The bbc, again.

Stirlingsays said:
The danger is that if Trump isn't satisfied with the end result he'll get his money back via tariffs.

The BBC really fecked up bad.

My prediction is that they will settle and it's going to cost a lot.

The TDS left costing the nation a packet because they can't keep their egos in check.
Click to expand...
If he attempted to be so vindictive as to use State policy to achieve personal retribution I hope we would call it out and stand firm.

It would simply hasten the need to achieve as much independence from the USA as possible. It would make the case for rejoining the EU far better than anything else I can imagine.

The BBC won’t settle. They will defend and argue any case brought in Court. They know Trump has a very weak case, that his lawyers will be telling him that and that he is now very unpopular in the USA. There’s more upside to their reputation in the USA in putting a calm, logical defence to a capricious action than downside.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Of course not. Nor are they.

They didn’t though misquote anyone. Trump said what was quoted. Just not contemptuously with the previous quote. Which changed the meaning of the previous quote, but only if it is considered in isolation. Which in an hour long programme dealing with why so many seemed prepared to give him a second chance isn’t the case. It was not intended to be a factual report on every segment of the speech.

The point being made with the clips from the speech was that Trump approved of the mob marching to the Capitol because he was continuing to spread the lie that the election result was invalid. The phrases in the speech which actually followed the first one broadcast confirm that. Later in the speech he expanded on what he meant by encouraging them to fight.

It could easily be argued that the edit clarified, rather than distorted, the meaning of the speech as a whole. The apology was about the edit not being made clear. Not about the validity of the underlying message.

That underlying message being, of course, nothing to do with a tiny segment taken in isolation but the whole speech set in the context of everything said and done before and after.

Add to that there is no evidence it was even seen in the USA.
Click to expand...
Surely the world renowned BBC World Service, would be shown in the US. Up until 2020 I owned a villa in Florida and one of many TV channels was the BBC News, so I would imagine somewhere in the US it was broadcast. Maybe the anti Trump US news channels showed it
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
It doesn’t. He can only sue for damage caused in the USA. Which as the programme wasn’t broadcasted there is difficult to see. There are suggestions that discussions on social media or views over the internet could have influence in the USA but should that argument be accepted it opens up a huge international can of worms.

In any case he won the election!
Click to expand...
How do you know that?
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
If he attempted to be so vindictive as to use State policy to achieve personal retribution I hope we would call it out and stand firm.

It would simply hasten the need to achieve as much independence from the USA as possible. It would make the case for rejoining the EU far better than anything else I can imagine.

The BBC won’t settle. They will defend and argue any case brought in Court. They know Trump has a very weak case, that his lawyers will be telling him that and that he is now very unpopular in the USA. There’s more upside to their reputation in the USA in putting a calm, logical defence to a capricious action than downside.
Click to expand...
So gain independence from the USA and give it to the EU. So glad you have got over Trump reelection and Brexit ( your words not mine)
 
They should just change their name to Ministry of Truth and have done with it.
 
Some really odd comments from public figures who support the BBC, basically they are saying don't pay Trump taxpayers money as if the BBC has a choice in the matter. There are also comments saying that it's outrageous that Trump is suing as if libelling someone is okay, Trump is perfectly entitled to sue whether he has a case is up to a court to decide not the friends of the BBC.

I would imagine the lawyers would have told the BBC nothing to worry about at the moment the first hurdle Trump faces is getting a US court to accept the case. So I expect the BBC will fight that.

If Trump wins that round then I would imagine the lawyers would be telling the BBC it's serious. Depending on Trump's evidence they might say better to settle like ABC rather than face an embarrassing court case.

I would imagine the idea of settling is the last thing the BBC will want to do but if they don't and then lose and Trump gets his award it could destroy the BBC. So it's a high stakes game and will come down to what can Trump prove.

In the meantime if I was the BBC I would be telling staff to shut up (Yeah Robinson I mean you) as the more they gob off the more ammunition they supply Trump.
 
Badger11 said:
Some really odd comments from public figures who support the BBC, basically they are saying don't pay Trump taxpayers money as if the BBC has a choice in the matter.

I would imagine the lawyers would have told the BBC nothing to worry about at the moment the first hurdle Trump faces is getting a US court to accept the case. So I expect the BBC will fight that.

If Trump wins that round then I would imagine the lawyers would be telling the BBC it's serious. Depending on Trump's evidence they might say better to settle like ABC rather than face an embarrassing court case.

I would imagine the idea of settling is the last thing the BBC will want to do but if they don't and then lose and Trump gets his award it could destroy the BBC. So it's a high stakes game and will come down to what can Trump prove.
Click to expand...
If it passes the first hurdle then trump will be able to ask about all the possible TIC other lies they told. His lawyers will be scouring the archives as we write.
 
Badger11 said:
Some really odd comments from public figures who support the BBC, basically they are saying don't pay Trump taxpayers money as if the BBC has a choice in the matter. There are also comments saying that it's outrageous that Trump is suing as if libelling someone is okay, Trump is perfectly entitled to sue whether he has a case is up to a court to decide not the friends of the BBC.

I would imagine the lawyers would have told the BBC nothing to worry about at the moment the first hurdle Trump faces is getting a US court to accept the case. So I expect the BBC will fight that.

If Trump wins that round then I would imagine the lawyers would be telling the BBC it's serious. Depending on Trump's evidence they might say better to settle like ABC rather than face an embarrassing court case.

I would imagine the idea of settling is the last thing the BBC will want to do but if they don't and then lose and Trump gets his award it could destroy the BBC. So it's a high stakes game and will come down to what can Trump prove.

In the meantime if I was the BBC I would be telling staff to shut up (Yeah Robinson I mean you) as the more they gob off the more ammunition they supply Trump.
Click to expand...
I would imagine they would be telling Trump that as his chances are slim to non existent does he really want all of this revived and the BBC defence splashed all over the US media when he has more than enough poo on him already?

It could finish him.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I would imagine they would be telling Trump that as his chances are slim to non existent does he really want all of this revived and the BBC defence splashed all over the US media when he has more than enough poo on him already?

It could finish him.
Click to expand...
Or the BBC. It would be nice, as a licence fee payer, to see what defence the BBC put up for knowingly putting out a falsified clip
 
cryrst said:
If it passes the first hurdle then trump will be able to ask about all the possible TIC other lies they told. His lawyers will be scouring the archives as we write.
Click to expand...
That is my take on this.

The BBC will use the "Journalism shield" as a defence but if Trump can produce a a history of BBC "mistakes" and better yet anti Trump social media posts he will win. Being a journalist does not mean you cannot be sued if bias can be proved.

As for jurisdiction a lawyer has already said Trump has a decent chance of getting the case heard. It doesn't matter that the Panorama programme wasn't broadcast in the the US. Were clips on social media, where else was it shown in the world? Trump is a global figure so his lawyers will argue that the impact of the BBC "mistake" was global.

In this country courts have accepted cases where nothing has happened on UK soil and I believe the same applies to the US.

If Trump does not get the case heard in the US he can always sue in the UK, where intent is not a prerequisite. As the BBC has already admitted liability he will win. He won't get the compensation he wants but the BBC will have mud on their face.
 
cryrst said:
As separate claims they will be but I note you don’t state there are no more.
Mmm no smoke etc 🤔
Click to expand...
Not true.

Trump will have to show intent to win his case, to do that he will ask the court to look at prior bad acts and I think the court will accept that as a strategy. Whether those prior bad acts are legitimate claims is another matter.

By showing that the BBC time and time again misreported him that shows a pattern and intent this will be the basis of his legal challenge. If he can also show that people at the BBC were regularly posting anti Trump comments on social media then it also proves bias.

All of the above has to be proved but that is what his lawyers will be trying to achieve.
 
Spiderman said:
Or the BBC. It would be nice, as a licence fee payer, to see what defence the BBC put up for knowingly putting out a falsified clip
Click to expand...
I would imagine they will say this was an unintentional mistake and no harm was done. If that is the only act that Trump's people can find then the BBC has a good chance of winning. However I strongly suspect that they will find other mistakes that all curiously defame Trump.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I have been busy most of the day, so haven’t read all the comments but can imagine them. No point in responding individually, even if I had the time.

The story is moving fast. First the apology, for the error of judgement. Now Trump’s threat to sue for a $1 billion! How predictable!

How should the BBC respond? Will they get political pressure from a government trying to avoid upsetting a narcissist while he remains the POTUS? Who, with the DG gone, will lead them? Will the politically compromised Board have the guts to stand up to him.

I listened to Radio 4 today, who covered the story all day. I was particularly impressed by two interviews..

Ed Davey was forthright in his defence of the BBC and said he is approaching all the other party leaders to ask them to join him in writing to Trump to request him to stop trying to interfere in British politics. Which by describing the BBC as fake news and encouraging people to watch GBNews he is doing. Ed Davey just won my vote.

Chris Patten, ex Chairman of the Tory Party, last Governor of Hong Kong and previously the Chairman of the BBC Trust, the forerunner of the Board, was equally forthright in his support for the BBC. He made me smile when he described Trump’s attitude, suggesting that it was rather ridiculous to label the BBC as purveyors of fake news when he is the most obvious of liars.

So I hope that the BBC simply send Trump a copy of their explanation, and apology for what now accept was an error of judgement. Nothing else.

If Trump decides to then sue that would be excellent news. From any reasonable perspective he would have zero chance of winning. Where could he sue where enough people watched it to matter? Proving defamation is incredibly hard at any time. With this near to impossible. Proving an impact on the electorate looks a lost cause. He won!

Making this into a fight between Trump and the BBC is the best result possible for the BBC. It would immediately divert attention from the Panorama issue. In any popularity contest in the UK between Trump and the BBC there would only ever be one winner. So him suing the BBC would galvinise support for them. Bring it on! With Farage being quite so far up Trump’s posterior that you would know it was him because of his Oxford shoes, it would doubtless damage him too. Win win. This would be a big test of the BBC Board, and of the government.

I also watched James O’Brien’s take on this tonight. It’s interesting, not only because it’s so obviously true, but also because he inserts a number of other clips from “that speech”. Clips which put those used in the Panorama documentary into greater context. If you really want to get to grips with this then do watch it.

Click to expand...

You are so very wrong Wisbech.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top