 |
|
lightblue
|
|
L'Boro, UK
Oct 2001
time: 05:33
|
|
Fox = Sky because Murdoch tells them what to say. So if you want to be goosestepping behind some australian billionaire feel free.
The BBC news is a bit dumbed down for me, I personally like Channel 4 here, which is probably significantly more left wing than the BBC but whose standards of reporting are significantly higher.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CerberusIV
|
|
Will the BBC devolve more programming decisions to regional level to keep the Scottish and Welsh MP's and Scottish Parliament/Welsh Assembly happy - possibly.
Will there be an independent regulator separate from the BBC board of governors- very probably. What worries the rest of the UK media is that once there is some sort of independent regulator they will inevitably be subject to similar controls, hence their "support" for the BBC.
Will anything else be changed - very unlikely. Government consultation nowadays almost always proposes more drastic changes than actually happen so that the Government can say they dropped proposals after listening to public views.
You read it here first.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sikander
|
 |
Boulder, Colorado, United Snakes of America
Jan 2000
time: 22:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Big Crunch
I can't stand the BBC, not because of political bias, but because of arrogant up their own arses reporting. |
Yes, for the most part I agree. We started to receive BBC broadcasts on our public television stations a few years ago and I was excited about the prospect. Pretty quickly I realized that their news stories about the U.S. (for which I had a large number of alternative sources for news) were extremely biased. I was also turned off by the style of the BBC reporting which resembled British tabloid reporting, with wild lead ins to the reports (which are like headlines in a newspaper) followed by reportage which usually completely belied the lead in. Also BBC reporters are extremely combative in exactly the same way that Bill O'Reilly is combative, ie they interrupt and don't let the important person with inside information who is a guest on their program say their piece. Apparantly they already know better. There are plenty of venues in American television for the chattering classes to opine away, but I prefer my news shows to simply ask questions and moderate debates rather than take sides in them.
I saw Kathy Kay (Washington bureau chief for the Beeb) explain how she was going to spin the news of a future event (the primaries in Iowa) to the viewers back home. Now that's preperation!
The only thing I like about the BBC is the fact that they actually have a story about Africa from time to time. I have to assume that their bias also permeates this reportage, but as there is no real alternative in the U.S. to the BBC here, something is better than nothing.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lightblue
Fox = Sky because Murdoch tells them what to say. So if you want to be goosestepping behind some australian billionaire feel free.
The BBC news is a bit dumbed down for me, I personally like Channel 4 here, which is probably significantly more left wing than the BBC but whose standards of reporting are significantly higher. |
Mr. Murdoch had to take out American citizenship in order to hold the variety of media outlets that he does in the United States.
The BBC is highly regarded in Third World countries, as being one of the few media networks that actually bothers to broadcast to them and report on events in those countries, and not just when there's a picturesque natural disaster or a bloody interminable civil war. In other countries its seen as the network that will actually report on what their governments are up to- rather than promoting the latest company nepotized and corrupted to the nth degree by the sons, daughters and assorted relatives of the Great Leader, Glorious Conducator or Leaderette for life.
Fez's view of the BBC is his own, and none the less inaccurate for that. Full marks to Fez for keeping us all entertained with the view from the pampas, however dimly perceived.
I'm still male and gay, by the way Fez, and still not interested in you, with or without shirt on.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970
time: 00:33
|
|
I agree with Sikander. A lot of the stuff is presented in a tabloid, breathless manner. But the reporters' biases and opinions also come in more than they should, and it seems like there are few editorial checks, especially on the radio programs. It doesn't surprise me that this is where the BBC got burned.
Quite frequently, I've read a good objective article or listened to a good objective radio piece. It's going fine -- just the facts -- until the last two or three short paragraphs where the reporters feel free to take pot shots at people or causes they don't like or editorialize to their heart's content. That really grates on my nerves, and it makes me wonder whether their reporters don't get a little somethin-somethin on the side for their views.
The strength of the BBC is its breadth of coverage. Personally, I don't find much value to the BBC beyond that. Further, even if I did find value beyond that, I would object to so much of my tax money being spent on it. Why is the BBC being paid to compete against established, respected news source like the FT, for instance?
Lastly, NPR often puts out good work, but it's incredibly left wing for the US. If my tax money were to go for that (I don't think it does, to any substantial degree), I would object. On the other hand, the Newshour with Jim Lehrer on PBS is the least biased news show available. This seems evident, because the show is respected across the political spectrum. I would object to my tax money being spent on this, but not as much as it being spent on NPR. This is so, even though I happily give to WETA, which produces the Newshour.
Last edited by DanS on 16-02-2004 at 07:54
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
15-02-2004 11:59
NPR agrees with you so you see less bias. You're wrong and that's that.
|