Bbc : Biased Broadcasting Corporation

[spilldig]

10 hours ago, RJRB said:

We will have to agree to disagree.

Actually I do like the snooker ,so no problem there.

If it’s not interesting viewing on the BBC channels then I have plenty to catch up on from recordings on other channels....which means that I don’t have to sit through 10 minutes of adverts per hour.

I don’t agree that the news has  a left wing bias at all and as for ensuing debate and current affairs all sides are represented.

I watch no day time TV whatsoever but generally have Radio 4 ,4 extra or 5 playing in the background if in the house or car.

Plenty of bits and pieces of interest that I would not come across from any other source.

And what does it all cost...less than £4 a week

It doesn't matter if it's less than 4 pence per week. The point is you have to pay it to be able to watch independant channels.

[RJRB]

That’s life.

You have to pay for road  surfacing  even if you don’t own a car.

[zach]

10 minutes ago, RJRB said:

That’s life.

You have to pay for road  surfacing  even if you don’t own a car.

You're comparing an entertainment company to a countries transport infrastructure? You may not own a car...ever took a taxi or bus? What do they drive on?

 

A strange comparison, but you're entitled to your opinion.

[melthebell]

All this talk of the BBC and Netflix is currently finding things tougher

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61153252

[trastrick]

14 hours ago, RJRB said:

We will have to agree to disagree.

Actually I do like the snooker ,so no problem there.

If it’s not interesting viewing on the BBC channels then I have plenty to catch up on from recordings on other channels....which means that I don’t have to sit through 10 minutes of adverts per hour.

I don’t agree that the news has  a left wing bias at all and as for ensuing debate and current affairs all sides are represented.

I watch no day time TV whatsoever but generally have Radio 4 ,4 extra or 5 playing in the background if in the house or car.

Plenty of bits and pieces of interest that I would not come across from any other source.

And what does it all cost...less than £4 a week

That's a rather a passive to get your news.

 

The government funded news Corporations, BBC, CBC, PBS/NPR, ABC, Tass,  are obviously biased against any political party that seeks to defund them. Their viability, and even survival depends on continuing status quo government funding. They tend to support their political 'friends', it's only human nature.

 

The internet is a good way to find out what all the major influential news organs are saying about the important issues of the day.

 

I find it pays to keep an eye on one's infuential political enemies. Not ignore them.

 

As for programming, with the bottomless pit of taxpayer funding, they distort the market, by their ability to outbid the private companies for the best available resources of celebrities, and production resources, so it's obvious they'll produce something of value to everyone.

Edited April 20, 2022 by trastrick

[trastrick]

Is there a way to cancel an accidental duplicate post?

Edited April 20, 2022 by trastrick

[RJRB]

4 hours ago, zach said:

You're comparing an entertainment company to a countries transport infrastructure? You may not own a car...ever took a taxi or bus? What do they drive on?

 

A strange comparison, but you're entitled to your opinion.

It’s so much more than an entertainment company that is unmatched by any other single communications organisation.

[RJRB]

4 hours ago, zach said:

You're comparing an entertainment company to a countries transport infrastructure? You may not own a car...ever took a taxi or bus? What do they drive on?

 

A strange comparison, but you're entitled to your opinion.

My example was slightly tongue in cheek but is one of many examples of services supported by a form of taxation,that individuals may feel that they do not benefit from.

Anyway I still fervently believe that the BBC is incredible value for money.

@trastrick

I read the Daily Express which rarely confirms or supports any of my beliefs,but that does serve a purpose.

As for gathering news on the internet,this is largely drawn from the original sources of the so called MSM.

i.e it is a variety of opinions rather than news.

[trastrick]

15 minutes ago, RJRB said:

My example was slightly tongue in cheek but is one of many examples of services supported by a form of taxation,that individuals may feel that they do not benefit from.

Anyway I still fervently believe that the BBC is incredible value for money.

@trastrick

I read the Daily Express which rarely confirms or supports any of my beliefs,but that does serve a purpose.

As for gathering news on the internet,this is largely drawn from the original sources of the so called MSM.

i.e it is a variety of opinions rather than news.

Long live "a variety of opinions". 

[S35_2o21]

59 minutes ago, trastrick said:

 

As for programming, with the bottomless pit of taxpayer funding, they distort the market, by their ability to outbid the private companies for the best available resources of celebrities, and production resources, so it's obvious they'll produce something of value to everyone.

It's not a bottomless pit of taxpayer funding. The licence fee is capped by Government. Over the years, the BBC has not been able to outbid rivals for sports contents- e.g. Football, Formula 1 (there are other examples, I'm not a massive follower of sports in general).

 

The BBC has had to cut it's cloth accordingly which may actually enable them to develop programmes from scratch, e.g. Great British Bake Off. 

 

#43

You're comparing an entertainment company to a countries transport infrastructure? You may not own a car...ever took a taxi or bus? What do they drive on?

 

A strange comparison, but you're entitled to your opinion.

 

(Sorry, don't know how to quote from multiple posts). I would argue with the span of content, the BBC is akin to part of the infrastructure.