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.

Interesting you trust AI

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

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.

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!

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.

Quite. And all the soft power it confers too.

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

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

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.

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

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

It doesn't matter that you watched in real time. That doesn't mean that you, or any other individual, has come to the correct conclusion.
Do you believe that people can't come to differernt conclusions with the same information?

When the media starts to take it upon themselves to make an assessment and manipulate the public to see things in that light, they are no longer any kind of news, they are propaganda. Even from an outright partisan media source that wouldn't be considered an ethical approach.

People have the right to come to their own conclusions about things. The BBC doesn't get to decide what they think.

One wonders, if it was so obvious, why they felt the need to manipulate it at all.

Some might say the first screw up was Saville. People don’t forget that cover up either.

Some very rich people must be absolutely laughing this week based on the responses here. I hope the BBC sticks to its guns and does not let itself be bullied. The report to find examples of (only left-wing) bias was anything but independent. Why was that?

It's not one screw up.

One, that we know of, case of manipulation of a quote by a political candidate.

An ongoing pattern of manipulative coverage of Gaza.

An ongoing pattern, for years, of manipulative coverage of women's rights.

Ignoring and suppressing complaints.

Ignoring and suppressing when these issues were presented to them internally.

Of course people can come to different conclusions. I’m a bit puzzled by how, in this case, as it seems so obvious. I suspect it was t picked up by the BBC before broadcast purely because they didn’t realise as it seems an obvious thing. As I’ve said, that was a mistake. They should have seen it and changed it. I’m not suggesting it was ok to dO it, just that trump doesn’t have grounds to sue as it didn’t materially affect anything.

Well it did change one thing. It blew apart any trust I had in the BBC as a truthful and impartial broadcaster.

That phrase has been going round my head since they announced it 🤣

The BBC obviously fucked up and the programme shouldn't have been edited in a way that was likely to mislead viewers about what Trump had said and when. However, I really don't understand how Trump would have a chance of winning a defamation case.

Firstly, from what I understand, he would need to sue in the US (Florida?), because he would be out of time to sue in the UK. And I gather that the programme wasn't even broadcast in the US, so that's presumably a significant hurdle.

Secondly, if he is claiming damages, what's the evidence of any actual damage having been done? The BBC weren't the first to suggest that he incited the Jan 6 riots, he had actually already been indicted in the US for his part in trying to subvert the election result. So while the spliced video was misleading about the specifics of what was said, it didn't point to any overarching allegations that weren't already in the public domain. Plus Trump was elected soon after the programme aired, so it isn't at all clear that it actually damaged him in any way?

Thirdly, I understand that under Florida law, Trump would have to prove that the BBC had malicious intent. I can't see how he would evidence this, particularly given that the rest of the panorama programme was actually quite balanced and included material that was favourable to Trump.

Defamation implies that the BBC causes damage to Trump's reputation. But Trump already had a terrible reputation and had already been accused in the US of inciting the riots. So while the BBC edit was grossly inappropriate, unprofessional and damaging to the BBC's reputation, I struggle to see how it did any damage whatsoever to Trump. So I struggle to see how he could win this case. I would love for someone to explain why they believe the courts might reach a different conclusion, and on what grounds etc.

The BBC have to get educated here. Trying to defraud and misrepresent to the plebs (ie the UK TV license payers) to get across their own skewed agenda, is wrong. They now have to face the consequences. Too many times the lefty top management have behaved with self entitlement and arrogance. They deserve what’s coming to them. We should be all over them for causing this shit show which could impact our license fees, not giving them the green light to continue manipulating the news to fit their own shitty agenda.

Why is this? I love the BBC programming and readily suck up the anti fake news adverts they put out all the time. Please explain why I am so deluded.

I'd gladly pay a subscription for their radio, quiz and drama output.

Spot on.. I'm sick if it too. Bad actors and useful fools lying and manipulating for their own nefarious purposes. Some of the useful fools should go and live in some of these shit countries that they seem to admire so much before being so quick to condemn institutions that have been built up over years in this country. They'd soon find out what post truth looks like .

Right that's it! We must now get rid of all Police forces, the NHS, all district and county councils, state education, and every single other public institution because we'll be able to find one or two screw ups in every organisation.

And then the country will be so much better. Instead of having public services, we can all pay private companies for the same services at a higher cost. I wonder who this might benefit...? I wonder who might be pushing the idea that public services that make mistakes should be eradicated?

Indeed. I wonder too...hmmmm.....let me think.......I couldnt possibly imagine who it could be......👏👏

So you advocate for the removal of the Police? After all they've screwed up LOTS over the years haven't they? And according to you, those institutions should be destroyed and replaced with private companies.

Basically your argument is "defund the....* insert institution of your hate * "

So if you argue that a British institution with a problem should be destroyed, then you are literally arguing for the destruction of the police, local councils or any other public service that has ever made a mistake.

And TBH... That's a daft, reactionary argument.

So let's get rid of everything. Who needs Police when we could have private protection forces instead. Who needs the NHS or schools or local government or anything else. It'll be sooooo much better when private companies control everything and can charge what they like!! /s

Yes. It's a choice isnt it. Do we want tried and tested public services that are generally ok and accountable but occasionally screw up, or do we want private services........like the water companies that literally pump shit into.our rivers....or that woman whose company allegedly took millions in govt money to make protective equipment during the pandemic and then the clothing turned out to be useless, ....or private health care where , when you are actually ill, you find doesnt help you with very much treatment at all without paying through the nose for it....Public or private ? I know which Id rather go with. So we should condemn Trump for having a go at the BBC and see his actions for what they really are......an attempt to destroy all British institutions that have the 'audacity 'to challenge him in any way.