-
-
Latest Discussions
-
-
Counterpoint: there was zero misrepresentation of truth never mind the bbc or the uk (for now)- his own country and government impeached him for trying to overturn an election. What happened was unforgivable. Trump adding a few “non violent”’ legally wise words absolves him of nothing but back to bbc and uk. They were correct and now we have Trump threatening to sue for a billion have English people lost all self-respect (that question was answers 9 years ago and is repeated almost daily) -
By beansprout · Posted
Point is.. top two have quit.. BBC is now what? From being well respected world wide.. not only for news, programs, no idea about pod casts.. Only thing we as a country do well currently is broadcast remembrance service…. Lets face it.. only country that I know of who can release wrong people from jail.. one gave himself up if news is to believed and the other is where? Only country I know of who actually pay people to leave, flights etc and they are back in country .. all heard via Radio 4… -
It doesn't matter what channel it was on, how pernicious the subject is and when it happened. Mis-representing the truth in broadcast is not only morally wrong, it's against the OFCOM code of ethics. Everyone in the industry is trained in how not to do it, most are made to take the BBC's own 'Safeguarding the Trust' course, even if they aren't making BBC programmes. There wasn't much fuss at the time, because no one knew about it. "Unless you hate Britain, hate liberals, hate the BBC, want a divided country, support the most powerful person in the world despite his many failings". What the programme makers personally think or feel should never affect how they tell a story; to do so is deeply unprofessional and a sackable offence. It's the job of the BBC and of all programming to inform viewers of the facts and let them make up their own minds. Even in campaigning documentaries.
-
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.