Sephiroth

Mad that on a thread about the telegraph (and are we saying they are a paragon of reporting? Are we?) it just happens to be the bbc and only the bbc copping the flak headnun - I’m not sure your point about despicable people “hanging themselves” holds up in a world where despicable people appear to be taking over in so many places for too long, these people have been given equal airtime to normal people, creating a false equivalence - the result being a lot of people seem to think “well if one person thinks smoking is bad for you and one person thinks it’s good for you, who am I to say who is right and wrong”

(Looks at title of thread)

“You are advocating that their failure to be impartial is justified because you disagree politically with the people they are inaccurate about. ” im arguing no such thing. I saw lowe’s comments misreported by several news sources and then in saw the corrections and apologies roll in. Correctly I think you will find everyone gets misreported. Pretty frequently. but whereas I think Badenoch is as mad as a box of frogs and a bad leader of Tories or starmer is not up to the job of leading the Labour party I think they both fit under the “norms” of political life and they tend to run with the punches a bit more Trump and Lowe are not just people I disagree with. They are fundamentally anti-democratic, racist pathetic men who should have no proximity to power - they also should not be misreported. But they do have thinner skin (something they share with say, Corbyn)

Fine dude - you do you. I dont think you have the slightest interest in the BBC (whereas clearly HeadNun dos) other than its elimination. If it made these mistakes against starmer/davey/greens whoever I doubt you would get as upset. It’s all very “bring a pen to Brexit referendum because they can rub out pencil votes” (“but strafe!! Dave hasn’t said any of these things on here and if you suggest he does elsewhere you have no proof!” This is true! And yet here we are ) I’ll ask again. Why do you think lowe said foreigner and domestic. Instead of just “criminals”?

Sorry if this is bullying, or name calling or whatever but anyone quoting Rupert Lowe is just never ever going to have a valid point several people misreported that line not just the bbc - seems to have been a mishearing and I’ve seen plenty of corrections So I don’t think it was a lie (it remains a curious distinction tho why say foreigners and domestic at all If you want to bring back the death penalty why mention this distinction?) Here’s a question. If Lowe or his party took power and introduced the death penalty, do you think proportionally more “domestics” or”foreign born” would receive the death penalty? Because I think I know the answer and so do you This bastion of truth. Rupert Lowe https://www.bbc.co.uk/search?d=NEWS_PS I wouldnt put him on any pedestal above the bbc

That example seems fair enough - but wouldn’t say it’s completely analogous to the Trump situation the STORY (your caps) is about the bbc edit precisely because of what happened that day and people’s ability to brush it under the carpet. I think the edit didn’t need to be done in that way to make the exact same point. So it’s wrong thing to do, but it isn’t actually incorrect in its point - and people should be reexamining the events and not the edit and I don’t think it’s political to say or do this. If your supporter example played out that way then fair enough - I just cannot agree that in this case the edit fundamentally changes what he said, meant or did - especially without events transpired It could definitely be made more explicit but given what actually happened… ? At least hopefully at this point we are being less aggy with each other and trying to make our points

I mean frankly we are a LONG way from the time I was called the Kofi Annan of the forum

But HN if you say this isn’t about Trump then we can never ever even approach dialogue the documentary was about Trump, the things he said and did and how those words were edited and acted on if you want to ignore absolutely everything else and just in a complete vacuum look at an editing decision - that’s on you I don’t think you are a proactive Trump supporter. But you make yourself one by proxy if you can’t look at this decision in the round. He literally does not care about these rules. Which is why he gets away with so much. If we were talking about him in the past tense then this would be easier - but he is very much an enemy of everything we hold dear, and the bbc isn’t - even allowing for this edit if I have previously explicitly or otherwise painted you as an actual Trump supporter I apologise and clarify that now. But on this actual issue I don’t think we will ever come close to agreeing Meanwhile - bbc enemies run their hands and trump carries on with his mission

I would prefer “intolerant of nonsense, outspoken and direct” and I definitely try to avoid “bullying” Am I above personal insults and name-calling? Hmmm. On balance I think I receive more than I give

I still say “morally reprehensible” is too extreme unless you are talking about Trump. And what he did that day. And what the outcome was. And him pardoning the criminals that is clearly morally reprehensible and in no way comparable to the bbc edit Ow if you want to say all edits like that should be better flagged to a viewer, if you want to compare the edit to the outcome, if you want to talk about better workflows to prevent in future. Sure. Why not. but it’s pretty repugnant to call that edit morally reprehensible in light of events and not call that monster out? Nah the bbc, us, the uk, all of us will lose if we play by rules that monsters like trump pay no heed to. “Go low go high” is aspirationally sound. But the BBC Is not the net loser on balance here even if you don’t like what they did when the BBC is disbanded it don’t be beside of decisions like this. It will be because people side with Trump, Dacre and the rest

As for being “swept under the carpet” - the bbc is in crisis, two senior people have resigned and Trump (yknow the lying, corrupt, racist, Epstein client monster) is suing for a billion but that is sweeping it under the carpet? The guy behind the report criticising also misquotes Trump but you are you arent gunning for him. How curious “Absolute trash” is very… extreme. one can say it’s not how it should be, one can say it’s wrong, one can say we will ensure it won’t happen again that seems proportionate people marching on Capitol Hill after Trump spoke, and then he pardons them? That is the opposite of “learning from mistakes” - that is absolute trash and that is who you are aligning yourself with. You could at least acknowledge that rather than wanting the bbc to be some great British bastion, mos uk newspapers and media barons and trump adjacent monsters all very much want the bbc eliminated. Not improved. Eliminated

I didn’t ignore it - as is obvious by reference to its content. But fine. Thanks for posting the bbc link Dave and well done you you big big man for ignoring 14 years of mismanagement to score cheap points about a bit longer than 1 year government. A government think is doing badly but not for the reasons you cite and I’ve been on this site for 20 years and I will happily take every single person calling me a gobshite. But a troll I am not. I have literally met hundreds of people face to face from this forum - sometimes one to one after online arguments. I troll no one. If I disagree with you I can be blunt and sometimes wrong. But I’m never ever trying to get a rise out of anyone

Why would I do that? Thanks for a bbc article that doesn’t post any impressive figures and the you ignore my counterpoints? if nothing else the shockwave to global economy since Trump got reelected should give pause to anyone on any side saying fastest growing when the numbers are so tiny is meaningless. As that article basically says and if it did mean anything the there would be a graceful electorate. There was not a grateful or happy electorate

None of that reads particularly impressively - and for sure, things on growth and GDP under Labour have not improved but the idea that the Tories retained power in 2024 and the U.K. would be doing better than it is now? I really really don’t think so

Can we get more data about this “fastest growing economy” thing. I’ve googled but can’t find anything concrete I do recall a bunch of unaffordable tax cuts which gave impression of boosting economy in short term in full knowledge they would have to deal with fallout. So there’s that but hey. If you are in the market for reasons why uk economy is in a doom loop might I point you to Brexit. And then I watch as people go “stop wanging on about that” and then they go back to complain my about doom loops and wondering why Tories lost so massively