http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4325914.stm

Please tell me what is not objective about this news report. Please
point out all examples of bias. Explain why you are so sure that the BBC
is not "fair and balanced."

DSK

Around 10/10/2005 6:45 PM, DSK wrote:

Explain why you are so sure that the BBC is not "fair and balanced."

Good grief, who ever said that? Perhaps they were thinking of The Sun or
one of the Dailies? The Onion, maybe?

The BBC is one of the (if not the) best, most reliable news sources
available.



--
~/Garth - 1966 Glastron V-142 Skiflite: "Blue-Boat"
"There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing about in boats."
-Kenneth Grahame, The Wind in the Willows

In article , says...
Around 10/10/2005 6:45 PM, DSK wrote:

Explain why you are so sure that the BBC is not "fair and balanced."

Good grief, who ever said that? Perhaps they were thinking of The Sun or
one of the Dailies? The Onion, maybe?

The BBC is one of the (if not the) best, most reliable news sources
available.

For some of these boneheads, anything not Faux Newsmax is anti-American
and not to be trusted.

They trusted the Brits with the "sexed up" bit about Saddam's revived
nuclear ambitions but they don't trust the BBC.

Pitiful.

jps

Please
point out all examples of bias. Explain why you are so sure that the BBC
is not "fair and balanced."

I wouldn't know if they were fair and balanced or not,. I don't watch
em.

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:45:47 -0400, DSK wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4325914.stm

Please tell me what is not objective about this news report. Please
point out all examples of bias. Explain why you are so sure that the BBC
is not "fair and balanced."

DSK

How long did you have to search to come up with this, Doug?

--
John H

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Ronald Reagan

PocoLoco wrote:
How long did you have to search to come up with this, Doug?


None.

It's a current headline.

But I bet Fox News isn't screaming about it, so you didn't know about it.

DSK

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4325914.stm

Please tell me what is not objective about this news report. Please
point out all examples of bias. Explain why you are so sure that the BBC
is not "fair and balanced."


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
First, let me ask you a question.


No, I asked you one first.

Are you a rabbi?
Do you always answer a question with another question?

Do you listen to World Service, watch the BBC TV on cable or listen on
the radio?

I usually "watch" the news on the internet. I can read a lot more news a
lot faster than it can be spoken over the radio or shown on TV.
Sometimes when we're driving, we listen the BBC World Service news.

BTW I am not saying here than this is the only place I get news,
although that accusation is sure to be flung.

My question is, why do you feel the need to discredit the BBC as
"biased" in some anti-Bush/Cheney way, when in fact they have no
connection whatever to American politics and generally present President
Bush favorably (although they don't lie about his disastrous policies).

DSK

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
While I'm sure there are lefties lurking the sacred halls of the BBC,
I pretty sure that most of them aren't lefties.

And, on average, they do tend to be fairly balanced when reporting on,
well things like potato futures, subsidies and the like. Their
politics serves Labour more than the Tories, but that's to be expected
from a state subsidized organization.


And how does this pertain to being "biased" in a way that relates to
American politics?

The problem that the BBC faces, much like Reuters New Service, is that
they, more so than AP or UPI, have become obsolete in the era of
instant video from remote places in the world.

???

Considering that they have one of the biggest and most accessible news
web sites, and have all their major articles translated into all major
languages, this is hard to fathom.

In fact, I call bull****. You are just plain wrong here... about 180 off.

... Folks rely on cable
news like CNN, MSNBC, CNBC and FOX for instant news from around the
world - the BBC and Reuters aren't relevant anymore.


Why sit down at a specific time to watch a cable news show, which is
generally more slanted to entertainment than to giving information, when
you can get the news straight off the web, as it comes in from any
location around the world?



It used to be that analysts in the CIA and NSC would actually have
their radios tuned to the BBC World Service to keep abreast of cables
and reportage from around the world. Even the majors (ABC, NBC, CBS)
used the BBC as a reliable news source from the remotest parts of the
world. They were the CNN of their time.

Unfortunately, time passed them by and they are now nothing more than
a small news service serving a small nation-state in a very large
world with very real competition for hard news from the edges of the
world.

The net result is that they tend to lean towards that which they feel
is their target audience - namely, the left wing which believes in
public funding for things like the BBC (or NPR for that matter, but I
digress). It's only natural for them to do so.


Oh, I see... they're pandering to the NPR ('Communist Mouthpiece Radio')
That means they *must* be left-leaning pinko fag-loving libby-rull
traitors!!

I guess 'Car Talk' is libby-rull biased too?



So take this screed for what you will

Yeah, the rantings of a bigot who cannot face the fact of his own
ignorance & prejudices.


... - it's unbiased commentary

Hardly. Your comments, when not directed towards boats, are heavily biased.

You make comments on science based on your religious leanings, and try
to pretend that you know the science. You try to make even-handed
political comments, but it's clear than any criticism of President
Bush... no matter how delicately phrased or how well deserved... makes
you angry. You've lashed out at me many times because of this. It's
transparent.


Simple as that.

Yep

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...

You make comments on science based on your religious leanings, and try to
pretend that you know the science. You try to make even-handed political
comments, but it's clear than any criticism of President Bush... no matter
how delicately phrased or how well deserved... makes you angry. You've
lashed out at me many times because of this. It's transparent.


Simple as that.

Yep

DSK


Having a bad hair day?

Eisboch

"DSK" wrote in message
...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4325914.stm

Please tell me what is not objective about this news report. Please point
out all examples of bias. Explain why you are so sure that the BBC is not
"fair and balanced."

DSK


The British have bad teeth, so their news sources are suspect.