Bbc : Biased Broadcasting Corporation

[top4718]

1 minute ago, Delayed said:

You have said on numerous threads that MSM can't be trusted and you describe the BBC as MSM. You've dismissed everything from Chris Whitty so I'm using your logic.

 

Whitty and Van Tam gave briefings which were broadcast by the BBC. By your logic we can dismiss them both because the BBC reported it

Have you actually read this thread or just jumping on individual comments. For the record Whitty blatantly lied about transmission after the vaccine.

[Prettytom]

Just now, The_DADDY said:

In my defence I only saw you ask 7 times but I've not read every posts. 😁

At least you sort of answered.

 

That’s a bit of progress.

[The_DADDY]

2 minutes ago, butlers said:

If you go look thru that Facebook link, what a fetid swamp he swims in.

 

Hmmmm, no one in 'my swamp' covered for nonces for decades though .

1 minute ago, Prettytom said:

At least you sort of answered.

 

That’s a bit of progress.

From tiny acorns and all that 🤣

[Delayed]

Just now, top4718 said:

Have you actually read this thread or just jumping on individual comments. For the record Whitty blatantly lied about transmission after the vaccine.

I read this and the covid thread abd everything I've said is true. 

 

Anything else that he has apparently lied about or are you just dismissing everything he says?

 

Why can we ignore Van Tam?

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Prettytom said:

Nine times I asked.

 

I have the patience of Saint Emilion.

Is that something to do with day drinking?

[Prettytom]

1 minute ago, The_DADDY said:

 

From tiny acorns and all that 🤣

Acorns aren’t real.

 

Oak trees are actually alien invaders.

 

All this suggestion that an acorn can turn into an oak tree is mumbo jumbo promoted by the msm to deflect attention from their woody paymasters.
 

Don’t  fall for it.

2 minutes ago, Hecate said:

Is that something to do with day drinking?

The best kind.

[Guest]

58 minutes ago, Anna B said:

Not reporting something (important) is also a form of bias. ...

Slight tangent: Read the coverage of Hadley Freeman's blistering resignation letter.  She  left the Guardian this month after 22 years.  Was in the last Private Eye.
 

Quote

 

In recent years, Freeman reminds Viner, "I have repeatedly suggested to multiple section editors" that they commission an investigation into the trans children's charity Mermaids. "But to no avail, either because of the editors' ideological beliefs or – more likely – their fear of the reaction in the office."

 

Mermaids is now being investigated by the Charity Commission. "It is astonishing to me," the departing hack tells her editor, "that the progressive media has handed such an own goal to the right, closing its eyes to concerns about the safeguarding out of fear that to do otherwise would lead to accusations of bigotry. You have said that both sides in the gender debate are equally passionate – but only one side demands censorship. It seems to me that at the Guardian that side has won."

 

It's only relatively recently that the paper has made tentative steps towards actually covering Mermaids, GIDS and surrounding issues with much other than a nodding dog level of unquestioning acceptance.

[Tyke02]

28 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Sorry, just to clarify, you appear to be saying that if that did happen it was an unacceptably biased interview ?

Therefore, to me,  if nobody else (who knows it did occur as stated) Tyke02 admitting the Beeb - certainly that interview - are biased is worth at least something !

"Just to clarify" LOL

 

You really are an expert in reading what wasn't said into what others have written.  Perhaps that's why when you say X happened and proves Y I always want to verify what was said and in what context before reaching any judgement.

 

Have I not been clear on attitude to the BBC?  I do not automatically assume the accuracy of anything based on the source, as everyone has different prior experiences that affect their beliefs, and also reporters can misunderstand things or be hoodwinked.  What matters to me in each case is the logic of what is being put forward and the evidence that is cited. 

33 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

They were broadcast by the Beeb with no, or very little, adverse comment from the (so called) journalists.

I remember JHB asking some questions at those briefings, so you seem to be tarring her with the same brush as all the others.  

[Guest]

And just to add: now I know why Adrian Chiles still manages to have his god-awful mundane inanities published.

[Tyke02]

38 minutes ago, top4718 said:

For the record Whitty blatantly lied about transmission after the vaccine.

Last time you said this I gave you chapter and verse on when he said it and the evidence from the vaccine rollout showing what level of reduction in transmission vaccines offered at that time with the then current variant.