pass that onto the relevant people, just so I have a peaceful life once more, thanks!
Soaps highlight why BBC needs to be broken-up and sold

Commercial channels recognise they need to keep viewers watching

BBC doesn't care about viewers as income guaranteed
 
Being factually wrong is not 'winning debate'

BBC & C4 are worst as we're compelled to pay for them
...ahem

Unlike the BBC, Channel 4 receives no public funding. It is funded entirely by its own commercial activities.
Most of our income comes from advertising revenue. You can find out more about advertising sales on Channel 4's dedicated advertising sales website.
Channel 4's financial statements are set out in our Annual Report, which is available online.
Channel 4 Corporation (C4C) is a publicly owned but commercially funded public service broadcaster with a distinctive role in British broadcasting.​
Its primary source of income is advertising and any surpluses either go back into paying for content or to maintain a cash reserve against any future shortfall in revenue.​
 

Latest Threads

Top