Do you trust the BBC to tell the truth 100% of the time

[spooky3]

Half of the reports I hear are incoherent, they don't even seem to understand the words they use half the time. How they can contradict themselves at times is ridiculous. It seems they just have to open their mouths and say something, no matter what.

 

A lot of interviews seem like interrogations just trying to force the sound bites they want.

 

BUT, I wouldn't just say this of the BBC, all the channels are guilty...

[spooky3]

shouldnt believe ANYTHING you read and see in the media as instant 100% truths

 

If you do a masters then you need something like a minimum of five independent sources of report, preferably some for and some against.

[INTERVIEWER]

BBC IN FREE TV WARNING

 

THE boss of the BBC yesterday warned that free-to-air television might disappear. Director General Mark Thompson said the right technology needed to be found in the “battle for the living room”. He told the Oxford Media Conference high quality free-to-air content faced immediate threats and a “future which is by no means certain”

 

He added: “Unless the broadcasters take an active role in defending it, it could disappear entirely.” But he said that innovations like Freeview, Freesat and the iPlayer had delivered “immense public value” for viewers.

 

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/172776/BBC-in-free-TV-warning/

 

Wow. The Director General of the BBC - an organisation totally committed to preventing 'free to air' television from ever becoming a reality in the UK - misleads the public about the BBC (yet again). The BBC is certainly NOT 'free to air', it costs £145.50 per year to view - as any TV licence fee enforcer will clearly state.

 

Where does Mark Thompson believe his £838,000 salary (excluding expenses) comes from? Thin air? The money tree?

 

Don't trust anything the BBC tell you.

[INTERVIEWER]

Left-wing bias? It's written through the BBC's very DNA, says Peter Sissons

 

For 20 years I was a front man at the BBC, anchoring news and current affairs programmes, so I reckon nobody is better placed than me to answer the question that nags at many of its viewers — is the BBC biased? In my view, ‘bias’ is too blunt a word to describe the subtleties of the pervading culture. The better word is a ‘mindset’. At the core of the BBC, in its very DNA, is a way of thinking that is firmly of the Left.

 

By far the most popular and widely read newspapers at the BBC are The Guardian and The Independent. Producers refer to them routinely for the line to take on running stories, and for inspiration on which items to cover. In the later stages of my career, I lost count of the number of times I asked a producer for a brief on a story, only to be handed a copy of The Guardian and told ‘it’s all in there’.

 

If you want to read one of the few copies of the Daily Mail that find their way into the BBC newsroom, they are difficult to track down, and you would be advised not to make too much of a show of reading them. Wrap them in brown paper or a copy of The Guardian, would be my advice.

 

I am in no doubt that the majority of BBC staff vote for political parties of the Left. But it’s impossible to do anything but guess at the numbers whose beliefs are on the Right or even Centre-Right. This is because the one thing guaranteed to damage your career prospects at the BBC is letting it be known that you are at odds with the prevailing and deep-rooted BBC attitude towards Life, the Universe, and Everything.

 

At any given time there is a BBC line on everything of importance, a line usually adopted in the light of which way its senior echelons believe the political wind is blowing. This line is rarely spelled out explicitly, but percolates subtly throughout the organisation.

 

Whatever the United Nations is associated with is good — it is heresy to question any of its activities. The EU is also a good thing, but not quite as good as the UN. Soaking the rich is good, despite well-founded economic arguments that the more you tax, the less you get. And Government spending is a good thing, although most BBC people prefer to call it investment, in line with New Labour’s terminology.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBCs-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html

 

Yet more evidence that you shouldn't trust the BBC.

[Mecky]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBCs-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html

 

Yet more evidence that you shouldn't trust the BBC.

 

Because the Daily Mail isn't biased is it, just like Blue Murdoch is biased? What is your point?

[INTERVIEWER]

Because the Daily Mail isn't biased is it, just like Blue Murdoch is biased? What is your point?

 

Of course 'The Daily Mail' is biased. But 'The Daily Mail' does not send round goons to bang on my doors and windows, attempting to gain entry whilst threatening me with a court visit. The words attacking the BBC's so-called 'independence' came from a former high ranking BBC News journalist, Peter Sissons. He states that the BBC believes passionately that:

 

"All green and environmental groups are very good things. Al Gore is a saint. George Bush was a bad thing, and thick into the bargain. Obama was not just the Democratic Party’s candidate for the White House, he was the BBC’s. Blair was good, Brown bad, but the BBC has now lost interest in both.

 

Trade unions are mostly good things, especially when they are fighting BBC managers. Quangos are also mostly good, and the reports they produce are usually handled uncritically. The Royal Family is a bore. Islam must not be offended at any price, although Christians are fair game because they do nothing about it if they are offended.

 

What the BBC wants you, the public, to believe is that it has ‘independence’ woven into its fabric, running through its veins and concreted into its foundations. The reality, I discovered, was that for the BBC, independence is not a banner it carries principally on behalf of the listener or viewer.

 

Rather, it is the name it gives to its ability to act at all times in its own best interests."

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBCs-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html

[INTERVIEWER]

Because the Daily Mail isn't biased is it, just like Blue Murdoch is biased? What is your point?

 

My point is this: 'The Daily Mail' does not send round large men to my home, who bang aggressively on my doors and windows whilst demanding entry.

 

'The Daily Mail' does not demand that I give entry to its employee's in order to search my home for copies of 'The Daily Mail' - under threat of a court appearance and large fine.

 

'The Daily Mail' does not send me threatening letters demanding that I purchase a copy of the newspaper.

[steiner]

To answer your question of course I dont trust the BBC they are left wing and even their ex BBC news anchor man Peter scissons said so in his biography.

[dosxuk]

Wow. The Director General of the BBC - an organisation totally committed to preventing 'free to air' television from ever becoming a reality in the UK - misleads the public about the BBC (yet again). The BBC is certainly NOT 'free to air', it costs £145.50 per year to view - as any TV licence fee enforcer will clearly state.

 

All BBC channels are currently free-to-air - they are not encrypted and do not require subscription payments in order to be able to view them. (An encrypted but non-subscription channel is often described as free-to-view).

[Greybeard]

To answer your question of course I dont trust the BBC they are left wing and even their ex BBC news anchor man Peter scissons said so in his biography.

 

You can, if interested, read a rant by Peter Sissons against the left wing bias of the BBC here....published in the Daily Mail

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1349506/Left-wing-bias-Its-written-BBCs-DNA-says-Peter-Sissons.html