Donald Trump BBC

They've made a mistake, that's allowed.

If you can't see the agenda behind Trump's tantrum, than more fool you.

Still is respected.

One screw up doesn't destroy a reputation built over 100 years.

I'm sure we all have criticisms of some (or all) of our nations institutions, but I'm sick to the back teeth of co-called 'patriots' slagging off Britain, it's institutions, it's achievements, and everything about the country.

And it's all because Russian bots, Iranian trolls, foreign misinformation peddlers, manipulated social media algorithms, and US ultra-capitalists want to destroy Britain for their own political, economic and ideological goals.

God, this thread really brought the loonies out didn’t it?

Was respected. They’ve damaged their own reputation here and have no one to blame but themselves.

Quite. And all the soft power it confers too.

I could, but I watched a lot of it in real time.
I’d made my decision before this programme, which I didn’t watch so it didn’t lie to me. All media presents a particular view point, everyone is aware of that.

You're celebrating the destruction of a pioneering British public service, and a British institution that is globally recognised and respected, by a foreign political operator. So much patriotism!

The point is that not everyone agrees with your personal judgement on his intentions.

You are assuming your view is correct.

You aren't, presumably, an infallible source of divine knowledge, you might consider that you could be wrong.

Especially if your media is lying to you, which seems to be the case.

I’m happy to pay for the BBC to be brought down a peg or two. It should happen more often.

Interesting you trust AI

How do you know that because you haven’t watched it so have no idea what was in it.

What have people in the US got to do with it? It was never broadcast there. I’m aware there are many brainwashed near cult members there.

It should never be acceptable to broadcast a deep fake about anyone.
Wait. What’s that you say? It wasn’t a deep fake, but an actual speech someone gave which I could have watched and then fast forwarded to the other bit, but instead someone saved me the trouble by stitching it together? Which was a bit naughty, some might even say lies unprofessional, but it saved me fast forwarding through the actual footage of that speech. Irrelevant which channel this was broadcast on, but I wish it was channel 4 as they would kick his ass all the way back to the touchline and wouldn’t be bullied, whereas the BBC have to stand in the village square and have tomatoes pelted at them.

Because it’s the crux of it. Everyone was aware he incited the insurrection anyway. The programme changed nothing.

Well this is interesting…
AI Overview

+6

No, the BBC does not typically provide streaming infrastructure for
other platforms for their live TV services; instead, it provides its own content and services through its platforms like BBC iPlayer. The BBC has built its own internet distribution infrastructure (BIDI) to deliver its services to users and also collaborates with third-party Content Delivery Networks (CDNs) and Internet Service Providers to handle the load and ensure quality of service. While it develops technology and standards, such as adaptive bitrate streaming, it uses them for its own services, not to provide the underlying infrastructure to others, as it has a public service obligation to be universally accessible across many platforms.

You don't seem to be able to understand that there are many people in the US who do not think that he was trying to start an insurrection.

That is what you think. It might be what the BBC thinks. But no one other than (possibly) DT knows, the rest are making a judgement. Everyone has a right to come to their own conclusions and it's essential to a liberal democracy that that is the case.

People judge his intentions based on what they hear him say, and see him do.

If the media shows him saying something he did not in fact say, that means people may make a different judgement. This is nothing other than manipulation on the part of the BBC. They changed the meaning so that it was almost the opposite of what he in fact said.

And if they did it in this case, people now wonder, how many other times have they done it? Can they trust anything the media has shown them about DT? Maybe it has all been manipulated - how can they know?

And as for DT - well one thing we now know is he is right about media like the BBC being "fake news."

The level of fuck up on this is massive, and they've completely doubled down on it at every turn.

There will probably be so many people cancel their licences after this debacle that the BBC will explode in a puff of angry letters because it has to send so many. I suppose it will keep the postie in a job.

Well if you haven’t even seen it of course you wouldn’t have been manipulated by it. It don’t know why you would keep saying that knowing you haven’t even watched it in the first place.

Freeview is coming to an end. We will no longer need a TV ariel soon.
Other pay to view platforms manage to stream live TV. Why should I have to pay for a TV licence to watch non-BBC live TV? Those services won’t suddenly stop live streaming if the BBC didn’t exist!

Ask them.
The BBC provides loads of value and the necessary infrastructure for many live broadcasts.

They only let us to see what they want us to see.

Nothing new, it’s been like it for years and years. You’d almost have to be an idiot to not realise.

I’m glad they’ve got their comeuppance. Absolutely disgraceful behaviour.

So why aren't the streamers having to pay for their live TV, why do licence payers have to pay for them to show live stuff.

For what feels like the millionth time, it wasn’t a news report.
I said I wasn’t manipulated. I can’t speak for everyone, no, but I’ve yet to speak to a real life person who thinks he was misrepresented - and not because they were brainwashed by one edit either. I haven’t even seen it, so the fact I know Trump incited violence is nothing to do with it. And that was talked about loads way before t(e programme was ever made.
As I’ve said, it was a silly think to do and the BBC should have caught it before broadcast but it didn’t misrepresent his main sentiment.

On this occasion I have no sympathy whatsoever for the BBC. What they did was a disgrace.

How do you know that people were not misled? You can’t possibly call that or speak for anyone else. It’s not about his behaviour, it’s about the behaviour of the BBC and how can people believe anything they report on in future.