Political Crossfire Forums

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

superskippy wrote: I dont personally have an issue with the BBC, I actually like it because of it's rapidity in bringing in breaking news from all over the world. And if a person uses their own head they can ignore the slant whether it is present or not and get a great deal of information very rapidly and that is normally very good.

The British press in general seems a little overly dramatic sometimes to me. The British seem to like that, which is a little odd because they are so reserved usually. But I think BBC is a pretty decent news outfit. And like you said any news you watch has to pass through the "spin" filters. :lol:

Nico · Joined: 03 Nov 2004 Posts: 10605 Location: Auckland

Di wrote: Nico wrote:
The BBC don't editorialise thier reporting though. They save that for specific editorial programmes, or bring in experts to voice their opinion, usually with a counter expert from another camp. Calling the beeb biased as an entity is clutching at straws. at best you can find individuals who have well known opinions outside the company, and who still don't express it during reports. I dare anyone to find a bbc report that clearly [a la fox] picks a side. Post it here and I will re-think my opinion.

I doubt you would re-think your opinion no matter what I linked to. No insult intended...most people do not see bias when it mirrors their own belief. Hard-core right-wingers, for example, resent hearing others refer to Fox News as biased, because they view the world through the same prism of belief as does Fox News... so to them, everything Fox does seems perfectly reasonable. A flaming liberal, however, cannot watch Fox without wanting to put a foot through the tv screen!

I've already given several examples of what I consider to be extreme anti-Israel bias in BBC's reporting. You've totally dismissed those examples, which means you clearly don't see anything wrong with it... and you probably do not see anything wrong with it because it mirrors your own views.

At any rate, the originator of this thread asked the question. I, and others, merely responded to it with our own opinions. I happened to support my own opinion with examples, which you are free to either acknowledge or ignore. :)

Yeah but this is a debate forum, and that's what we do here. ;) I just don't agree with your points because I watch BBC reporters being as ruthless in interviews with the left and the right. I watched a great deal of last night's program dedicated to the Israeli position and a great deal from lebanon where the reporter looked more flustered, however that was understandable given that the two reporters were in entirely different environments. this is all part of factors we take into consideration.

There are left leaning correspondents in the BBC, but also right leaning. Old school hard core right leaning. If you want a reason for the different level of agitatuion among on site reporters, you are going to have to consider that there was a difference in destruction on both sides. This is the reality, which is borne out by some very genuine numbers in casualties/ material damage. Sometimes a spade is just a spade.

cap'n queasy · Joined: 15 May 2004 Posts: 34968

Well, the fact that both sides see bias in the media indicates that a wide spectrum of information is out there to be had. But on the other hand we can literally "shop around" for news outlets that confirm our worldviews. That's why debate is such a good thing.

It's kind of a crucible and a spin filter at the same time. :lol:

Nico · Joined: 03 Nov 2004 Posts: 10605 Location: Auckland

cap'n queasy wrote: Well, the fact that both sides see bias in the media indicates that a wide spectrum of information is out there to be had. But on the other hand we can literally "shop around" for news outlets that confirm our worldviews. That's why debate is such a good thing.

It's kind of a crucible and a spin filter at the same time. :lol:

Yeah that's true. I'll be honest though, the beeb infuriates me sometimes because it can be so stale with an article. It's usually only the reporters on the ground who seem overwhelmed by their environment, unless you're watching a john simpson or someone of equal stature.
I feel fairly unchallenged watching the bbe but I also make a point of watching fox, even though it rings my own alarm bells.

You're right about debate. It has a way of breaking things down to component parts.

Gaea · Joined: 22 Jun 2004 Posts: 5579

ukgirl wrote: I have always believed that the BBC is slanted on reporting news when it comes to Israel, much to the irritation and denial of my fellow Brits.

So what do the BBC have against Israel?

I have my opinions, but would like to hear some of yours?

Do you think the BBC are bias against reporting fairly in regards to Israel?

If so, why do you think that is?

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525841951&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

:lol: I accidently ran across this editorial railing against the BBC. It appears the BBC is the favorite punching bag of the week for all sides and factions. They can't win for losing.

The BBC: propaganda which upholds Israeli war crimes http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=HAS20060717&articleId=2743

The author in the above link is really pissed off at the BBC because according to him the BBC is biased towards the Palestinians in favor of Israel. The problem is, that his argument looks just as valid and credible as the one in the above post that rails against the BBC for being biased towards Israel.

Oh dear, oh dear, what ever are we to believe about the BBC now? This is turning into quite a pickle, isn't it? :lol:

battleax86 · Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 4997 Location: Texas

Plato & Socrates wrote: Moot wrote: Di wrote:

.... I will point out that simply referencing an Israeli perspective on occasion does not eliminate bias, particularly if 4-5 times as much print/air time is devoted to the other side's perspective. For example, an announcer in studio calmly announces 200 rockets hit northern Israel, killing 8 people, including children. Then they switch to a hysterical reporter in Beirut, standing amidst rubble and screaming people, then spends several minutes of air time decrying the horrible massacre caused by Israeli missle attacks with smoking ruins and sobbing civilians in the background! This is not bias? That actually happened on the BBC last week. And when a "news report" refers to suicide bombers as martyrs, spends one sentence reporting the destruction of a bus and an entire paragraph giving "context" by explaining why the "oppressed martyrs" have no other choice to express their grievances, then damn... I call bias, plain and simple.

It is a known fact that the Israelis control and censure their media and try to do the same around the world. Could this know fact have something to do with what some here are calling biased because of the amount of coverage the BBC gives Israel compared to Lebanon, especially in the first weeks of the Israeli invasion?

AP Reveals Israeli Censorship, Says It Will Abide By Rules

http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002876486

Perhaps the perceived bias is more Israel's fault than it is the BBCs.

Israel has been censoring news for a long time. A single rule by it self does'nt do much harm to a democracy, but the plethora of rules and edicts when now reporting in Israel, especially when they do one of there West bank or Gaza incursions. They are not fit to be called a democracy. It is the culture of sickening spin, so the world can see them in a positive light. Whats even more sickening, is that these censoring is designed not for the Arab street, but primarily for the western media viewership. If the media companies dont play along with the game, access to certain areas and just getting an easy time from the authorities is not going to happen.
Do they hold fair and free elections? Yes? Then they are a democracy.

Tepic · Joined: 05 May 2006 Posts: 1463

battleax86 wrote: Do they hold fair and free elections? Yes? Then they are a democracy.
There's a distinction between liberal democracy and democracy.

Plato & Socrates · Joined: 24 Dec 2005 Posts: 1745 Location: London

battleax86 wrote: Plato & Socrates wrote: Moot wrote: Di wrote:

.... I will point out that simply referencing an Israeli perspective on occasion does not eliminate bias, particularly if 4-5 times as much print/air time is devoted to the other side's perspective. For example, an announcer in studio calmly announces 200 rockets hit northern Israel, killing 8 people, including children. Then they switch to a hysterical reporter in Beirut, standing amidst rubble and screaming people, then spends several minutes of air time decrying the horrible massacre caused by Israeli missle attacks with smoking ruins and sobbing civilians in the background! This is not bias? That actually happened on the BBC last week. And when a "news report" refers to suicide bombers as martyrs, spends one sentence reporting the destruction of a bus and an entire paragraph giving "context" by explaining why the "oppressed martyrs" have no other choice to express their grievances, then damn... I call bias, plain and simple.

It is a known fact that the Israelis control and censure their media and try to do the same around the world. Could this know fact have something to do with what some here are calling biased because of the amount of coverage the BBC gives Israel compared to Lebanon, especially in the first weeks of the Israeli invasion?

AP Reveals Israeli Censorship, Says It Will Abide By Rules

http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002876486

Perhaps the perceived bias is more Israel's fault than it is the BBCs.

Israel has been censoring news for a long time. A single rule by it self does'nt do much harm to a democracy, but the plethora of rules and edicts when now reporting in Israel, especially when they do one of there West bank or Gaza incursions. They are not fit to be called a democracy. It is the culture of sickening spin, so the world can see them in a positive light. Whats even more sickening, is that these censoring is designed not for the Arab street, but primarily for the western media viewership. If the media companies dont play along with the game, access to certain areas and just getting an easy time from the authorities is not going to happen.
Do they hold fair and free elections? Yes? Then they are a democracy.

Funny you saying that, then so is Hamas and the Palestinian authority. Yet I see you ripping into them.
My my standards have slip. Democracy my arse. Its only a true democracy if you are Jewish.

Nico · Joined: 03 Nov 2004 Posts: 10605 Location: Auckland

Moot wrote:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525841951&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

:lol: I accidently ran across this editorial railing against the BBC. It appears the BBC is the favorite punching bag of the week for all sides and factions. They can't win for losing.

:lol:

ToonArmyIsComing · Joined: 15 Feb 2005 Posts: 5888 Location: Ontario

Nico wrote: Moot wrote:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525841951&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

:lol: I accidently ran across this editorial railing against the BBC. It appears the BBC is the favorite punching bag of the week for all sides and factions. They can't win for losing.

:lol:

I am disappointed really about all this. Is Israel following the path of Zimbabwe? :roll:

thundertaker · Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2006 8:06 am Post subject:

cap'n queasy wrote:

The British press in general seems a little overly dramatic sometimes to me. The British seem to like that, which is a little odd because they are so reserved usually.

I don't see how it is possible for anyone who has had the opportunity to compare the american and british news programmes to come to that conclusion. American TV News is absolutely outrageous for scaremongering and sensationalising the news...
Unless you are talking about the tabloids like the Sun, the Mirror, Daily Mail, Daily Express etc. Then I'll agree with you.
The broadsheets are generally a lot more sensible though......

AKAMad · Joined: 20 Feb 2006 Posts: 300 Location: Birmingham

thundertaker wrote: cap'n queasy wrote:

The British press in general seems a little overly dramatic sometimes to me. The British seem to like that, which is a little odd because they are so reserved usually.

I don't see how it is possible for anyone who has had the opportunity to compare the american and british news programmes to come to that conclusion. American TV News is absolutely outrageous for scaremongering and sensationalising the news...
Unless you are talking about the tabloids like the Sun, the Mirror, Daily Mail, Daily Express etc. Then I'll agree with you.
The broadsheets are generally a lot more sensible though......

The advantage is we have is the Representation of the People Act.

If you want Democracy & Free Speech, you must control paid speech.

battleax86 · Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 4997 Location: Texas

Tepic wrote: battleax86 wrote: Do they hold fair and free elections? Yes? Then they are a democracy.
There's a distinction between liberal democracy and democracy.
Well, considering that their people have more freedoms than any other nation in the Middle East...

Plato & Socrates wrote: Funny you saying that, then so is Hamas and the Palestinian authority. Yet I see you ripping into them.
I rip into them because of what they do, not how they got to power. Unlike some people on this forum, I don't take the ignorant approach of denying the fact of a democracy just because I oppose their actions.

Plato & Socrates wrote: My my standards have slip.
Really? Didn't know it was possible for yours to slip any lower... :think: ...oh well, ya live and learn...

Plato & Socrates wrote: Democracy my arse. Its only a true democracy if you are Jewish.
Your words, not mine.

iafhq · Joined: 29 Jul 2006 Posts: 15

its not only BBC its CNN and most of the big news networks, the only news network that shares fair news from both sides is FOX News.

Its sad that in this world you can only get fair news on one news network.

The world needs to stop hatin and starting to appreciate everyone for the way they are.

Tepic · Joined: 05 May 2006 Posts: 1463

Looks like somebody thinks Fox is biased :P

Gunmen kidnap 2 journalists in Gaza

battleax86 · Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 4997 Location: Texas

Tepic wrote: Looks like somebody thinks Fox is biased :P

Gunmen kidnap 2 journalists in Gaza
I don't think it had anything to do with their being from Fox. :roll:

From your link:
Quote: Similar incidents in the past in Gaza have ended with the release, usually within hours, of kidnapped foreign journalists or aid workers.

Claudia Schiffer · Joined: 26 Jul 2006 Posts: 3234

iafhq wrote: its not only BBC its CNN and most of the big news networks, the only news network that shares fair news from both sides is FOX News.

Its sad that in this world you can only get fair news on one news network.

The world needs to stop hatin and starting to appreciate everyone for the way they are.

:rotf: :rotf: :lol: ..Oh! My God. You trying to manipulate us into thinking Fox is reliable. :lol: Ho! My God!

The republican Cheerleaders are on the march...

how much are they paying you to sell that crap. i know there's an army of you out there. :clap: :ah:

skinn · Joined: 19 Jul 2006 Posts: 426 Location: beirut

Claudia Schiffer wrote: iafhq wrote: its not only BBC its CNN and most of the big news networks, the only news network that shares fair news from both sides is FOX News.

Its sad that in this world you can only get fair news on one news network.

The world needs to stop hatin and starting to appreciate everyone for the way they are.

:rotf: :rotf: :lol: ..Oh! My God. You trying to manipulate us into thinking Fox is reliable. :lol: Ho! My God!

The republican Cheerleaders are on the march...

how much are they paying you to sell that crap. i know there's an army of you out there. :clap: :ah:

i think he was being sarcastic, that's pretty funny :lol:

superskippy · Joined: 14 Jul 2005 Posts: 8289 Location: Petah Tikva

A news organization can be reliable while still having slant. The BBC, CNN, and Fox News all manage to stay reliable while maintaing their own respective political bias and slant.

thatisnotme · Joined: 26 Mar 2006 Posts: 452

I suppose Al Jazeera is very reliable... :bang: