Published across Europe but pulled by the BBC:
Published across Europe but pulled by the BBC:
Headline changed but story carried.
Oddly the pregnant status of the woman is mentioned in body of the story.
Had to search for the story as it didn’t appear in my feed.
Also the headline in the search was different to the one that appears above, and closer to the truth.
Yep, should have said headline pulled.
That Owen Jones, what a rabid Anti-Semite he is eh!
Sadly the days of the BBC having a world wide reputation as a fair and independent news provider have long gone. They are bought and paid for like the overwhelming majority of the MSM in this country, not to mention large numbers of elected MPs. When the call comes in from the Israeli embassy they say ‘Yessir’. In contrast to the overwhelming majority of the MSM and MPs across Europe who don’t. But thankfully we will soon be rid of being under the yoke of these treacherous Europeans, whose only reason for being is to do Britain down. They even have the impertinence to be be relaxed about their media reporting world events truthfully, even though they may show the State of Israel, Saudi Arabia, and their sponsors in visiting death and terror on thousands of civilians, the USA and the UK, in a less than favourable light. Beyond the pale!
But the day is fast approaching when we will be rid of these charlatans, with their plans for a European army, which of course will be controlled by ‘The Hun’ from their bunkers in Berlin. I know this is on the cards, cos i read it on Sotonians! We will be there, standing in front of The Donald, with Bibi on his right hand, and Salman Of Saudi Arabia on his left, awaiting our instructions. Chests bursting with pride, standing shoulder to shoulder with our new allies. What could possibly go wrong!
There was a Twitter campaign last night under the hashtag #bbcswitchoff.
A question for @SaintBristol to consider
Two days ago, Jewish Voice for Labour delivered a letter of complaint to the BBC, condemning a ‘lack of impartiality and inaccuracies’ in its reporting of Hodge’s allegations against Corbyn. Her accusations were ‘repeated numerous times without denial or opposing views’ by BBC News. Moreover, Hodge’s assertion that she represents the entire ‘Jewish community’ has been allowed to pass unchallenged.
Hey Pap, “Claims that the BBC lacks impartiality is nothing new” … It’s nothing new. Statistically more people complain about BBC left wing bias than vica versa. News is a tricky subject as it’s a medium to state facts, decide which ones are important. And, in communicating these things try not to be impartial. I don’t have any affiliation to the BBC, shit they made me redundant years ago. I do know they have stringent checks and balances.
BBC’s bias is directly linked to opposite side of the arguement you are championing on the Internet.
Quite right. SM has given large sections of the public the ability to become so entrenched in their views to the point that they become completely unable to engage in reasoned debate. Twitter is a perfect example. The natural consequence of this is that any news outlet, by virtue of being a news outlet, is biased if it doesn’t provide wholesale positive coverage supporting your point of view. It’s a bastard of a job for something that tries to be neutral. The BBC aint the best, but it aint the worst.
I’d disagree. I’d say it is more akin to a small child telling an edited highlights version of events for the benefit of a concerned parent.
It’s probably too much to expect that kid to provide a complete account, just as it is unrealistic to expect any news agency to tell you everything that is happening within half an hour.
But then the BBC doesn’t need to. If it so elected, it could cover everything in significantly more depth. It’s not chasing advertisers, doesn’t have to worry about a story’s commercial appeal, actually has the remit to fight the good fight.
The most disappointing thing about the BBC is that it’s like a small child lying to both parents.
But what is the average reading age in the UK these days (& by extrapolation the ability to understand the news in whatever format)? Why do you think they seem childish and not up to your level?
It’s more the deliberate obfuscation of the truth by leaving key information out, like when one of your kids turns up and said another kid hit them for apparently no good reason.
As a parent, if you take that kid at face value, you’re going to make some bad choices. Same applies to citizens of this country.
You cannot make informed decisions based on misinformation.
Do you genuinely believe that the BBC deliberately misinforms the public at large?
Are you saying that the majority of the population would have been bright enough to understand complex issues around Brexit if given enough information to make a balanced decision, or are you happy they weren’t and you got the decision you wanted?
Yes, and with decades of events to back it up. It has always had its moments when it has been on a looser leash, but when push comes to shove, the BBC is with the government.
Didn’t think it could get much worse after it got its teeth kicked out after Hutton. I reckoned without the likes of James Harding or Sarah Sands.
Let me put this another way. Are you saying it doesn’t?
The BBC is certainly the organ of the Govt. I readily agree with you. I’d trust it as far as I could throw it.
My question is, who is really pulling the chains in the background and for what ends.
Do I believe that the quality of reporting has fallen as a result of a news environment of 24hr news and a reliance on randoms on social media for quotes - absolutely.
Do I believe that it set out to deliberately misinform - no. That doesn’t mean to say that they don’t fuck it up.
I would certainly trust it more that the myriad of unregulated, unaccountable douche bags on twitter
We’ll have to disagree there. When the BBC gives rolling coverage to complete nonsense like the Salisbury affairs, decisive Russian involvement in Western political processes and chooses not to cover much of one side of some of the most divisive issues in the world today, it is deliberately misinforming.
Put it this way, your local Crown Court jury needs more evidence to prove one bloke twatted another than the BBC needs to accuse entire countries of murder.