-
-
Latest Discussions
-
the same complaint was made about usa news stations 4 years ago. its an old story. Its quite shocking how intelligent people are so easily manipulated. I -
With slightly less respect Headnun I have watched the 1 hour video - he said what he said and he did what he did. And his faux-wink wink “no violence people” fools no one but fools. Are you a fool? the bbc told the truth - and it’s a straight up lie to say otherwise. Did they edit and cut to the chase to make a point? Absolutely and correctly he was not edited to say things he didn’t say I cannot believe you watched the entire video and are trying to say the bbc edit somehow misrepresented what he said and Back in the real world - did the nutters who showed up at the white house materialise because of a bbc edit ffs - have some self respect and recognise what’s going on -
Friends and family in the 'States always say how wonderful it is to be in Britain and see our news coverage. It's all partisan out there. The BBC manages to simultaneously p off the left and the right so must be doing something right. -
From the BBC: "The conclusion of that deliberation is that we accept that the way the speech was edited did give the impression of a direct call for violent action. The BBC would like to apologise for that error of judgement." What is wrong is editing someone to make him say something they didn't. With respect Sephiroth, this is something I know a bit about and I have encountered, over the last decade, people in programming editing contributors to make them say things they didn't, the end point being to hang them out to dry. It's happening more and more and it's my job to make sure that people on TV are not mis-represented, but shown in their true light so that viewers can make up their own minds. You have no idea what goes on behind the scenes and how hard some us fight to keep things impartial. It's also worth mentioning that I have personally lost work because of Trump suing US networks, and that's one of the lesser reasons why I'd like to see him gone. But broadcasters have a moral obligation to tell the truth and that's the hill that most decent professionals in the industry are willing to die on. Otherwise, how can the viewing public trust anything that's beamed into their living rooms?
-
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.