The bbc, again.

[Spindle]

Watch it, check the claims from other sources, then decide for yourself.

I've no doubts that you were equally supportive of that Trump targeted Panorama which has just been found guilty. The sad thing is It's self fulfilling because it made you dislike Trump even more, this having you believe all of the anti Trump shite that gets pumped out.

So gullible

 

[Spindle]

Ofcom found against the BBC and they have admitted their culpability but it's still not enough. What does it take?
Face it - they mugged you off as usual.

He'll blame it on AI or something

 

[Spiderman]

Watch last night’s Panorama.

You might change your mind because there are things going on that threaten all of us.

Even the most indoctrinated MAGA devotee is being shafted.

You dismiss it as drivel if you want to stay in your self righteous bubble.

You never learn do you 😂 “ things going on” do you mean like Trumps speech? Oh wait, didn’t happen

 

[georgenorman]

He'll blame it on AI or something

Brexit most likely.

 

[georgenorman]

Complain to the BBC.

 

[Badger11]

Has the BBC's Veritas unit spoken up to deny or confirm the allegations? It's why they were setup.

I mean what's the point of them if they stay silent on this whilst mouthing off about climate change or the ethnicity of the last violent criminal.

 

[McAhuna]

Untrue. They were fooled by paedophiles for decades, along with many others. Including the right’s favourite sweetheart, Margaret Thatcher.

They were different days. Looking back now the warning signs are only too evident, but then wasn’t now. Excuses were made by many for what would now be instantly condemned as inappropriate behaviour.

Being a nonce was practically part of the job description at the Beeb. It still is. Hugh Edwards ring any bells?

They weren't 'fooled'. At best they chose to ignore it. At worst, they facilitated it.
Careful you don't find yourself doing the same thing in your rush to exonerate and excuse the guilty.

 

[McAhuna]

And here we have it

Yep, behind the façade of respectability lies a morality cess-pit (a bit like the BBC itself).

Lies and deceit are acceptable if the victim deserves it.

 

[McAhuna]

Has the BBC's Veritas unit spoken up to deny or confirm the allegations? It's why they were setup.

I mean what's the point of them if they stay silent on this whilst mouthing off about climate change or the ethnicity of the last violent criminal.

Good Point.
What about their own 'Misinformation' Fuhrer? The one who lied on her CV to get the job - Marianna Spring.
She should be all over this.

 

[Badger11]

The current scandal is just being manufactured by the Tories.

So nothing to do with the Cross Party Parliamentary committee that has demanded answers from the BBC on why it has happened and why an internal report that identified it has been sat on by the BBC.

Nah, just blame Farage and the Tories.

 

[ASCPFC]

Has the BBC's Veritas unit spoken up to deny or confirm the allegations? It's why they were setup.

I mean what's the point of them if they stay silent on this whilst mouthing off about climate change or the ethnicity of the last violent criminal.

They're just there to get paid off. Usually because they're not employable in industry and they're someone's mate/ family.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

I've no doubts that you were equally supportive of that Trump targeted Panorama which has just been found guilty. The sad thing is It's self fulfilling because it made you dislike Trump even more, this having you believe all of the anti Trump shite that gets pumped out.

So gullible

Firstly, it wasn’t a “Trump targeted Panorama”! It was an analysis of the run up to the riot at the Capitol and what contributed to it.

No one in their right mind could possibly suggest that Trump’s attitude, claims and behaviour didn’t play a role in that. Indeed, if he had accepted, as he should, the result of a democratic vote none of it would have happened. So it is perfectly legitimate to examine how responsible he was. In my view he was the primary cause and him subsequently pardoning those convicted only strengthens that view.

The specific question of whether the editing of this particular analysis, which is but one of hundreds, was fair and reasonable is little more than a sideshow to the main event.

That though won’t stop Trump trying to claim, yet again, he is the victim of a “witch hunt” which shamefully will be supported by those on the right in the UK who take joy at every opportunity to take aim at our treasured national broadcaster.

Anyone who believes that the criticism of Trump is shite is either totally deluded or has been asleep for many years. The man is a dangerous psychopath. It’s time everyone accepted that. He needs care. Not support.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Untrue. They were fooled by paedophiles for decades, along with many others. Including the right’s favourite sweetheart, Margaret Thatcher.

They were different days. Looking back now the warning signs are only too evident, but then wasn’t now. Excuses were made by many for what would now be instantly condemned as inappropriate behaviour.

The BBC held two enquiries into Savile's behaviour in the early 70s and he was banned from the studio when Children in Need was being filmed. They knew well enough what he was up to and protected him because he was regarded as an asset.

 

[McAhuna]

The current scandal is just being manufactured by the Tories.

So nothing to do with the Cross Party Parliamentary committee that has demanded answers from the BBC on why it has happened and why an internal report that identified it has been sat on by the BBC.

Nah, just blame Farage and the Tories.

Don't forget the Russians.
I am sure they must have had something to do with it.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Ofcom found against the BBC and they have admitted their culpability but it's still not enough. What does it take?
Face it - they mugged you off as usual.

Of course they didn’t. They accepted the criticism. I can see why they did but that doesn’t mean I don’t think the programme made any valuable points.

The BBC are held to much higher standards than almost any other programme makers. If the same standards were applied to the political videos available on YouTube, and elsewhere, there wouldn’t be much content.

 

[McAhuna]

Firstly, it wasn’t a “Trump targeted Panorama”! It was an analysis of the run up to the riot at the Capitol and what contributed to it.

No one in their right mind could possibly suggest that Trump’s attitude, claims and behaviour didn’t play a role in that. Indeed, if he had accepted, as he should, the result of a democratic vote none of it would have happened. So it is perfectly legitimate to examine how responsible he was. In my view he was the primary cause and him subsequently pardoning those convicted only strengthens that view.

The specific question of whether the editing of this particular analysis, which is but one of hundreds, was fair and reasonable is little more than a sideshow to the main event.

That though won’t stop Trump trying to claim, yet again, he is the victim of a “witch hunt” which shamefully will be supported by those on the right in the UK who take joy at every opportunity to take aim at our treasured national broadcaster.

Anyone who believes that the criticism of Trump is shite is either totally deluded or has been asleep for many years. The man is a dangerous psychopath. It’s time everyone accepted that. He needs care. Not support.

What are you gaslighting on about?

Trumps character, good or bad, is irrelevant.

This is about the fact that our state broadcaster is a fraud.
You don't start a fraud investigation by saying the victim probably deserved it because I don't like him.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Firstly, it wasn’t a “Trump targeted Panorama”! It was an analysis of the run up to the riot at the Capitol and what contributed to it.

No one in their right mind could possibly suggest that Trump’s attitude, claims and behaviour didn’t play a role in that. Indeed, if he had accepted, as he should, the result of a democratic vote none of it would have happened. So it is perfectly legitimate to examine how responsible he was. In my view he was the primary cause and him subsequently pardoning those convicted only strengthens that view.

The specific question of whether the editing of this particular analysis, which is but one of hundreds, was fair and reasonable is little more than a sideshow to the main event.

That though won’t stop Trump trying to claim, yet again, he is the victim of a “witch hunt” which shamefully will be supported by those on the right in the UK who take joy at every opportunity to take aim at our treasured national broadcaster.

Anyone who believes that the criticism of Trump is shite is either totally deluded or has been asleep for many years. The man is a dangerous psychopath. It’s time everyone accepted that. He needs care. Not support.

For someone so concerned with the dangers of misinformation this is a remarkably laissez faire attitude to an actual example. Our treasured national broadcaster lied.

 

[Wisbech Eagle]

Name us one presidential candidate for either the Reps or Dems who didn't have mega rich backers.

Go on.

The biggest weakness of the US system is the cost of campaigning, so yes funds must be raised.

Most though come from a slate of backers. Not from just one mega rich libertarian who wants to bring down the entire system. Someone who has stealthily placed his man into becoming VP at a time when it looks increasingly likely he will either take over through death or sickness, or be the next nominee. That’s dangerous.

 

[McAhuna]

Firstly, it wasn’t a “Trump targeted Panorama”! It was an analysis of the run up to the riot at the Capitol and what contributed to it.

No one in their right mind could possibly suggest that Trump’s attitude, claims and behaviour didn’t play a role in that. Indeed, if he had accepted, as he should, the result of a democratic vote none of it would have happened. So it is perfectly legitimate to examine how responsible he was. In my view he was the primary cause and him subsequently pardoning those convicted only strengthens that view.

The specific question of whether the editing of this particular analysis, which is but one of hundreds, was fair and reasonable is little more than a sideshow to the main event.

That though won’t stop Trump trying to claim, yet again, he is the victim of a “witch hunt” which shamefully will be supported by those on the right in the UK who take joy at every opportunity to take aim at our treasured national broadcaster.

Anyone who believes that the criticism of Trump is shite is either totally deluded or has been asleep for many years. The man is a dangerous psychopath. It’s time everyone accepted that. He needs care. Not support.

The line 'our treasured national broadcaster' inclines me to believe you are actually a troll.

No-on is that naïve.

Either a brilliant troll, or an absolute half-wit. I'm leaning towards the former option.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

Of course they didn’t. They accepted the criticism. I can see why they did but that doesn’t mean I don’t think the programme made any valuable points.

The BBC are held to much higher standards than almost any other programme makers. If the same standards were applied to the political videos available on YouTube, and elsewhere, there wouldn’t be much content.

Dress it up how you like but they doctored a speech to change the meaning.
YouTube isn't a treasured national broadcaster that we're forced to pay for.