The BBC are screwed, aren't they?

[kinkytoes]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c891jp9j79do

Are we ever going to find out who actually made the monumental fuck up? Rather than just a homogenous apology from the top.

Is this person/people still working for them?

I actually understand why Trump is doing this. You can't just let something so wrong pass by or they'll just keep doing it.

Trumps New Best Friend is president of China - the worlds largest communist country.

Hows that critical thinking course going ? Let me guess, government cuts ?

We've gone from he directly incited a riot to 'it was in the subtext, which mobs of people are famous for understanding' in one post.

BTW, if you're trying to detail how clever you are, maybe you should know that subtext is one word

Does this mean that the BBC are now not allowed in White House press conferences?

Hardly the punishment it seems.

I hadn't noticed, but I am not a particularly prolific user, sometimes I'm on 3 days in a week, other times not for a couple of weeks or so.

There are multiple threads on Israel and Hamas, does that mean there's a concerted effort?

Might it just be that this is a really major news story about one of our most respected institutions that nearly everyone is affected by (because most of us pay the licence fee and watch some BBC programming) and that's why there will be lots of threads about it?

Or have we moved on to the "this is a vast right wing conspiracy to destroy the BBC and anyone discussing it is a far right thug and there's nothing to see here" phase of the debate?

But presumably it would be a big PITA for a news corporation to be excluded (not that I know if they are excluded, hence me asking).

I never used the word ‘directly’. I haven’t ‘gone’ anywhere.

What happened to the accusation? I admit I can’t recall the process but on googling it says acquitted.

They did what they did just after he said fight for your country or you won't have a country to fight for. It was clear watching it.

It was clear watching it because that bit was also spliced. They started marching before that.

Here's the link to Michael Prescott's e-mail: Revealed: The devastating memo that plunged the BBC into crisis

It's the Telegraph, but I think you can get 3 articles for free if you sign in and they publish his criticisms in full so you don't have to rely on them to "interpret" it for you. But if you can't be arsed, this is what he specifically said on that:

On January 6, 2021, the so-called Proud Boys, Trump’s supporters, marched to Capitol Hill before Trump had started speaking.

David’s report to the EGSC highlighted that Trump’s ‘speech’ clip was followed by video footage of the Proud Boys marching towards Congress. This created the impression Trump’s supporters had taken up his ‘call-to-arms’.

So the speech wasn't the only thing that was spliced.

You think he couldn’t incite them to riot because they were already on a protest? Really?

https://www.thenewworld.co.uk/james-ball-exclusive-the-error-at-the-heart-of-trumps-bbc-attack/

No, I don't think he couldn't incite them to riot because they were already on a protest. But this isn't about whether he incited them to riot, it's about whether the BBC accurately and honestly reported this incident.

The overwhelming consensus is that they didn't.

My interest in this isn't the Trump splicing stuff, it's the overall picture that Michael Preston's e-mail presents. It shows quite clearly that there is a huge problem at the BBC.

I don't know who James Ball is, but he's clearly a man who believes two wrongs make a right.
So what if Prescott misquoted Trump, what the BBC did was still wrong.

If you're caught red handed doing wrong pointing out your accuser has also done wrong things doesn't make you any less guilty.

This is the basics of how to behave that I taught my children when they were very, very young and i'm surprised anyone thinks it a good defence.

I don't know who that guy is or what that publication is. But what do you think it proves?

That the Panorama programme was OK after all?

That the 2 resignations shouldn't have happened and they should have their jobs back?

That there's nothing to see here?

Bit sloppy though from the man who brought along the accusations, or maybe hypocritical

It's not a defence, it's background to Prescott and his possible motives

I find it bizarre that people are highlighting edited quotes in Prescott’s dossier. Prescott isn’t the state funded broadcaster whose charter puts impartiality at its absolute heart. It’s not like anyone is able to dismiss the actual truth of his accusations.

Considering he approached the BBC with his findings numerous times and was either ignored or batted away I'd say it proves absolutely nothing.
Furthermore, none of Prescotts report need have seen light of day at the Telegraph if the BBC was interested in addressing its bias and getting its house in order.

Edited for typo

Oh God, his "possible motives" again.

The shadowy motives of the vast right wing cabal who want to bring down the BBC?

He got a job as an independent external advisor. It's really unlikely that his motive is to destroy the BBC. Most people who are criticising them are doing so because they are alarmed by the terrible slide in journalistic standards and want it to return to its glory days of being broadly trustworthy and certainly the best broadcaster in the world.

It's staggering to me that so many people seem to believe that criticism of the BBC is evidence of bad faith and right wing enmity.

This is tin-foil hat stuff, sorry.

Why can't it simply indicate that the BBC have systemic problems and also that people hate paying the licence tax?

Trump is a playground bully who has been given almost unlimited power by ignorant MAGA voters and corrupt Supreme Court Judges (mostly appointed by...Trump).

The best thing would be for the BBC to declare that they don't recognise his right to sue them in the USA (where the programme wasn't broadcast nor was available on Iplayer), and refuse to take part in any legal action, or pay him one cent whatever a court might say. The bBC isn't an American organisation so they can avoid paying this modern version of 'protection' money. And just tell him to go and F.O.

The BBC didn't have to do that to make him look a deranged cunt he does that well enough himself.

I so hope he'll be successful and will bankrupt the fuckers. I'd pop the champagne. Can't stand Trump, but hate the bbc more.

Amazing how the Beeb suddenly reported widely this week on the Darlington nurses case re a trans in their changing room. Before Prescott’s leaked memo, not a single word on it. 🧐

Yes. They know there's a problem. They just don't want to talk about it, because they have utterly failed in their duty to educate.

Be a shame if benefits had to be cut to pay for it though.