The bbc, again.

Wisbech Eagle said:
It may well be the standard practice.

Standard practice applies to standard situations involving standard people.

Trump is unique and so was this situation.

It may well be that Ofcom give the programme maker, and indirectly the BBC, a reminder of good practice. Time will tell, but cutting the statements together in this way painted an accurate picture of Trump’s attitude over this. To suggest he was defending the representatives is laughable. He had been pleading with Pence to not sign and berating him for refusing to obey him.
Click to expand...

Standard practice applies to standard situations involving standard people.

Seems as though you are implying that people should be treated differently, which is an interesting concept from someone who likes rules to be applied equally…
 
Common Sense Club said:
Standard practice applies to standard situations involving standard people.

Seems as though you are implying that people should be treated differently, which is an interesting concept from someone who likes rules to be applied equally…
Click to expand...
I do.

When someone doesn’t think those rules apply to him then we need to adopt a different strategy.

That’s what was happening. Trump was denying an election result. It was a unique situation, never seen before.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I do.

When someone doesn’t think those rules apply to him then we need to adopt a different strategy.

That’s what was happening. Trump was denying an election result. It was a unique situation, never seen before.
Click to expand...

When someone doesn’t think those rules apply to him then we need to adopt a different strategy.

!! That must mean the death penalty for most of our politicians !!
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
I do.

When someone doesn’t think those rules apply to him then we need to adopt a different strategy.

That’s what was happening. Trump was denying an election result. It was a unique situation, never seen before.
Click to expand...
How does anyone know the BBC haven't been misreporting news for decades? Imagine if all your preconceptions and prejudices are based on manipulated news stories.
Deciding that someone else doesn't think the rules apply to them and deciding editorial policy on that basis is hardly an impartial approach.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
What if the narrative, in their opinion, was accurate?

Don’t forget he did say those words. Words he later scrambled to try to suggest they didn’t actually mean you should fight.

You, and all the other critics, are doing what Trump wants you to do. Which to look at the words of that particular speech in isolation from everything else he had said and done before and afterwards. Especially his behaviour whilst the attack was in progress. He wasn’t shocked or trying to stop it. He just stood back and watched until members of his family told him it was hopeless and he should tell them enough, go home.

That’s the narrative.
Click to expand...
He didn't scramble them though. What he said is on record; the scrambling was in the way they were reported.
Defending this approach is like defending Martin Bashir over the faked Princess Diana bank statements -
"If such papers existed this is probably what it would look like", is no way for a supposedly trustworthy news programme to operate.
 
silvertop said:
Who said it was?

I am very pro BBC but even I thought editing A US president's speech to make a point...
Click to expand...


This is a huge blow for the BBC. Up there with the Saville stuff. Maybe even more because this literally wipes out their ego trip about how their coverage is neutral. They literally tried to sway a foreign election.
 
Badger11 said:
www.bbc.co.uk

BBC director general Tim Davie and News CEO Deborah Turness resign over Trump documentary edit

Davie says "there have been some mistakes made and as director general I have to take ultimate responsibility".
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

So if there is nothing to see here and it's all a plot by the Daily Mail and the Tories why have 2 senior BBC staff resigned?
Click to expand...
This one was never a plot by the Mail. It was by the Telegraph. The Tories, so far as I know, hadn’t questioned the programme. Until the Telegraph wrote their piece.

The BBC executives have fallen on their swords as a consequence of the political pressure. Tim Davie’s statement confirms that. What will be more interesting is what is said by the actual programme makers and by individual BBC journalists.
 
Matov said:
This is a huge blow for the BBC. Up there with the Saville stuff. Maybe even more because this literally wipes out their ego trip about how their coverage is neutral. They literally tried to sway a foreign election.
Click to expand...
There is no comparison with Savile! It’s ridiculous to suggest there could be.

The BBC is held to the highest of standards and whenever there is even the smallest doubt of them failing to meet them there are consequences.

The idea that they tried to sway the US election is farcical. Panorama is made for the British market. It’s hardly watched in the USA. You need to make a great deal of effort there to do so. Its report was probably mentioned by some of their own news outlets, but it would have been on the periphery. How the British see us!

Making a programme about the way Trump tried to overturn the previous election during the next one is completely justified. That they now face accusations of inappropriate editing to tell a truthful story doesn’t change that.

Especially when you now see how Trump is behaving. The BBC are a public broadcaster. They have a public duty to inform and tell the truth, without being intimidated by rogue politicians.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top