PPRuNe Forums


Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 29th Jan 2017, 13:39   #61 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: On the beach with a cerveza.
Posts: 1,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by G0ULI View Post
It seems that we are not getting neutral reporting so much as an analysis of the situation as seen by the reporter at the scene. That makes some sort of sense given that facts are usually in short supply in conflict zones. Facts are in short supply in most disputes, so just a way of padding stories to fit with 24 hour news coverage. I would have said reporting, but it isn't any more.

The BBC are by no means the only neutral news organisation to have been affected by this trend.
That is true, but they are the only one funded by taxation.

If Fox news or CNN want to editorialise thats up to them, they are private companies and can do what they like. With the BBC's odd funding arrangement people, quite rightly, get annoyed when the BBC decides to take a particular position which the individual has to fund whether they agree with it or not.
Jet II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 10:13   #62 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bolton ENGLAND
Age: 71
Posts: 705
Jet II................. The BBC does a great job, just need to be left alone to get on with it.

Last edited by Planemike; 30th Jan 2017 at 12:26.
Planemike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 10:34   #63 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Fecknose
Posts: 643
Quote:
The BBC do a great job, just need to be left alone to get on with it.
The BBC overlay their reporting with personal views and opinions, this has got worse since 24 hour news coverage. Either get their act together or find a new sponsor.
engineer(retard) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 10:46   #64 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norway
Age: 61
Posts: 474
Like most children of the early 60's and when we finally got a TV I grew up with the BBC and what a fabulous service it was. Sadly its no longer fit for purpose and the sooner it is privatised the better. It will either change or disappear.
MOSTAFA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 11:09   #65 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 51
Posts: 732
I see the BBC have reinforced their left wing credentials by employing the editor of the Evening Standard (who supported the Tories at the last general election and for London mayor) as editor of the Today programme on Radio 4. She was previously editor of the Sunday Telegraph and consultant editor of the Daily Mail.
Curious Pax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 11:57   #66 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,100
I find this all quite extraordinary!!
One could suppose that there would be a modicum of ability to think for oneself in these threads but there is, instead, an apparent acceptance that because something is published somewhere, in print, or sound or vision, that it has validity and should be allowed to affect our lives, opinions and actions!! What the hell happened to logic, free thinking, assessment, judgement and all those attributes sentient beings supposedly have to make JUDGEMENTS!!! I gave up newspapers 30+ years ago because of the demonstrable lies they peddled. I listen to/watch the Beeb solely because they don't carry the mind-numbing vaccuous crap which passes for advertisements - although they're closely related with their endless programme trails. The 'information' I take in comes from a great many different sources and I sift and ponder through it all to reach a conclusion ... MY opinion, not something foisted on me by self-appointed 'interest' groups or out-of-touch politicos. Just how difficult is it to make judgements without the biassed views of others? Come on, people, the wriggly bits in that dome on top of your shoulders can work quite well ... if you allow it!! and another one
Cornish Jack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 12:07   #67 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Norfolk
Age: 60
Posts: 468
Modern life runs at such a frenetic pace, people think they don't have time to sit down and ponder long form articles. They look at the headline, the four line executive summary and move on thinking they are fully informed. It becomes something of a game trying to pick the gems from the overwhelming quantity of dross that is churned out by the media.
G0ULI is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 12:13   #68 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Here
Posts: 154
Cornish Jack,


I'm not sure what you're ranting against. You say that you don't read the newspapers, and you only appear to listen and watch the BBC under some sort of duress. Of course it is quite understandable that you seek out your own sources of information and make up your own mind and opinions and of course that is to be applauded. But where do you get this information and how do you verify it's veracity? Magazines? the internet? JetBlast?


The BBC, ITV and Channel 4 & 5 for example are Public Service Broadcasters and are required under Ofcom regulations and the BBC trust to provide and undertake a fair and overall balanced news service.


I suspect most citzens of the UK don't have a lot of daily time to gather together numerous sources of news and infomation and collate them together to ruminate on - thats why our PSB broadcasters, which are highly viewed and listened to in the UK, are so tightly run from a news governance perspective on the basis that people must believe what the PSB broadcasters are telling them - that is a fundamental requirement of them, unlike newspapers and magazines.

So what is your rant about, and to who(m?) is it directed?
yellowtriumph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 12:23   #69 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: On the beach with a cerveza.
Posts: 1,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Planemike View Post
Jet II................. The BBC do a great job, just need to be left alone to get on with it.
Surely that is the point, if you are going to fund something out of taxation then it does need oversight to ensure that the Public are being served well -
adding a partisan editorial slant is not fair on those who have been forced to pay to support the edifice yet now see views opposite to theirs being promoted.
Jet II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 12:30   #70 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bolton ENGLAND
Age: 71
Posts: 705
Jet II..... More than happy to pay my license fee for such an excellent service. What do you mean by "partisan editorial slant", I don't understand? No we certainly don't need any "oversight", certainly not from politicians.
Planemike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 13:26   #71 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: On the beach with a cerveza.
Posts: 1,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Planemike View Post
Jet II..... More than happy to pay my license fee for such an excellent service. What do you mean by "partisan editorial slant", I don't understand? No we certainly don't need any "oversight", certainly not from politicians.
Take Climate Change - the BBC (famously) has said that they perceive that the Science is 'settled' and that they see no need to give airtime to alternative views. Now the Science may or may not be settled - but we all know that scientific knowledge evolves over time and to say that you are only going to promote the scientific orthodoxy of the day is a very partisan measure.

So all those taxpayers who are forced fund the BBC who hold different views to the orthodoxy are not having their views represented - that is the fatal flaw with the type of funding arrangement the BBC has. If the BBC were like every other media organisation then they would be free to promote whatever views they want as they wouldn't then be in a position to force individual taxpayers to subsidise such views - it would be voluntarily.

Of course this also applies to other areas - the BBC's support for the EU, their opposition to Trump, their support for the EU stance on importing refugees etc.
Jet II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 13:29   #72 (permalink)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Brighton
Age: 63
Posts: 8,235
Quote:
What do you mean by partisan editorial slant?
Maybe things like this?

David Keighley: BBC declares war on America
ORAC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 13:42   #73 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bolton ENGLAND
Age: 71
Posts: 705
I don't know where this idea comes from that the BBC has some form of political agenda. I feel the BBC is very fair, rounded and objective.

The BBC needs money to provide its excellent service, it has to come from some where. The license fee seems a fair way of raising that money.

Should add, I do not, nor ever have worked for the BBC. Life long listener and viewer. People may have other views but I am proud that Britain has the BBC as a national institution.
Planemike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 13:48   #74 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Fecknose
Posts: 643
Quote:
I don't know where this idea comes from that the BBC has some form of political agenda. I feel the BBC is very fair, rounded and objective.
If the news service was excluded I would agree with you.

http://www.cps.org.uk/publications/r...s-at-the-beeb/
engineer(retard) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 14:36   #75 (permalink)
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Brighton
Age: 63
Posts: 8,235
BBC Bias - In Their Own Words
ORAC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 15:48   #76 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,100
Yellowtriumph
"I suspect most citzens of the UK don't have a lot of daily time to gather together numerous sources of news and infomation and collate them together to ruminate on - thats why our PSB broadcasters, which are highly viewed and listened to in the UK, are so tightly run from a news governance perspective on the basis that people must believe what the PSB broadcasters are telling them."
Were it not for a number of the responses above, I would find it difficult to believe that we were in 'the age of enlightenment' 'Believe nothing of what you read/hear and only half of what you see' - a paraphrase from the distant past which still holds good. Let's just make it nice and simple and forum relevant ... Which news source, in your esrtimation, has ACCURATELY reported ANY aircraft incident in recent memory??? Which news interview, with a politician, has produced a direct answer to any of the questions posed??
Apropos other recent topics about making America grate again, has nobody else read Aesop's tale of the Emperor's new clothes?
Cornish Jack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 22:40   #77 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Norfolk
Age: 60
Posts: 468
The factual reporting is usually okay. It is the theorising about what may have happened that causes problems when it is presented with the same apparent authority as the factual bit. So while we get a report of an aircraft crashing and that the tail has been found some distance away from the rest of the aircraft (fact). We then also get interpretations of data lifted from Flight Radar 24 and experts claiming that it was either metal fatigue or a bomb before anyone has even reached the scene (opinion and interpretation of unverified sources). Then you get the reporting of phone calls claiming responsibility and anonymous YouTube videos that may or may not have any connection with the original incident.

Just another side effect of constant 24 hour news coverage where everyone is demanding and expecting answers within the hour as if it was just another TV drama. As anyone knows real life murders take a team of officers months if not years to clear up. Half a dozen major incidents like that will take you from just out of probation to the end of your career if you work CID. They are never cleared up by a couple of guys wandering about questioning witnesses for a couple of days.
G0ULI is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 30th Jan 2017, 22:55   #78 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Bay area, CA USA
Posts: 111
Except for the loss of Lillibullero played at the top of the hour, the BBC is close to perfect.


Well, except for the "Arts Hour" and the "Food Chain" and some other non-hard news features. And perhaps less football please.
jack11111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st Jan 2017, 11:53   #79 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Clarty Waters, UK
Age: 51
Posts: 742
And ditch Sherlock.
Andy_S is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st Jan 2017, 12:01   #80 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Wild West Yorkshire
Age: 55
Posts: 0
And please stop Panorama from taking 12 months to find a man in Africa who will sell them a pet chimp.
Random SLF is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 11:16.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1