b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 2684426 (Thread)

# 'cept
it wasn't lying to promote a political viewpoint. it was an overexcited journalist extrapolating a bit much from what a source told him. as it turns out, he was substantially corect and the claim he was exposing as bollocks was bollocks - it was only his attempt to string campbell out to dry with it that was the problem

[edit] that was of course intended as a reply to indole ring
(I helped save b3ta! atomboy, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:24, archived)
# We shall see that quoted in the S*n then...
'the claim was bollocks'
:)
(I helped save b3ta! Samsonite, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:26, archived)
# my previous comment
was lifted directly from the hutton inquiry website*




*less than 100% FACT
(I helped save b3ta! atomboy, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:36, archived)
# I think it was lying.
The BBC has a very definite political agenda, and the story fit into that. It has become intoxicated by its own power. Most B3tans have similar views, so it's not all that apparent.

It's not the place of the BBC to promote political viewpoints, as I have seen it do on many occasions. It should be reporting the facts, and it has failed to do that.

The whole organisation needs a cultural change. Maybe this event will start that - but I don't think the BBC is capable of reforming itself. That pressure has to come from the outside.
(Indole Ring, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:36, archived)
# i disagree entirely
the bbc does not have anything like a single political viewpoint, let alone allowing it to skew the bias of their reports.
every serious political party attacks the bbc as being biased against them, which is indicative of being spiky and investigative, but ultimately unbiased.

i listen to radio4 almost non-stop, and i can definitely say that they made every effort to be fair to the govt over the iraq war, it's just that the case for war was so flimsy and so obviously a tissue of lies, half-truths and exaggerations, that no responsible journalist could do anything but expose them.
frankly anything short of a 10-minute john humphreys monolgue ranting against government sending young men overseas to die and to kill thousands of Iraqis in order to prop-up a man who wasn't elected and is the most discredited US president since Nixon would be fair and balanced.
(I helped save b3ta! atomboy, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:46, archived)
# Well
said.
(I helped save b3ta! MissPrism, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:50, archived)
# thank you
(I helped save b3ta! atomboy, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:56, archived)
# clapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclapclap
well sayed, sir!
(I helped save b3ta! Manic can teach you the secret of fire, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:52, archived)
# Does it occur to you
that listening to the BBC almost non-stop may result in some bias to your own viewpoint?
(Indole Ring, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:56, archived)
# !
Now IreallyloveWogan you're IreallyloveWogan just IreallyloveWogan reaching.
(I helped save b3ta! Manic can teach you the secret of fire, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:58, archived)
# admittedly
saying almost non-stop was something of an exaggeration, however I do use a number of different news sources, but for english language news, radio 4 is the very best there is.
your point is a fair one, but it's a cause and effect difference here - i mostly listen to it 'cos it's the best, i don't think it's the best 'cos i listen to it all the time, if you see what i mean
(I helped save b3ta! atomboy, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:58, archived)
# Nevertheless
people's opinions are influenced by their information sources. Of course, I'm no exception.
(Indole Ring, Wed 28 Jan 2004, 16:00, archived)
# Well said
for that, you deserve a whole packet of biscuits - or half a cake
(The Scone from U.N.C.L.E., Wed 28 Jan 2004, 15:57, archived)