 |
|
FrustratedPoet
|
 |
All Glory To The Hypnotoad!
Mar 2002
time: 05:23
|
|
But Buck is right, the BBC is not state-funded. You don't have to pay a penny if you don't own a TV capable of receiving their channels. It's not as if they receive a percentage of the income tax revenue or anything.
Last edited by FrustratedPoet on 18-09-2004 at 19:18
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
 |
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:23
|
|
quote:
Actually it's cause I couldn't think of any other synonym for "true". I've done way too much philosophy at university. |
there there.
I also taken intro to philosophy and such (though in highschool).
I can still talk normally, though.
In any case - your argument is not supported and is unfounded.
quote:
Let me reassure you that we get plenty of coverage of suicide bomb attacks on Israeli civilians on the BBC. No attempt is made to cover that up or make heroes of the bomber. |
Really?
Cause I remember I saw a program a year and a half ago, with Hamas and Fateh bomb-makers and it sure made them look heroic. It was on and on about how tough is their job, and what great evil IDF actions are, when they are simply trying to go on a peaceful daily life of blowing up Israelis.
Azazel saw that one too, I remember we commented about it in a thread.
quote:
Whereas you yourself are possessed with the 100% insight of omnipresence coupled with a natural ability to discern "The Truth!" from your own crusading and unbiased media sources? |
My media sources do much more to present the Palestinian point of view, than the BBC ever did to present the Israeli point of view.
And as of late, I do posses some form of omni-presence 
quote:
I get my news from many sources, and I don't think the BBC is on any sort of anti-Israel crusade. |
While it is usually much more yellow and cheap, Sky news is usually much more fair, and attempts to present all sides, instead of singlehandedly passing judgement on Israeli actions.
quote:
The cultural divide may account for much- in Britain right now the words "Arab militant" or "Arab fanatic" probably arouse far more fear and loathing than "terrorist". |
The use of the word militant is not completely correct, as militants are those who take part in military action. Shooting at soldiers would be "militant". Bombing civilians is "terrorist".
And the fact that the brits are oh-so-clever and cynical to put the word "terrorism" to laughter does not say good things about them.
quote:
Through watching the BBC, I think my nation's public are quite satisfied that among Hamas are wings that make the IRA look like Carmelite nuns. |
Yes.
But through watching the BBC alot of your nation's public find it very easy to identify with Hamas "militants" and legitimize / condone their actions.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
The BBC writes many thousands of articles a year. If someone wants to waste their time and find a small portion of Israel articles that explicitly mention Israel and a small portion of Iraq articles that don't mention Iraq, then they can go ahead and do that, but it doesn't prove more than that they're hacks.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
quote:
It produces the same sort of unwatchable high-brow crap |
Ned, the People's Advocate!
May Lenin Himself aid you in your effort to strike down unwatchable high-brow crap spewed by the borguoisie. All programming should be made for 3 year olds if it is to be run in these glorious Soviet States of America. May the counterrevolutionary "intellectuals" rot in hell for their crimes of thought.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
germanos
|
|
behind a firm ****, Rotterdam, NL
Apr 2002
time: 06:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
quote:
The coalition forces, although claiming to be defending the security of their own countries, singularly failed to convince popular opinion that Iraq posed a real threat. By contrast popular opinion clearly accepts that the Israeli army is defending its civilian population from a very real threat which does constantly claim Israeli lives[1]. This difference between the two conflicts, if it affected an impartial news provider at all, would logically tend to result in Israel receiving a more sympathetic coverage than did the coalition forces. The opposite is in fact the case.
This is one of the opening paragraphs. Does it improve from that, or is it bullshit all the way? |
ditto
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-09-2004 18:54
|