RandyWanger
Je suis rôti de boeuf
Big Black Cock?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] The BBC - (Rant about Impartiality)
- Thread starter bWize
- Start date
Big Black Cock?
nwgull
Well-known member
Got a link to the Jo Swinson Husband thing? Surely the pro-Brexit media such as the Mail or Express would’ve reported it.
nwgull
Well-known member
I’ve looked this up myself now and can see why the thing about Jo Swinson’s Husband hasn’t been reported anywhere. It’s because he hasn’t received £4m from the EU. He works for a non-profit company that accepts funding from a number of governments (including the U.K.) and large institutions, one of which is the EU who donated £3.5M over the last year and I expect that they’ll continue to receive EU donations post Brexit seeing as they’re based in Germany.
The reason that neither the BBC or any other media outlets have decided to report this is because it’s perfectly legit and not newsworthy. The fact that you’ve painted this as of greater significance than Boris’s alleged sexual assault is laughable.
Last edited:
I wasn't allowed to comment on a story on the Women's World Cup. It said I was 'too old'! I am not making that up.
blue-shifted
Banned
Yup. Giraffe mate, take this this as a bit of a learn that you could do with getting your news from some more independent and editorially mature outlets
Mellor 3 Ward 4
Well-known member
You honestly expect the Brussels Broadcasting Corporation to report on that....?
McTavish
Well-known member
- Nov 5, 2014
- 1,587
No, because as pointed out already, it isn't true.
McTavish
Well-known member
- Nov 5, 2014
- 1,587
You may not be making it up but you are certainly mistaken. It would have said that the story is too old, not you...
nwgull
Well-known member
Jo Swinson’s husband works for an international non-profit organisation that aims to combat corruption - SCANDAL!!!!!
blue-shifted
Banned
But you probably are
I am most definitely not! It said 'Sorry, it looks like you're too old to comment on this story.'
EDIT: And I've just found another one! (On Diana-Asher Smith, very current.) It says : 'Sorry, it looks like you’re not the right age to use this.' Ok, I got the text wrong (or it has changed), but the end result is the same - age discrimination!
Last edited:
schmunk
Why oh why oh why?
Aha - I've worked it out. The story will have been on the CBBC website; comments are only allowed from under-16s...
Ah, it wasn't CBBC, but it was Newsround. I got there by following a link from my Homepage though - and so I'm still calling it a hate crime!.
schmunk
Why oh why oh why?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround
Newsround is a CBBC programme. Here are their posting rules (and good on them, for keeping a safe-ish place for children to communicate):
https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/44086264
Don't be such a kidultphobic Nazi, It's my right to self-identify as a child if I want to - so ya boo sucks to you, smelly.
But yeah I'll take the point. Although I wish they'd made it clearer as just clicking on a link to the page it doesn't come up and tell you that it's an age-restricted site - which they would do if it were an adult site. And being over 60 I am a bit conscious of age discrimination and being aware that all young people hate me because of Brexit.
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
Just had a look at their on-line comments on Brexit debate,and makes NSC look quite well balanced!
blue-shifted
Banned
For obvious and sensible reasons.
blue-shifted
Banned
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
The BBC are not impartial at all.
Sometimes I think Laura Kuenssberg just makes shit up and hides behind the term "unnamed sources".
I'm pretty sure a lot of journos these days abuse the privalige of unnamed sources to cover for inserting their own opinions, or at best, they get a politically "kindered spirit" to say something which they both know will never be scrutinized or subject to verification, in a kind of wink and nod exercise.
I'm sure it's been going on a while, but I think it's gone to pretty ridiculous levels in recent years.
I think they may end up putting the (actually pretty important) right of journalists to use unnamed sources, and certainly the credibility they have with the public, at risk by abusing the privalige the way they do these days.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,876
That sounds like a conspiracy theory, it's really just the way Politician's operate when there isn't a shared vision and party discipline. They "brief".
At the moment the Cabinet is as leaky as a sieve because behind the facade of unity it's all very fragile. They don't trust Boris and Boris doesn't trust them, politically they are misfits.
The "price of Brexit" to the rest of the Cabinet is to allow Boris to make billions of promises to the country and gain the attention and popularity he desperately needs.
He's also keeping cabinet out of all the important Brexit decision making and they hear about them just a few hours before the press.
Raab and Truss are smiling through gritted teeth.