The bbc, again.

[silvertop]

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.

Trump does not have to sue. He has received his apology and scored his political point. He does not need the money. This is vanity and revenge.

 

[HKOwen]

Any legal costs, and they will be considerable incurred by the BBC are not recoverable in the US.

They would be better to try and negotiate a small settlement, after all, they are 100% at fault

 

[Badger11]

Trump does not have to sue. He has received his apology and scored his political point. He does not need the money. This is vanity and revenge.

I never said he did have to sue. I find it really odd how people are outraged that Trump is talking about suing. He has every right to do so, whether he wins is another matter.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

I never said he did have to sue. I find it really odd how people are outraged that Trump is talking about suing. He has every right to do so, whether he wins is another matter.

of course its not really about the money. I you had somebody running around town, badmouthing you, you would want to shut them up too.
The BBC have had a lack of accountability for decades. Hopefully now the chickens have come home to roost. Its ironic that the power to end them came from abroad. I reckoned there would be an anti BBC coup within the UK.

 

[eaglesdare]

I never said he did have to sue. I find it really odd how people are outraged that Trump is talking about suing. He has every right to do so, whether he wins is another matter.

I think he tried to sue the likes of YouTube, X, cnn, facebook for billions but was only able to get 10-20 million in settlements. I think! So it could just aswell be the case here with the BBC.

 

[Badger11]

of course its not really about the money. I you had somebody running around town, badmouthing you, you would want to shut them up too.
The BBC have had a lack of accountability for decades. Hopefully now the chickens have come home to roost. Its ironic that the power to end them came from abroad. I reckoned there would be an anti BBC coup within the UK.

The BBC has been successfully sued many times e.g. Cliff Richard and others for a variety of reasons. I don't remember the public being outraged at those people for suing.

If the Beeb doesn't want to be sued perhaps it might work harder at getting it's facts straight.

Trump may end up doing them a favour if they lose heads will roll and they will have to drain the swamp. A stronger impartial BBC is not a bad thing.

 

[HKOwen]

The BBC reaping what they have sown for many many years. I hope any costs come directly out of bonuses and salary of the top cohort who are responsible.

Certainly no rises and bonuses going forward, let them see how they get on the free market of the real world, you think anyone else would pay Fiona Bruce 400K + plus pension contributions

And now part of the Blob, Osbourne , is looking for the top job there

It's a massive heads in the trough club

 

[Badger11]

The BBC reaping what they have sown for many many years. I hope any costs come directly out of bonuses and salary of the top cohort who are responsible.

Certainly no rises and bonuses going forward, let them see how they get on the free market of the real world, you think anyone else would pay Fiona Bruce 400K + plus pension contributions

And now part of the Blob, Osbourne , is looking for the top job there

It's a massive heads in the trough club

My comments below not specific to the BBC.

It occurs to me that in this country the establishment has institutionalised corruption. Why run the risk of a nosy reporter spotting you taking a brown envelope.

So the establishment realised there was another way to get their readies. We have a myriad of Quangos, and other no show jobs, which pay out a nice little earner, and don't forget the expenses, those hotel suites don't come cheap.

Then of course there is the gongs, all in all they look after each other, which is why a socialist party like Labour does nothing about it. Even they realise how useful it is to lob a cushy part time job or a knighthood to one of their supporters.

Only in this country could we come up with a system that institutionalises corruption.

 

[Phil’s Barber]

I think he tried to sue the likes of YouTube, X, cnn, facebook for billions but was only able to get 10-20 million in settlements. I think! So it could just aswell be the case here with the BBC.

Various reports last night were stating he was awarded $15M for one (ABC News) & $16M in another (CBS News).

People could say what they like about me for $31M.

 

[Stirlingsays]

My comments below not specific to the BBC.

It occurs to me that in this country the establishment has institutionalised corruption. Why run the risk of a nosy reporter spotting you taking a brown envelope.

So the establishment realised there was another way to get their readies. We have a myriad of Quangos, and other no show jobs, which pay out a nice little earner, and don't forget the expenses, those hotel suites don't come cheap.

Then of course there is the gongs, all in all they look after each other, which is why a socialist party like Labour does nothing about it. Even they realise how useful it is to lob a cushy part time job or a knighthood to one of their supporters.

Only in this country could we come up with a system that institutionalises corruption.

It's the Blair version of the friend/enemy distinction......where you reward your friends and punish your enemies.

The Lords was the old version, the limited size of which meant the size of this kind of thing was kept small. By Blair distributing power out to Quangos he not only increased costs but he increased the corruption significantly.

Blair was by far the most intelligent and effective leader Labour have ever had, most of what he did was bad.....a lot of the wrong types of people did very well out of him.

Which is why he was so disastrous long term.

 

[silvertop]

I never said he did have to sue. I find it really odd how people are outraged that Trump is talking about suing. He has every right to do so, whether he wins is another matter.

Wellington said publish and be damned.

I am saying he would demonstrate nobility and statesman like conduct if he didn't sue.

Not sure I have to say anymore.

 

[silvertop]

I am not sure why I have only just noticed but since Labour have got into power, suddenly the migrant boats are no longer news to them?
When the Tories were in power, it was a daily update but not any longer, even though they are still coming and in greater numbers.
Left wing bias so blatantly obvious - absolute idiots - it is news and should be reported!

Pretty much discussed every day.

And on the BBC!

Just listened to a bulletin on 6music. Number one item.

May I take this opportunity to apologise for these inconvenient facts.

 

[Glazier#1]

Trump does not have to sue. He has received his apology and scored his political point. He does not need the money. This is vanity and revenge.

And an orchestrated attack and bring down the BBC. Fascinating to imagine what's gone on behind the scenes to bring this attack to fruition considering the programme was originally shown in October 24, which brought no reaction from Trump, The Telegraph, or the BBC haters.

Yes, an orchestrated attack, nicely synchronised between the Telegraph and the anti-BBC forces.

As we can see, all the haters on here are having a field day - loving it.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

forget about armies of lawyers fighting each other. We can settle the dispute the old fashioned way. Our champion versus theirs.

Trump vs Noel Edmunds.

 

[silvertop]

My comments below not specific to the BBC.

It occurs to me that in this country the establishment has institutionalised corruption. Why run the risk of a nosy reporter spotting you taking a brown envelope.

So the establishment realised there was another way to get their readies. We have a myriad of Quangos, and other no show jobs, which pay out a nice little earner, and don't forget the expenses, those hotel suites don't come cheap.

Then of course there is the gongs, all in all they look after each other, which is why a socialist party like Labour does nothing about it. Even they realise how useful it is to lob a cushy part time job or a knighthood to one of their supporters.

Only in this country could we come up with a system that institutionalises corruption.

Power corrupts. It's inevitable and unavoidable.

The secret to a well run country are checks and balances to effectively counter and reduce it.

The Fourth Estate is one which is why Tory dominance of the press and recent BBC issues are important.

The standing of a country is how effectively it limits corruption and how it sits relative to other countries.

I have no idea if we languish or sit high and proud. Is there a reliable hit parade somewhere?

 

[silvertop]

And an orchestrated attack and bring down the BBC. Fascinating to imagine what's gone on behind the scenes to bring this attack to fruition considering the programme was originally shown in October 24, which brought no reaction from Trump, The Telegraph, or the BBC haters.

Yes, an orchestrated attack, nicely synchronised between the Telegraph and the anti-BBC forces.

As we can see, all the haters on here are having a field day - loving it.

They are not wholly wrong. The BBC does have a liberal left bias which is wrong and needs addressing. John Humphreys spent 33 years working for them, left and wrote a book critical of them for this very reason.

But correct the wrong. Don't end the entity. Too much like book burning for my liking. And what will it leave?

My concern is that the most reliable broadcaster will be eg GB News. A company that stands proudly beside it's right wing bias; but you only have to look up this thread to see that folk genuinely rate it as impartial.

I suppose if you consume anything long enough it becomes a normal to you. I am as guilty as anyone given i get my news from R4.

 

[Stirlingsays]

And an orchestrated attack and bring down the BBC. Fascinating to imagine what's gone on behind the scenes to bring this attack to fruition considering the programme was originally shown in October 24, which brought no reaction from Trump, The Telegraph, or the BBC haters.

Yes, an orchestrated attack, nicely synchronised between the Telegraph and the anti-BBC forces.

As we can see, all the haters on here are having a field day - loving it.

The BBC are receiving hate back for their hate.

As predicted many times something like this was inevitable.

The BBC employs fleas then it's going to itch financially at some point.

They can't complain because this was the path they chose, despite criticism.

Now the people who give them money and are annoyed with this have a full right to give them stick.

 

[PalazioVecchio]

My concern is that the most reliable broadcaster will be eg GB News. A company that stands proudly beside it's right wing bias;

you can keep your BBC if i can keep my GB news. And equal funding & status to both.

 

[Stirlingsays]

They are not wholly wrong. The BBC does have a liberal left bias which is wrong and needs addressing. John Humphreys spent 33 years working for them, left and wrote a book critical of them for this very reason.

But correct the wrong. Don't end the entity. Too much like book burning for my liking. And what will it leave?

My concern is that the most reliable broadcaster will be eg GB News. A company that stands proudly beside it's right wing bias; but you only have to look up this thread to see that folk genuinely rate it as impartial.

I suppose if you consume anything long enough it becomes a normal to you. I am as guilty as anyone given i get my news from R4.

You must surely see the gap in this argument here.

I think GBNews made plain at the start that it came into being because there was a large gap in the market. It's been attacked since it started and the damaging element of those attacks has been at its revenue base. It also has a very left wing OfCom(muists) sniffing around it all the time.....restricting how it operates when it's a private company.

In these regards it gets treated far more harshly than the BBC.....Which gets chucked over three billion a year and can't even stick to its core principles.

Being liberal is fine......the problem is when you receive a licence fee from the population to be impartial....a significant segment of the country are always going to be right wing.....well that means that the organisation isn't fit for purpose.

When was the last time I saw a masculine straight right wing white male on the BBC?.....It's so rare it practically never happens, but it's at least twenty percent of the population.....In my view most of the BBC look down their nose at that and worst a fair amount of them regard it as evil.

Rather tellingly GBNews do not receive a licence fee.

The BBC won't correct itself, it had that chance in the 90s and it spurred the chance.

The left are too narcissistic to admit the real problems at the BBC and would rather burn it too the ground.

 

[silvertop]

you can keep your BBC if i can keep my GB news. And equal funding & status to both.

And same source of funding and open about their partiality.

My concern is normalising. You only have to see people on here who I suspect share many of your views who post GB News or articles from the Express (or Mirror) as fact.

I would prefer as is save addressing the corporation's liberal left bias. But I don't hate your idea (for what that's worth)