Donald Trump BBC

[Daygloboo]

If Donald Trump gets compensation from the BBC to the tune of a million, which might affect our license fee payments, would it be appropriate to stop buying goods from US for a while. I think the BBC were wrong to misrepresent what Trump said, but effectively suing the population as a retaliation seems a step too far.

As he should. If you want the corporation to continue, and not impact the license fee payers, this is what the government has to do. Clean up after the shitty BBC. Again….

I'll ask again as radio silence, is the neutrality on news to be found on the right then?

What do you mean by this?

Panorama isn't a news outlet, but the BBC repeatedly mentioned in their broadcasts that Trump was responsible because of the Panorama show, which, IS a BBC programme. The powers that be within the beeb knew the lie and still broadcasted it on their news shows!! That makes it worse!!

The public duty to uphold accuracy and impartiality applies to current affairs programmes as well as the news.

The BBC should provide duly accurate and impartial news, current affairs and factual programming to build people’s understanding of all parts of the United Kingdom and of the wider world.

You said yourself that the BBC was guilty. You said if it was anyone but Trump you'd agree.

All western media outlets are told which viewpoint to choose from one single source - Reuters. We believe that CNN, BBC, German news French news, etc have individuality come up with the truth from their journalists - NO!! They are told which viewpoint come from when they send in their stories.

Trump bad Biden good, etc.

Oh, and that old chestnut - we in the west have the truth, poor old eastern europe - mainly Russia, doesn't. We are just as much lied to as they are!!

Do right wing news outlets that sympathise with Trump uphold impartiality? Surely, they don't in the U.S as news outlets unashamedly don't rate impartiality and their 'journalism' is not investigative or unbiased.

That is objectively just untrue.

The NHS, police, council etc provide something useful and there’s no alternative to the emergency services. We have lots of alternatives to watching the BBC and it’s not essential to anyone so hardly comparable to the NHS or police.

It’s not the first time the BBC has been caught up in controversy, the miners strike, the Troubles, rigging phone competitions, fake footage on the panorama show about Primark, the Martin Bashir interview, the list is endless. I don’t understand why you are making out as though this is the first time they’ve misled the public when it’s clearly not.

No, right wing news outlets are, by definition, not impartial.

What is your point?

The BBC is useful in upholding the tenets of a democratic society.

What are we supposed to do pay Trump billions forevermore!

Are you American?

Of course not. There’s bias across the board. We could name which specific Newspapers lean to the left or to the right. And I’m sure if ITV had cobbled together and edited something to manipulate an important news item, then they too would be having to explain themselves. To me, this isn’t about bias, but about an institution actually being so anrrogant and lacking in self awareness, that they actually thought they’d get away with it.

No.

Do you actually have a point?

James Hacker:
I know exactly who reads the papers. The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country. The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country. The Times is read by people who actually do run the country. The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country. The Financial Times is read by people who own the country. The Morning Star is read by the people who think the country should be run by another country. And the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
Sir Humphrey Appleby:
Prime Minister, what about the people who read the Sun?
Bernard Woolley:
The Sun readers don't care who runs the country, as long as she's got big tits.

:-)

😄

The BBC at it's best :-)

I see other posters have already responded to this so I’ll confine myself to pointing out that you yourself said that you would acknowledge the BBC were wrong if it were anyone but Trump. Your shift is an interesting one, some would say a self contradiction.

The public duty to uphold accuracy and impartiality applies to current affairs programmes as well as the news

It does indeed, @PencilsInSpace - especially when it concerns what they insist is their flagship current affairs programme

Unfortunately Panorama has too often completely traduced the truth, and I've yet to see any real responsibility taken for this

This!

So, you have the truth then?

Whilst the BBC massively blundered on this, and have blundered on several other things in recent years, I’m not sure why there is so much rabid vitriol against them. In general, their news and current affairs output is of a high standard. Certainly there are no independent media sources in the UK who do any better… The BBC also produce high quality TV drama, hugely popular entertainment shows like Strictly and The Traitors, some excellent radio output, and their children’s programming has always been of a high standard.

I am perfectly happy to pay the licence fee for their TV drama and entertainment output alone, even if I disregarded their news content.

However - that kind of editing isn't just inappropriate for state broadcasters.

Most mainstream media have committed to journalistic ethics that are pretty extensive. Most professional journalists are expected to maintain those ethical practices to remain in good standing.

Editing quotes at all has very specific parameters, they are normally considered sacrosanct. If a quote is difficult to understand normally you would use a comment rather than change the quote itself.

Besides - people can sue the NHS or the police if they are systematically negligent.

As is their right.