dosxuk Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 Yes BBC is state sponsored as it is funded by law which is set by the government . You can't deny that which ever way you choose too look at it , You said (my bold) Also BBC is state sponsored , even tho thy wont admit ! I've never been aware of the BBC being afraid or unwilling to admit that they are funded by the Licence Fee. Even to the extent of advertising themselves based on it (remember the "only possible due to the unique way the BBC is funded" campaign?). Hope that's been clear or send me a message So, no, it's not been clear why you claimed that. Or why you use the term "state sponsored" rather than just "state funded". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 They also reported the fact Gadaffi had offered to have elections (Billions of pounds worth of bombs ago),but wasn't accepted by NATO or as far as I,ve seen reported by our main media. Why would they want to keep that quiet ? Sorry I took a while - been really busy. I mentioned RT is biased and anything anti-USA will do for them. I'm no fan of the US of Idiots but that doesn't mean I have to believe any crap anti US media spews out. I'm quite happy to believe Gaffers the murdering cretin offered to hold elections but I really don't believe he was even close to telling the truth. Are there little green men on a moon made of green cheese and would you believe it if RT said so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iuchi_Zien Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Thankfully we don't really have an equivalent here, comparing it to the BBC is ridiculous. It's more like a Russian version of the Fox network in America, except in fact it's probably even worse than that too, at least fox is independently owned, albeit by Rupert 'scum' Murdoch. So that's OK than is it? Provided it is biased and owned by an individual it's OK, if it's biased but owned by a state that is horrendous! Yes I do watch RT, but I am well aware of its anti-US bias and take that bias into consideration. If you can't do that I suggest you, or your friends simply stop watching the news because it is all biased by the beliefs of the person responsible for writing the story! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erebus Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Aljazeera and RT could be said to be bias, but do not confuse that with BEING DIFFERENT. I was shocked at how probing their questions are compared with BBC and Ch 4 news. They ask intelligent questions, and appear to not give a dam, nothing to loose. It cannot last forever! They also provide a different perspective on the same story, and theirs tends to expand the explanation, and one realises how much news does NOT hit our screens. Keiser Report and Cross Talk remind me of discussion programs on TV decades ago. Regarding the global financial condition they are light years ahead, and the stock market meltdown was predictable and only a matter of time, as they explain in more depth how and why things are as they are, and who is pushing the buttons and why. Our broadcasting wraps us up in cotton wool, except for celebrity news, and interviewing crime victims, asking the inane "HOW DO YOU FEEL" questions, pandering to the tabloid shaped news we are thought to be capable of understanding. As for Libya and Gaddafi, our propaganda view is "of the moment" no depth, just reporting on the immediate, pushing and backing up he was a bad guy, simplistic twaddle, fantastic simplicity, almost beyond belief. It’s about the oil not him, especially if you read the UN report which regarded him as a benevolent despot, and why. In fact was regarded as a model, NOT a tyrant, but we need his oil, and he wanted paying in gold bullion, wanted a gold based dinar for Africa. So the people being screwed by banks we saved need to be diverted from the price rises and corporate interests that rule our land. Why is food rising? Speculators....Where did their money come from to speculate, answer YOU, through Quantitative Easing, hence the banks prefer NOT to give to industry / business with crap returns, compared to such investments. Propaganda? well compared to our information through media outlets, one starts to question "Why we are NOT told so much information" our information and questions are patronizing, and without RT and Aljazeera I would never have know what I was missing, as I too sucked up the information as the whole simplistic spoon fed dumbed down information, as that is al there was, and you get used to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That easy Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 RT is a hoot, their interpretation of certain events is funny. I have it on right now and theres been two items on there that have made me laugh. The first was a discussion about the increasing tensions between the UK and Argentina over the Falklands(which I notice RT often refers to as Malvinas); They're making out that the recent tensions are being created by the BRITISH government to distract attention from "political woes at home"!! the British coalition government does indeed have some political woes at home but the tensions over the Falklands are clearly being stoked up by the Argentinian government to distract from their political woes. The second was a discussion about the loyalist protests/riots in northern Ireland over union Jack flag flying, or lack of it, on public buildings. RT suggests that the loyalist protesters are behaving like this because they know they're in trouble, that most people in northern Ireland want to leave the United Kingdom. I do not condone violent riots on the streets and the loyalist rioters are wrong to do this, but to suggest that a majority in northern Ireland want to leave the UK is plainly wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 So that's OK than is it? Provided it is biased and owned by an individual it's OK, if it's biased but owned by a state that is horrendous!No it's not ok but yes that makes it much worse. Individuals can do what they want with their money. States have responsibilities to their people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Who the F cares what Russia thinks of America. Putin is a little goblin former KGB agent who probably has complete control of the media and has rock groups arrested for mocking religion or himself. Who is Russian media to criticize anyone? As for Fox News and Murdoch that's one Brit import we could do without Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 As for Fox News and Murdoch that's one Brit import we could do without Australian import if you don't mind. He's a US citizen now too - so you get to keep him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southcoast Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Love watching RT,its great to get another dimension on the news,especially Syria and the middle east in general,far better than sky or the BBC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Australian import if you don't mind. He's a US citizen now too - so you get to keep him. Lucky USA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.