The bbc, again.

cryrst said:
You have acted like a tool over this !
Click to expand...
No doubt many here agree with you. The antagonism towards the BBC here tends to cloud judgements.

All I have been doing is try to understand and explain why the BBC would have done this. Not to jump to conclusions, as so many here do.

I have the greatest admiration for, and trust in, the BBC. One of my oldest friends spent many years working for them and through him I learned how the extraordinarily vigorous application of their standards is an absolute. Individuals can always make mistakes. There can also be differences of opinion. That doesn’t undermine the institution itself.
 
Teddy Eagle said:
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.
Click to expand...
Untrue. Just consider everything he said on the subject, both during that speech and both before and later. He mentioned fighting 20 times during that speech alone! Trying to pretend what he said in two consecutive sentences changed that is nonsense. Any reference to the congressmen and women being “good people” suggests to me that he thought they could be “persuaded” to see things his way, and that the mob could help him.

Tim Davie and his News Editor have succumbed to the pressure. Who knows what was applied on them behind the scenes. When Trump is involved anything is possible and with our government trying to manage him with flattery they could be complicit in it.

I hope that does leak out. It’s much more relevant than any dissenting memo from a past advisor.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Untrue. Just consider everything he said on the subject, both during that speech and both before and later. He mentioned fighting 20 times during that speech alone! Trying to pretend what he said in two consecutive sentences changed that is nonsense. Any reference to the congressmen and women being “good people” suggests to me that he thought they could be “persuaded” to see things his way, and that the mob could help him.

Tim Davie and his News Editor have succumbed to the pressure. Who knows what was applied on them behind the scenes. When Trump is involved anything is possible and with our government trying to manage him with flattery they could be complicit in it.

I hope that does leak out. It’s much more relevant than any dissenting memo from a past advisor.
Click to expand...
Don't worry, their pay off amounts will trickle out within the week too.
 
ASCPFC said:
Don't worry, their pay off amounts will trickle out within the week too.
Click to expand...
Why would I worry? The BBC will continue. It will continue to do the job we expect to do.

I just watched a Times Radio interview with Roger Bolton, who is a former Panorama editor, on this issue. It presents an informed and interesting perspective.

All who are genuinely interested in understanding are encouraged to look at it:-

 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Why would I worry? The BBC will continue. It will continue to do the job we expect to do.

I just watched a Times Radio interview with Roger Bolton, who is a former Panorama editor, on this issue. It presents an informed and interesting perspective.

All who are genuinely interested in understanding are encouraged to look at it:-

Click to expand...
Has it been edited?
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Untrue. Just consider everything he said on the subject, both during that speech and both before and later. He mentioned fighting 20 times during that speech alone! Trying to pretend what he said in two consecutive sentences changed that is nonsense. Any reference to the congressmen and women being “good people” suggests to me that he thought they could be “persuaded” to see things his way, and that the mob could help him.

Tim Davie and his News Editor have succumbed to the pressure. Who knows what was applied on them behind the scenes. When Trump is involved anything is possible and with our government trying to manage him with flattery they could be complicit in it.

I hope that does leak out. It’s much more relevant than any dissenting memo from a past advisor.
Click to expand...
As long as you're happy with being lied to, and paying for the privilege, that's OK. Why should the BBC get to decide what someone meant rather than what they actually said? Whatever it suggests to you is filtered through an extreme dislike of Trump and nothing else.
The DG and the Head of news resign and you're still trying to insist there is no case to answer. Carry on blaming Trump when he's one who's been misrepresented. Good luck with that.
And good luck trusting their reporting on any future news stories.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
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.
Click to expand...
😂
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
No doubt many here agree with you. The antagonism towards the BBC here tends to cloud judgements.

All I have been doing is try to understand and explain why the BBC would have done this. Not to jump to conclusions, as so many here do.

I have the greatest admiration for, and trust in, the BBC. One of my oldest friends spent many years working for them and through him I learned how the extraordinarily vigorous application of their standards is an absolute. Individuals can always make mistakes. There can also be differences of opinion. That doesn’t undermine the institution itself.
Click to expand...
So you have not jumped to any conclusions? Wow!
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Why would I worry? The BBC will continue. It will continue to do the job we expect to do.

I just watched a Times Radio interview with Roger Bolton, who is a former Panorama editor, on this issue. It presents an informed and interesting perspective.

All who are genuinely interested in understanding are encouraged to look at it:-

Click to expand...
It might continue but on a subscriber basis or free if they take advertising.
If you want it you pay for it.

www.bbc.com

BBC licence fee 'unenforceable', says culture secretary Lisa Nandy

Lisa Nandy tells the Telegraph "no options are off the table" when it comes to its review into the broadcaster's charter.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
Last edited:
I made the effort to listen to the BBC news broadcast when they broke the news. Basic gist of it was that it had been a troublesome year with this fake Trump news 'the straw that broke the camels back.'

WTF? Even now, they still don't get it. They literally attempted to sway a foreign election. With this claim being repeated accross the US.

It's not even bad journalism. This goes way, way beyond that. This is in the realms of the beyond sinister.
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
Untrue. Just consider everything he said on the subject, both during that speech and both before and later. He mentioned fighting 20 times during that speech alone! Trying to pretend what he said in two consecutive sentences changed that is nonsense. Any reference to the congressmen and women being “good people” suggests to me that he thought they could be “persuaded” to see things his way, and that the mob could help him.

Tim Davie and his News Editor have succumbed to the pressure. Who knows what was applied on them behind the scenes. When Trump is involved anything is possible and with our government trying to manage him with flattery they could be complicit in it.

I hope that does leak out. It’s much more relevant than any dissenting memo from a past advisor.
Click to expand...
You forgot the 3 times between 2.30 and 4 pm he told them to be peaceful, stop any trouble and go home. Just watched an interview with Peter Tatchell, who must be related to you. He was pulled up on saying exactly what you have been saying. He was a bit sheepish when confronted with the facts I just quoted. Another on with TDS
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
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.
Click to expand...


Lol

"I would have gotten away with it if it wasn't for those pesky kids"
 
Wisbech Eagle said:
No doubt many here agree with you. The antagonism towards the BBC here tends to cloud judgements.

All I have been doing is try to understand and explain why the BBC would have done this. Not to jump to conclusions, as so many here do.

I have the greatest admiration for, and trust in, the BBC. One of my oldest friends spent many years working for them and through him I learned how the extraordinarily vigorous application of their standards is an absolute. Individuals can always make mistakes. There can also be differences of opinion. That doesn’t undermine the institution itself.
Click to expand...
Why they would have done it doesn’t excuse them. Pure arrogance and unsurprising.

You admiring the BBC isn’t a surprise either. Then your following posts… 🤦‍♂️😂
 
This latest debacle at the BBC is not a one off and has highlighted what fair minded people have known for years. The BBC is institutional biased to a material degree. The real problem is that (like our universities) it’s stuffed full of liberal/left people who just can’t abide anything right wing and who have been indoctrinated since their University days to consider the right evil. I also had a friend who worked at the BBC who said the bullying there was off the scale. He was centre right of the politics and said if you dared challenge this bias you were immediately ostracised and pigeon-holed as a right-right bad person and probably racist. Senior management and HR did nothing to change things. Needless to say he left.
 
Unfortunately the BBC still doesn't get it.

Katie Razzall (who she?)

www.bbc.co.uk

Katie Razzall: A seismic moment that shows rift at top of BBC

There may be more to this than meets the eye, says the BBC's culture and media editor.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

"But, as with any resignation, and certainly with two, I can't help thinking there is more to this than meets the eye. And there is another story emerging about the functionality and make up of the BBC Board and its role in what has happened.

It appears there has been a rift between the Board and the news division with some arguing the BBC has, for too long, failed to address institutional bias inside the BBC and others questioning whether what's unfolded has been an orchestrated - and politicised - campaign against the corporation which has claimed two big scalps."

And by the BBC board she means

""They point to Robbie Gibb, a former BBC editor who left to become Downing St director of communications for Theresa May and who is now a member of the Board""

Who are "they" Katie? Or do you mean you. Okay it's clear blame the Tories.

The Mail has done a timeline, what is shocking is that in 2025 the BBC has had to tackle 5 major scandals including this one.

Davies had to go because he is one of many DG's that has failed to get to grips with the BBC problems, whether it is political bias or failure to address inappropriate behaviour by staff.

As Thatcher famously said "Weak, weak weak" . It's no good blaming others especially when you have to admit the allegations are true. Of course some people / parties will make policial capital out of it but who loaded the bullets.
 
Ps. I’d also take anything Wisbech Eagle says on here with a pinch of salt. This is the guy who denied Biden’s mental health was failing right the way through his Presidency and in fact defended all the terrible things the democrats did included the Russian dossier hoax. He’s doing something similar with the BBC. We all have political allegiances but this shouldn’t mean we have to be blind and in denial to bad behaviour within our tribe.

No hard feelings Wisbech.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top