News of the World RIP

They never stopped Elfinsafety! 😆

What din’t?

I’m going to have some fish sticks.

Sensitive about your BBC aren’t some of you

Well if that’s how you want to describe it.

The BBC is one of those few remaining institutions which Britain can be, deservedly, very proud of. It’s reputation for excellence in the whole spectrum of broadcasting, is world renowned. Contrast that with Rupert Murdoch’s global media empire.

And another institution which Britain can be immensely proud of is the British police. But go on, tell us how much better the French police are.

“Arab press welcomes Blix report”. Think a little about how that will be received by the reader. the choice of the word “Arab”. They could have used “Middle East” which would have more accurately geographically placed the newspapers or are they talking about the the world over in which case “Muslim” would be more appropriate. How would a report starting “Black press welcomes… .” as a lead to the story about the DSK case be constrewed by the reader? The choice of the word Arab is poor.

What a pathetic attempt to castigate the BBC by darkly suggesting the term “Arab” is somehow racist. You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel mate.

And since you appear to have completely missed this huge story, even though you apparently watch the BBC, have a look at this link :

No ‘truce’ in Iraq dossier row

Quote :

“Downing Street has denied declaring a “truce” in its row with the BBC over the government’s Iraq dossier.”

“The BBC has refused to apologise for its report that a senior intelligence official had said last September’s Iraq dossier was “sexed up” at Downing Street’s request.”

“In response the BBC’s head of news, Richard Sambrook, said: “The real question for the BBC is were we right to report what we actually said, when we said it? We believe the answer is ‘Yes’.”

For a British government “propaganda” tool in the Iraq War, the BBC were clearly left wanting. How did ITN and Sky compare in holding the government to account ?

There’s no need to mess up a perfectly good watermelon yunki.

I got one of these for later

The other half was eaten last night 8)

Ah, what??

Unlucky, but tbh, it was coming. 🙁

That’s from June 03, Ernie (not that I continue to address you politely by your forum name rather than “mate” or something I consider more appropriate). They knew what they were reporting before the war started was “sexed-up” but did not inform the public until it was too late.

The BBC is blantant government propaganda, Ernie.

True – at least when it comes to Israeli government propaganda.

The BBC’s world renown reputation for excellence only exists in the UK in reality. Very few people in any other country will have seen anything other than monty python or little britain.

Although I will say it does some of the best natural history programming available, most of the world will not realise them as BBC productions.

OMG Penalties…. 😯

Care to join in Elfin? “Allons enfants de la patrie, le jour de gloire est arrivé… .”

Cruel. Just cruel. 😥

It is therefore very important to take into account what is clearly not being said when watching any news story.

I heard a report on the French PM no mention of lizard people or gay swans I conclude he is a lizard king who mutilates Gay swans …Am I right?

Sensitive about your BBC aren’t some of you,

I think it is clear many of us respect the BBC and you dont. It seems you are clutching at straws and ignoring the facts tbh. I think by neutral you mean a news organisation that reports your view rather than all views.

They knew what they were reporting before the war started was “sexed-up” but did not inform the public until it was too late

Can you prove they knew this just out of interest?

Has Hitler or the Nazis been mentioned yet…?

I think they might have, Bully.

Still pretty boring though.

Sensitive about your BBC aren’t some of you, Rightplace.

What?????

What is that supposed to mean? What do you think my “agenda” is. My only relationship to the BBC is when I occasionally watch a programme on the iPlayer, listen to the radio or look at the BBC news website.

Are you wearing your tin-foil hat?

All I’m sensitive to is the fact that you are talking complete and utter rubbish.

Personally I was dead against the war, so if the BBC was as you said, why would I be defending it?

I only dipped into this particular discussion because of the breathtaking scale of your wrongness. It seems unfair to let you continue that way without trying to help.

Thank you highlighting some of my points in your quotes, Junkyard. Pity you seemed to have missed them completely.

Afer a few seconds thought I realised that Hilter can help me with this one, Bullheart. Not reporting information was as crucial to Nazi propaganda as misleading reporting and lies. The vast majority of Germans were unaware of who set fire to the Reichstag, of the fate of communists and Jews that were being rounded up and a host of other events that may have led to mass opposition to the Nazi party and its plans for war.

How many Brits would have supported Gulf war II if they knew the contents of George Bush’s fulfilling biblical prophecies telephone conversations with Jacques Chirac or had the same positive reporting of Hans Blix’s inspections as other Europeans?

People need all the information to make sound judgements.

People need all the information to make sound judgements.

True.

I suggest you go and find some….

or had the same positive reporting of Hans Blix’s inspections as other Europeans?

We did. On the BBC and on our fnon murdoch press – thats why a million people marched against it.

So, as Edukator isn’t at all sensitive and seems to think little of those who are, here’s a joke (with apologies to Fred, of course):

Edit: no, I musn’t. It’d open a whole new can of ugly worms…

A million marched for peace, TJ, and Charles Kenedy complained to the crowd about the government providing “misleading evidence”. Now which organisation was relaying that misleading evidence to the Britsih people? That’s right, the BBC. When an organisation relays government information it knows or suspects to be misleading it becomes the propaganda agent of government.

I watched news on national TV channels in the run up to Gulf war II and the BBC reports had me spitting. The reports from two nationas told me Blair was lying through his teeth and the BBC just kept reporting the lies as intelligence gained fact.

Jut simply wrong educkator. The BBC did not do that.

Thank you highlighting some of my points in your quotes, Junkyard. Pity you seemed to have missed them completely.

well I think that clarified things for me thanks for the edukation.
Anything that does not fit your view of events is biased.
Otherwise you would have beaten me to death with some evidence.

Now which organisation was relaying that misleading evidence to the Britsih people? That’s right, the BBC.

you are correct no other media outlet over here reported the government dossier. IIRC News International were immensely cynical as were the other papers but the BBC drove it home for Blair.

Biased BBC reporting of the march?

Oh yeah, about the “Arab press” thing…

What language do you think Al Jazeerah reports in?

Is it “Muslimic”?

Or perhaps “Middle Eastic”?

Oh no, wait a minute…

Edukator – Member

They knew what they were reporting before the war started was “sexed-up” but did not inform the public until it was too late.

Until it was too late ? The government certainly thought those allegations were extremely damaging to them – and they weren’t in the least bit happy about the BBC reporting them. I thought you said that the BBC provides “blatant government propaganda”. Make your mind up ffs.

The job of BBC News is to report news – not make it up. Andrew Gilligan reported allegations that a dossier published by the British Government had been “sexed up” once those allegations had been made. You wouldn’t expect him to report the allegations before they had been made.

.

Edukator – Member

Thank you highlighting some of my points in your quotes, Junkyard. Pity you seemed to have missed them completely.

Your “debating skills” are starting to resemble more and more those of Zulu-Eleven. Not only are you using diversionary tactics to change an anti-Murdoch thread into an anti-BBC thread, but now you come out with completely meaningless comments devoid of any substance with presumably the intention of “scoring points”. Do you two belong to the same debating society ?