Bbc : Biased Broadcasting Corporation

[Chekhov]

The positive news item (below) on Covid has still not appeared on the BBC News website, or if it has it is very effectively hidden.

The BBC is an organisation which, on the 8 Nov 21) had a story about a footballer with Long Covid on its front page (technically a link - with a picture - from the news home page to it), but on the same day, did not mention Amanda Pritchard's infamous reported inaccuracy about exaggerated Covid admissions to hospital.

 

(12 Jul 23) Ahh, what a surprise (not)......

Even for those who get Long Covid (and that's those who actually get it, which turned out to be far fewer than they originally said) it usually goes within a year :

 

Long Covid symptoms ease for most within a year, new research finds
Ongoing fatigue, loss of smell, weakness and trouble breathing can be scary and debilitating following Covid. A new study suggests most people do get better.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/long-covid-symptoms-ease-year-new-research-finds-rcna65151

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/380/bmj-2022-072529

Edited January 27, 2023 by Chekhov

[RJRB]

@Chekhov

I believe the definition of Long Covid applies to those still experiencing some symptoms from mild to acute after 12 weeks so to say that for most it usually goes after 12 months is hardly surprising.

A minority apparently suffer this as a minority suffer side effects from having been vaccinated.

If you Google”BBC Long Covid”you will find plenty of reports,some of which you might even agree with.

Your constant MO is to start with a conclusion and then pursue it to an extreme level.

Audi drivers,Lefty voters,etc.

[Chekhov]

On 27/01/2023 at 15:51, RJRB said:

@Chekhov

I believe the definition of Long Covid applies to those still experiencing some symptoms from mild to acute after 12 weeks so to say that for most it usually goes after 12 months is hardly surprising.

A minority apparently suffer this as a minority suffer side effects from having been vaccinated.

If you Google”BBC Long Covid”you will find plenty of reports,some of which you might even agree with.

Your constant MO is to start with a conclusion and then pursue it to an extreme level.

Audi drivers,Lefty voters,etc.

I am simply putting on yet more proof for those who dispute my contention the BBC is biased. It has an agenda which it pushes, as much by omission as anything else.

[RJRB]

3 hours ago, Chekhov said:

I am simply putting on yet more proof for those who dispute my contention the BBC is biased. It has an agenda which it pushes, as much by omission as anything else.

I suppose by that definition everything is biased in that not every viewpoint can be represented as one would like it according to ones own leanings.

So my contention would be that the BBC news services gives as good a representation as any available.

 

[A.B.Yaffle]

I'm surprised so many people think the bbc aren't biased! When I last watched the bbc a few years ago they were clearly biased. That's why I cancelled my tv license. Do you all realise that you don't need a license if you only watch catch up or on demand (ie itv hub, all 4 etc)?

 

[ECCOnoob]

11 hours ago, A.B.Yaffle said:

I'm surprised so many people think the bbc aren't biased! When I last watched the bbc a few years ago they were clearly biased. That's why I cancelled my tv license. Do you all realise that you don't need a license if you only watch catch up or on demand (ie itv hub, all 4 etc)?

 

In my opinion, the fact that there is nearly  always someone screaming BBC bias - no matter what side of the fence they're on - demonstrates they are getting it about right.

 

It's a fabulous juxtaposition when the BBC gets criticised for being nothing more than the "Tory government mouthpiece" at the same time as being criticised for being too controlled by "a load of lefty liberal woke non-binary vegan Islington types".  

 

I think most people do know that you do not need a licence for on demand. But most people still watch a lot of broadcast television. Lots of people still like to have live news. They have sports subscriptions and like to watch live matches. They like the access of being able to watch big national events broadcast. Every season we have the Twitterati going mad for the latest gossip on Love Island wetting themselves in anticipation for the next linear broadcast episode. We have the cheesiest and tackiest of live entertainment shows still drawing in millions of viewers each and every week. 

 

All of that, irrelevant of the channel or network still requires a tv licence which people are seemingly still prepared to pay.

 

I see lots of arguments regarding scrapping the so called "BBC licence" but are people so naive to think that the government will simply end it there. So, let's say the TV licence gets dropped. But how long will it be before something else takes its place.  Internet licence? Government communications levy?  Broadcast signals tax?

 

Somehow they would have to find a way cos the infrastructure wouldn't just go away and would still need to be paid for.  

 

People need to be careful what they wish for.  There is already many examples of countries which still force some sort of communications licence and yet their state broadcasters are filled with  adverts, product placement and commercial interference that most of our BBC channels escape from.

Edited January 31, 2023 by ECCOnoob

[El Cid]

On 31/01/2023 at 09:35, A.B.Yaffle said:

That's why I cancelled my tv license. Do you all realise that you don't need a license if you only watch catch up or on demand (ie itv hub, all 4 etc)?

So you were watching TV and paying the licence fee, when you could do it for free?

Things will change in the future, but getting TV via the aerial is all too easy.

The BBC attempts to be neutral. Just watch local TV, Talk TV and is got more Conservative political pundits than any other.

Nadine Doris was interviewing Boris Johnson yesterday, Johnson picked a friendly face to ask him questions. That would not happen on the BBC. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if it were illegal for two MPs to make a TV program.

 

Wouldn't they normally call that a 'party political broadcast'?

[Chekhov]

18 hours ago, ECCOnoob said:

In my opinion, the fact that there is nearly  always someone screaming BBC bias - no matter what side of the fence they're on - demonstrates they are getting it about right.

It's a fabulous juxtaposition when the BBC gets criticised for being nothing more than the "Tory government mouthpiece" at the same time as being criticised for being too controlled by "a load of lefty liberal woke non-binary vegan Islington types".  

I cannot remember when I last heard anyone saying that the BBC was a "Tory government mouthpiece".

But, be that as it may, I am not saying they are biased in favour of a particular party, but they are most definitely biased in favour of woke PC stuff, there is no doubt about that whatsoever. And there is even less argument about their bias over Covid, the articles I linked to (and many others) prove that absolutely. They were fully paid up members of the "general Covid suppression (by suppressing society) is the only alternative", they had far fewer stories about the pain that suppression was causing and the fact many many people did not want it. It was that more than anything that lost them my support.

Edited February 1, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

4 hours ago, El Cid said:

Nadine Doris was interviewing Boris Johnson yesterday, Johnson picked a friendly face to ask him questions. That would not happen on the BBC.

It happened loads during Covid, They let "experts" (and non experts come) to that, spout unproven cobblers and never picked them up on it.

 

Classic example :

 

I can remember hearing an interview on R4's Today (my old car only got FM so I had to listen to the Beeb when in there...) where a French politician from Macron's ruling party was being asked about vaccine passports. She said "we need them to protect people if, for example, they are visiting a museum".

The BBC interviewer just accepted that and never asked her any questions, such as how do vaccine passports protect people if the vaccines do not actually stop transmission of Covid ? Nor did she ask her why vaccinated people should be concerned about catching Covid if the vaccines work ? Which, by definition, you must think or you would not have introduced vaccine passports. etc etc  

It was absolutely pathetic and I was shouting at the radio.....

[Zinger549]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

It happened loads during Covid, They let "experts" (and non experts come) to that, spout unproven cobblers and never picked them up on it.

 

Classic example :

 

I can remember hearing an interview on R4's Today (my old car only got FM so I had to listen to the Beeb when in there...) where a French politician from Macron's ruling party was being asked about vaccine passports. She said "we need them to protect people if, for example, they are visiting a museum".

The BBC interviewer just accepted that and never asked her any questions, such as how do vaccine passports protect people if the vaccines do not actually stop transmission of Covid ? Nor did she ask her why vaccinated people should be concerned about catching Covid if the vaccines work ? Which, by definition, you must think or you would not have introduced vaccine passports. etc etc  

It was absolutely pathetic and I was shouting at the radio.....

There are lots of commercial stations on FM