Duh
-
What's with all the 1 votes? The BBC's own internal investigation revealed this, and it's not terribly surprising. Frankly I think it's honorable of the BBC to admit this. Maybe they can work on being a bit more balanced now. Granted being a Yank I don't know much about the BBC's internal affairs or political affiliations and maybe it's a disgruntled conservative employee behind the report but an opportunity for little self-examination is never a bad thing..
Patrick Sears wrote:
What's with all the 1 votes?
Leftists hate it when I'm right, so all of my posts are riddled with 1-votes.
-
What's with all the 1 votes? The BBC's own internal investigation revealed this, and it's not terribly surprising. Frankly I think it's honorable of the BBC to admit this. Maybe they can work on being a bit more balanced now. Granted being a Yank I don't know much about the BBC's internal affairs or political affiliations and maybe it's a disgruntled conservative employee behind the report but an opportunity for little self-examination is never a bad thing..
-
I do think Red gets a lot of 1's just because it's him. I've been getting some of it myself. I just wish people who vote down would post WHY.
______________________ stuff + cats = awesome
leckey wrote:
I just wish people who vote down would post WHY.
I vote you 1's because I don't like when you insinuate that women shouldn't be subservient to men. The very thought of that twists my stomach.
-
Patrick Sears wrote:
What's with all the 1 votes?
Leftists hate it when I'm right, so all of my posts are riddled with 1-votes.
We should establish a "Leftist disgruntlement index" based on the number of 1 votes you receive over a given time period.
-
What's with all the 1 votes? The BBC's own internal investigation revealed this, and it's not terribly surprising. Frankly I think it's honorable of the BBC to admit this. Maybe they can work on being a bit more balanced now. Granted being a Yank I don't know much about the BBC's internal affairs or political affiliations and maybe it's a disgruntled conservative employee behind the report but an opportunity for little self-examination is never a bad thing..
Honourable will be when they release the Balen report (covers their egregious middle east reporting and has been denied a freedom of information act request where the BBC spent £300,000 of public money protecting itself), this is a slight of hand intended so that people will congratulate them on their honesty while they carry on as usual.
Patrick Sears wrote:
being a Yank I don't know much about the BBC's internal affairs
They had an image of George Bush with a Hitler moustache drawn on him in the news room and are more partial than Al Jazeera english in their ME coverage, if that helps you put them in the right ball park. They are soft left through and through (communists by US standards :) ), with long term institutional links to commercial left wing media.
Patrick Sears wrote:
maybe it's a disgruntled conservative employee
Nope, the people behind are impeccably liberal BBC establishment, hence the glaring omissions.
-
The BBC has failed to promote proper debate on major political issues because
of the inherent liberal culture of its staff, a report commissioned by the
corporation has concluded.The report claims that coverage of single-issue political causes, such as climate
change and poverty, can be biased - and is particularly critical of Live 8
coverage, which it says amounted to endorsement.And a part I found interesting (but equally obvious):
It reads: “There is a tendency to 'group think’ with too many staff inhabiting
a shared space and comfort zone.”A staff impartiality seminar held last year is also documented in the report, at
which executives admitted they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown
away but not the Koran, in case Muslims were offended.Red Stateler wrote:
at which executives admitted they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown away but not the Koran, in case Muslims were offended.
I would like to know if the executives themselves are Christians or Atheists and if they believe Christians in general take offence to these types of actions.
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
-
Red Stateler wrote:
at which executives admitted they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown away but not the Koran, in case Muslims were offended.
I would like to know if the executives themselves are Christians or Atheists and if they believe Christians in general take offence to these types of actions.
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
-
We should establish a "Leftist disgruntlement index" based on the number of 1 votes you receive over a given time period.
It would be interesting to see if it's a leading indicator of world events. Like maybe it peaked right before Sarzosky was elected. Maybe we could make money gambling with it.
-
A.A. wrote:
take offence to these types of actions.
Taking offense is to be expected - thats human nature. It's the violent reactions that have to stop if Islam wants to move forward.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Taking offense is to be expected
But the BBC's willingness to disparage one religion over another in order to advance its own agenda should not be expected.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
at which executives admitted they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown away but not the Koran, in case Muslims were offended.
I would like to know if the executives themselves are Christians or Atheists and if they believe Christians in general take offence to these types of actions.
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
Offence isn't the issue, its a combination of fearing the members of your faiths famed tendency to commit acts of savage violence at the slightest provocation (at least once sufficiently manipulated into a frenzy Danish cartoon style), along with the liberal fear of being considered racist or reactionary in any way - an anathema in the circles they move in. The beeb had very recently aired Jerry Springer the Opera, which was very much opposed by a number of evangelicals (I doubt the C of E gave a toss). They did the right thing and went ahead with it anyway.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
at which executives admitted they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown away but not the Koran, in case Muslims were offended.
I would like to know if the executives themselves are Christians or Atheists and if they believe Christians in general take offence to these types of actions.
Who is the creator? Finding Allah (Video) Surah Al-An'aam (Ayah 74-110)
A.A. wrote:
I would like to know if the executives themselves are Christians or Atheists and if they believe Christians in general take offence to these types of actions.
I'm willing to bet they're either atheists or at a minimum secular humanist leftists. It's their goal to bring down Christianity because it is dominant. In this case the enemy (Islam) of their enemy (Christianity) is their friend.
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Taking offense is to be expected
But the BBC's willingness to disparage one religion over another in order to advance its own agenda should not be expected.
-
Offence isn't the issue, its a combination of fearing the members of your faiths famed tendency to commit acts of savage violence at the slightest provocation (at least once sufficiently manipulated into a frenzy Danish cartoon style), along with the liberal fear of being considered racist or reactionary in any way - an anathema in the circles they move in. The beeb had very recently aired Jerry Springer the Opera, which was very much opposed by a number of evangelicals (I doubt the C of E gave a toss). They did the right thing and went ahead with it anyway.
Given the BBC actively takes a generally pro-Islamic and anti-Christian bias, it seems their position on offending religions is less based in fear of reprisal than an inherent bias.
-
Red Stateler wrote:
But the BBC's willingness to disparage one religion over another in order to advance its own agenda should not be expected.
Nope, I've long held that the BBC is just as biased (in their news coverage) as everyone else.
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Nope, I've long held that the BBC is just as biased (in their news coverage) as everyone else.
I think it's obvious that they're just a tad more biased.
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Nope, I've long held that the BBC is just as biased (in their news coverage) as everyone else.
I think it's obvious that they're just a tad more biased.
-
Given the BBC actively takes a generally pro-Islamic and anti-Christian bias, it seems their position on offending religions is less based in fear of reprisal than an inherent bias.
I think its more to do with anti Americanism and support for Palestine than anything else, at least that's what the British left who are highly critical of Islamism think (there are quite a few, just not at the BBC..).
-
The BBC has failed to promote proper debate on major political issues because
of the inherent liberal culture of its staff, a report commissioned by the
corporation has concluded.The report claims that coverage of single-issue political causes, such as climate
change and poverty, can be biased - and is particularly critical of Live 8
coverage, which it says amounted to endorsement.And a part I found interesting (but equally obvious):
It reads: “There is a tendency to 'group think’ with too many staff inhabiting
a shared space and comfort zone.”A staff impartiality seminar held last year is also documented in the report, at
which executives admitted they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown
away but not the Koran, in case Muslims were offended.You posted FACTS. 5 from me.
-
The BBC has failed to promote proper debate on major political issues because
of the inherent liberal culture of its staff, a report commissioned by the
corporation has concluded.The report claims that coverage of single-issue political causes, such as climate
change and poverty, can be biased - and is particularly critical of Live 8
coverage, which it says amounted to endorsement.And a part I found interesting (but equally obvious):
It reads: “There is a tendency to 'group think’ with too many staff inhabiting
a shared space and comfort zone.”A staff impartiality seminar held last year is also documented in the report, at
which executives admitted they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown
away but not the Koran, in case Muslims were offended. -
The BBC has failed to promote proper debate on major political issues because
of the inherent liberal culture of its staff, a report commissioned by the
corporation has concluded.The report claims that coverage of single-issue political causes, such as climate
change and poverty, can be biased - and is particularly critical of Live 8
coverage, which it says amounted to endorsement.And a part I found interesting (but equally obvious):
It reads: “There is a tendency to 'group think’ with too many staff inhabiting
a shared space and comfort zone.”A staff impartiality seminar held last year is also documented in the report, at
which executives admitted they would broadcast images of the Bible being thrown
away but not the Koran, in case Muslims were offended.We were leaked much of this report ages ago. The BBC is biased all over the place, generally as has been said a slight left turn but much more in specific areas. Individual programmes have at times been nobbled by special interest groups. For example the Today programme, which is the BBCs premier serious news Radio programme every weekday morning was for years completely subject to the whims of a private gentlemans club which used to meet several nights a week with the editors and decide the agenda for the next day or 2. Edward Heath, who was involved, boasted about it when he got too old to care. At the other end of the spectrum Newsnight a BBC2 evening news programe helped to bring down John Major's government, biased certainly but that was a 'public service' if ever I saw one.:laugh:
Nothing is exactly what it seems but everything with seems can be unpicked.
-
Given the BBC actively takes a generally pro-Islamic and anti-Christian bias, it seems their position on offending religions is less based in fear of reprisal than an inherent bias.