How would you describe it?
How would you describe it?desperate stuff.
The point I was making is that while hidden edits of quotes at Panorama and Newsnight has you hopping up and down about a credibility crisis, examples of other journalists doing the same thing (if not making quotes up entirely) doesn’t seem to bother you at all?
‘I already don’t like the BBC’Look I get it, ho ho ho, actually he can’t resign because technically he already did etc etc
The point I was making is that while hidden edits of quotes at Panorama and Newsnight has you hopping up and down about a credibility crisis, examples of other journalists doing the same thing (if not making quotes up entirely) doesn’t seem to bother you at all?
Look I get it, ho ho ho, actually he can’t resign because technically he already did etc etc
The point I was making is that while hidden edits of quotes at Panorama and Newsnight has you hopping up and down about a credibility crisis, examples of other journalists doing the same thing (if not making quotes up entirely) doesn’t seem to bother you at all?
Oh dearIm hardly hopping up and down I say the standards of a tax funded organisation which has as a code of conduct geared to impartiality has to do better then - I don’t know some sad rag which brags people like Will Self as a main contributor
if you see it differently that’s your choice
Oh dear
You sound quite triggered
You’re free to ramble on about Self, Campbell and various other people I haven’t mentioned - my original post was about Michael Prescott. He was supposed to be acting as an independent arbiter of the BBC’s editorial standards, but was in fact guilty of the very same sloppiness that ended up with the DG and the Head of News getting axed via his memo.If you can’t see the difference between Will Self and Alistair Campbell and the BBC then I’ll leave you to it
You’re free to ramble on about Self, Campbell and various other people I haven’t mentioned - my original post was about Michael Prescott. He was supposed to be acting as an independent arbiter of the BBC’s editorial standards, but was in fact guilty of the very same sloppiness that ended up with the DG and the Head of News getting axed via his memo.
It takes quite the set of mental gymnastics to not care about child sex abuse if it happens in the US but get really worked up about the BBC misrepresenting something that happens in the US.
Can I just ask why a keen eyed observer such as yourself wasn’t in uproar about such scandalous behaviour at the BBC when the episode aired?Why are the two subjects related?
This is purely to do with the BBC not acting with impartiality?
You will be making jokes about child victims touching parts of a doll again soon.
Why are the two subjects related?
This is purely to do with the BBC not acting with impartiality?
You will be making jokes about child victims touching parts of a doll again soon.
Because you claim you don't care what happens in the US so why are you upset that the BBC have misrepresented something from the US.
This is the problem when you take such daft and sometimes extreme views in the name of being such a contrarion - it often comes back to make you look even more stupid.
Can I just ask why a keen eyed observer such as yourself wasn’t in uproar about such scandalous behaviour at the BBC when the episode aired?
That’s nice for you - no comment on the actual content of the article again though. Maybe next time!I’m talking about your source
When was the programme broadcast and when did people start giving a shit?Im not a keen eyed observer and im not in uproar.
Editing a programme is a breach of the licence payer ethics and standards was a totally stupid thing to do.
If anyone could edit this into a sentence that makes sense then that would be greatEditing a programme is a breach of the licence payer ethics and standards was a totally stupid thing to do.
When was the programme broadcast and when did people start giving a shit?
Be very careful how you edit such a sentence, it’s a touchy subject on here.If anyone could edit this into a sentence that makes sense then that would be great
If anyone could edit this into a sentence that makes sense then that would be great
They’re under pressure from the most powerful man on the planet. He has extorted big money from US media organisations over similar matters or just broadcasting things he dislikes. If those cases went to court he would lose, but companies are scared of being shut down so pay him money to leave them alone.Well I assume when the person given a job on an ethics advisory board highlighted it - the issue here you have and refuse to comment on is why the corporation have said it’s wrong and two senior people have resigned.
Why if there was nothing wrong at all?
“Oh dear” again ole oleOh dear again - I suspect you have some resentment against Prescott? Want to share to us the resentment?
“Oh dear” again ole ole
I think my “resentment” is more like confusion that a right-wing crank journalist can torpedo the BBC’s credibility for impartiality with a memo that’s guilty of the precise same editorial sloppiness that he’s complaining about. Quite funny that you’re suggesting that I must know him personally though!
Not this 'boomer', ta very much.They’re under pressure from the most powerful man on the planet. He has extorted big money from US media organisations over similar matters or just broadcasting things he dislikes. If those cases went to court he would lose, but companies are scared of being shut down so pay him money to leave them alone.
Of course you and the other boomers on here snigger, but that is blatant intimidation of the press and authoritarianism. This was apparently an egregious misrepresentation of his speech yet nobody commented when it was broadcast. Why not?
Not this 'boomer', ta very much.
Quite sweet that 'Big Beautiful Bill' was actually just a shout-out
Wrong again - fun theory though.Sorry I thought it was a frustration he’s been rather successful from very humble journalist beginnings - namely the Coventry Evening Telegraph
Who actually owns it now?
Who actually owns it now?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?