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.

It's no good saying the edit didn't trouble anyone at the time of broadcasting. We all thought it was verbatim. You can't complain about something you don't know has happened!

Now I know I'm bloody outraged!

Oh there's a surprise strawberrybubblegum does there faux moralising about extreme right wing victims, I bet you had a party when Gary Lineker was axed!

@bemoresloth to the contrary, they explicitly made up the quote by splicing together two completely unconnected sentences uttered an hour apart and were made aware of this fact many months ago but elected to say nothing.

How is it relevant that it “didn’t trouble anyone at the time of broadcasting?” If anything it just confirms how misplaced having faith in the reporting by the BBC is.

I did think Gary Lineker was a dick, yes. Celebrities should stick to what they're famous for - entertainment - instead of wading into political commentary on things they have no clue about. His anti-semitism was appalling.

They did make up a quote by splicing a sentence together.

Oh, and there's nothing false about my belief that the Left are utterly morally reprehensible in many ways. Far more dangerous and harmful than the Right.

And that when they are so certain of their moral superiority that they decide the ends justify the means - that's when the most terrible things happen.

BBC made a mistake and they have apologised for it.

Posters on here are cheering for Trump to take down the BBC

The perpetual indignation is a bit OTT isn't it, do you really worry this much about the BBC!

Funny that.
I've made a complaint to the BBC twice for bias. On both occasions it was because their reporting was skewed to the right.

Can you tell us what those complaints were about? Genuine question, I would like to understand what right wing bias you have seen, because I understand that being centre right I might be likely to miss noticing it.

In a democracy everyone is entitled to have, and share, an opinion. Their main job is irrelevant to this.

Entitled to have, not entirled to share publicly when employed in a prominent role by the BBC. As we saw. They are required to be publucly impartial in return for the license fee.

Lots of professions ban political social media posts.

It isn't irrelevant if the reason they have an online profile that other people will listen to is that you are paid a huge sum of taxpayers money. Lineker's continuing online popularity came from his BBC presence and licence payers have, imo, a right not to have a BBC presenter whose salary they have been forced to contribute to just because they watch Coronation Street make overt political statements that they don't agree with.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Have you seen the frothing about Farage, who has 5 MPs?

Or the excesses of Trump Derangement Syndrome, about another country's elected leader?

Or the way some Labour supporters still pretend to spit when Thatcher's name is mentioned, 35 years after she resigned as PM?

Labour are the actual, current UK government. And the ridiculous, blind self-righteousness of the Left - even as they do the exact opposite of what is decent and sensible, every single fucking time - is what's driving Labour to damage the country more every day.

And that same attitude - the attitude of those who elected them - is displayed here in spades, over and over again - including in minimising this complete disgrace by the BBC. Because the BBC are on the side of angels, even when they lie about a political leader 'for the greater good'. Or something.

So no, I don't think my reaction is OTT.

We all thought it was verbatim.

Did you watch that episode of Panorama @Imdunfer ? The whole hour as opposed to the 12 seconds of spliced speech ?
A one hour speech that Trump gave on January 6th 2021 and which was dissected by every news channel on the planet for days/weeks afterwards. You would be hard pressed to remember an hour long speech verbatim, especially a Trump speech, which are generally extremely ponderous.

I'm sorry but I don't know what point you're making?

1. I love your snobbish belief that anyone who watches a channel whose perspective you don't like, must be thick. The arrogance of this is wonderful.
2. No one is forced to pay a licence fee to fund these terrible right wing TV channels. The right wing TV channels are not having women locked up in prison for not having a TV licence. And they are not adding insult to injury, by disseminating an ideology which proposes that male rapists who say they are women, be locked up in the same prison as those licenceless women.

What about all the other instances of bias that Prescott's e-mail pointed out?

Have they dealt with those? Is it all OK now? Is there nothing to see here?

Free Speech Nation on Sunday evening is also very good.

I don't want Trump to take down the BBC.

I want the BBC to return to its values of public service broadcasting.

The internal report pointed out the malicious splicing months ago. But nothing was done. They sat on it. A very similar edit was done on the same speech for Newsnight. This points to much more than one off mistake. Instead, it’s a complete failure of corporate governance.

Trump is a big boy and can take care of himself. He’s not a very sympathetic figure either. The report’s concerns about misogyny and antisemitism are much more alarming. Trump’s shenanigans are taking focus away from those two issues.

None of this would be such a big deal if it weren’t a state broadcaster subsidised with what is effectively a very generous, hypothecated tax. Perhaps it is too big too manage and should be broken up. News separated from entertainment?

You haven't actually offered anything to the conversation but a personal attack. Who changed what your said. You're a bit odd .

You can splice the speech however you like but it doesn't change the message of the speech. It was fight the people who "stole" this democratically won election which is exactly what they did. Don't be so naive.

Yes Free Speech Nation tonight covered an interim ruling at an employment tribunal for unfair dismissal that the right to criticise Islam is protected by the Equality Act. This is pretty monumental.

It ranks right up there with Maya Forstater's unfair dismissal case establishing that belief in sex being immutable is a protected belief under the same Act.

They had the guy on who had his registration to practice as an actuary removed for 2 years, along with a £22,000 fine, after he had engaged in a political debate online where he called "unreformed" Islam "problematic for western values".

I may be searching wrong but I can't see that the BBC have covered it at all online. I watch the BBC 6 o'clock news every night and it hasn't been on that as I recall. The papers have covered it , as has this forum.

This was a big deal, why didn't the Beeb cover it?

The splicing was bad. But I agree it’s minor compared to the overall report which was damning of the corporation’s governance and institutional bias.