Comment Feed for BBC is biased (Coffeehouse on Channel 9)

Re: BBC is biased

ScanIAm — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 17:21:17 GMT

Cornelius Ellsonpeter wrote:

ScanIAm wrote: BBC is biased the same way that NPR is biased: Towards higher educated people. This isn't meant as an insult, but most of BBC (radio at least) would bore the drooling masses to tears. Same with NPR.

Now, those who suck at the teat of Mr. Murdoch tend to think that anything intelligent is:

1) liberal
2) lefty
3) bad
4) different

so there is an appearance that the BBC (and NPR) are biased, but it's just not true.
NPR...ugh. I consider myself "higher educated" but a lot of times NPR is pretty slanted towards the "liberal" side of things. And yes, they are really, really, really boring some days. Although I used to listen to "Science Friday" once in a while.

I honestly think that it (NPRs boringness or lack thereof) depends on what shows are picked up by the local station.

We get Fresh Air, Car Talk, Tech Nation, Science Friday, Marketplace, a bunch of other specialty shows on the weekends, and none of the above are boring. Of course, we have the second largest listener base in the country :)

Fox is biased, too, but they seem so hungry for Karl Rove's man-meat that they never seem to get around to saying anything of substance that could be seen as biased. Bias only appears when it is in stark contrast to the current government :)

Re: BBC is biased

JohnAskew — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:43:22 GMT

Cornelius Ellsonpeter wrote:

ScanIAm wrote: BBC is biased the same way that NPR is biased: Towards higher educated people. This isn't meant as an insult, but most of BBC (radio at least) would bore the drooling masses to tears. Same with NPR.

Now, those who suck at the teat of Mr. Murdoch tend to think that anything intelligent is:

1) liberal
2) lefty
3) bad
4) different

so there is an appearance that the BBC (and NPR) are biased, but it's just not true.
NPR...ugh. I consider myself "higher educated" but a lot of times NPR is pretty slanted towards the "liberal" side of things. And yes, they are really, really, really boring some days. Although I used to listen to "Science Friday" once in a while.

You know I don't agree with you. :)

I was surprised last night to see how partisan and biased CNN was right before the election (pro Democrat). They aren't usually quite so explicit.

I would imagine they feel compelled to match FOX's always over the top conservative Republican bias.

Again, un-biased news is a dream, imho.

Re: BBC is biased

Cornelius Ellsonpeter — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:32:18 GMT

ScanIAm wrote:
BBC is biased the same way that NPR is biased: Towards higher educated people. This isn't meant as an insult, but most of BBC (radio at least) would bore the drooling masses to tears. Same with NPR.

Now, those who suck at the teat of Mr. Murdoch tend to think that anything intelligent is:

1) liberal
2) lefty
3) bad
4) different

so there is an appearance that the BBC (and NPR) are biased, but it's just not true.

NPR...ugh. I consider myself "higher educated" but a lot of times NPR is pretty slanted towards the "liberal" side of things. And yes, they are really, really, really boring some days. Although I used to listen to "Science Friday" once in a while.

[H]

Re: BBC is biased

ScanIAm — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:27:59 GMT

BBC is biased the same way that NPR is biased: Towards higher educated people. This isn't meant as an insult, but most of BBC (radio at least) would bore the drooling masses to tears. Same with NPR.

Now, those who suck at the teat of Mr. Murdoch tend to think that anything intelligent is:

1) liberal
2) lefty
3) bad
4) different

so there is an appearance that the BBC (and NPR) are biased, but it's just not true.

Re: BBC is biased

Paul Smith — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:24:18 GMT

DigitalDud wrote:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411846&in_page_id=1770What's funny is I have friends who claim to read the BBC news for their "impartiality."

No what is funny is you quoting an article from a right-wing newspaper that supported the (I need to watch my language)s.

A news organisation owned by the British public may be biased, but it'll be less bias than one owned by one or a handful of capitalists.

I'll stick with the BBC, (and Channel 4 which has a single shareholder the government) for my sources rather than some dirty rag.

Edit: The need to watch my language was the the party that took power in Germany in 1933 and their British counterparts.

Re: BBC is biased

ScanIAm — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:57:23 GMT

Rossj wrote:

AndyC wrote:
All it needs now is for somebody to park their car underwater.

Dude, I've just spat coffee on my laptop. Please give some advance warning before you do that ...

I want to be in on the joke, please 'splain this :)

Edit: nevermind, I just got it.

Re: BBC is biased

JohnAskew — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:54:19 GMT

yman wrote:

Tensor wrote: You cant give equivalent air time to all political parties. If that were policy, any nutter with a single issue chip on there shoulder would set up a political party and demand airtime.

I allready am amazed at how much air time fringe parties like UKIP get.

Actually...

Nevertheless, there shouldn't be any institutional bias.

You are a romantic, I'd say. Salt anyone?

Re: BBC is biased

yman — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:53:08 GMT

Tensor wrote:
You cant give equivalent air time to all political parties. If that were policy, any nutter with a single issue chip on there shoulder would set up a political party and demand airtime.

I allready am amazed at how much air time fringe parties like UKIP get.

Actually...

Nevertheless, there shouldn't be any institutional bias.

Re: BBC is biased

yman — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:51:33 GMT

In my opinion, I feel the BBC sways more to the left with a pro multiculturism and EU agenda.

Example:
(I am not implying I support this particular political party)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditors/2006/05/helping_the_bnp.html

One editor is questioning if it is "morally right" to link to the BNP's (British Nationalist Party) website in an article (when there is a political news item, they link to the political party in question).
It says specifically in the Royal Charter of the BBC, that they should offer equal "air time" for every political party, ensuring equal coverage and no bias.

Re: BBC is biased

Tensor — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:51:01 GMT

You cant give equivalent air time to all political parties. If that were policy, any nutter with a single issue chip on there shoulder would set up a political party and demand airtime.

I allready am amazed at how much air time fringe parties like UKIP get.

Actually...

Re: BBC is biased

JohnAskew — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:50:37 GMT

yman wrote:

billh wrote: I don't understand what is so surprising about this. Virtually every news outlet has some amount of bias.

Yes, but it is outlined in the BBC's Royal Charter that they should be impartial.

In the USA, our PBS recently did a "conservative makeover" to combat the very same 'left leaning' bias charges.

I don't believe impartial news is feasible at all, given best intentions.

FWIW, multiculturalism seems prudent, here, there, everywhere...

I am proud of my UK heritage too, even if it's ~370 years ago.

Re: BBC is biased

billh — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:39:48 GMT

yman wrote:

billh wrote: I don't understand what is so surprising about this. Virtually every news outlet has some amount of bias.
Yes, but it is outlined in the BBC's Royal Charter that they should be impartial.

The problem is, editors almost always have a bias and that affects which stories reach the front page/top of a newscast. Sometimes the bias comes out by its placement (front page versus being buried in the back of a newspaper), tone, or omission altogether. You can take two magazines, such as Time and Newsweek for instance, and compare their reporting side by side on major stories. Many times there will be differences on which facts get reported, as well as the the tone of each piece (liberal/conservative, pro/con, etc.). This seems to usually get worse right around election time in the States. In fact, you'll see newspapers endorse candidates for election. How unbiased is that?

The only way you really start to see this is by comparing several newspapers and websites at once on the same stories.

Edit: I'm not saying I agree with any of this...in fact I think it's sad because most people depend on the news to learn about what is going on in the world. But there has been a lot of "vertical integration" over the years in media (at least here in the States, but I'm sure it is happening elsewhere) and that undermines what gets reported, too.

Re: BBC is biased

yman — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:09:11 GMT

billh wrote:
I don't understand what is so surprising about this. Virtually every news outlet has some amount of bias.

Yes, but it is outlined in the BBC's Royal Charter that they should be impartial.

Re: BBC is biased

billh — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 14:00:57 GMT

I don't understand what is so surprising about this. Virtually every news outlet has some amount of bias.

Yes, even in the States, Eagle. New York Times...LA Times...etc.

Besides, the newswire agencies are often flooded with press releases which can come from a myriad of sources...including people who want to improve their image in the eyes of the public, corporations, political candidates, etc. Heck, you can make up your own press release and send it to these agencies and make the release sound like "news". There are books that teach you how to do this. And never forget that these news outlets are businesses and many of them have stockholders.

:(

Re: BBC is biased

W3bbo — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 13:05:17 GMT

blowdart wrote:

W3bbo wrote:

I'll bet they signed a 10 year contract with them or something. All the other news sites are using *.flv or WMMS.

Actually a few weeks back they signed a "memo of understanding" for WM. Also things like the education systems they use all in WM

The article states they're also in agreement with Real (still) and Linden Labs (noooooooo! 2L IS EVIL!!!)

Re: BBC is biased

blowdart — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:55:19 GMT

W3bbo wrote:

I'll bet they signed a 10 year contract with them or something. All the other news sites are using *.flv or WMMS.

Actually a few weeks back they signed a "memo of understanding" for WM. Also things like the education systems they use all in WM

Re: BBC is biased

W3bbo — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:38:42 GMT

Rossj wrote:

blowdart wrote:
wasn't there a big fuss this week about the "Real IRA" starting up again?

Oh great, so more of this to look forward to?

The BBC is biased, sure, to bloody RealPlayer. The service, quality, and experience is terrible. I'll bet Real is kept alive primarily by the BBC, and secondarily by their spyware/popups.

I'll bet they signed a 10 year contract with them or something. All the other news sites are using *.flv or WMMS.

Re: BBC is biased

W3bbo — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:38:30 GMT

Massif wrote:

blowdart wrote:

Massif wrote:
I always wondered about that, why bikini state? what does "bikini state alpha" mean? What is it with Marines and wearing skimpy swimming costumes?

Alpha? I don't think there ever was an alpha; it goes

Red
Amber
Black Special
Black
White

I've never seen it below Black Special either.

That would be my memory failing. But it was 15 years ago, so I think I'm allowed a little slack. Perhaps I confused Amber for Alpha, as Alpha sounds much cooler.

I'm still confused by the whole thing though.

"Bikini State" is our version of the US's DEFCON. It shows the current defense-condition of the country. The higher the value, the more screwed we are. More recently it has been reappropiated for "terrorism!", similar to Homeland Defense's rainbow scale (which is never set to "low" for some reason, hmmmm)

Officially, there are 5 states, but there are really 6:

White = We don't know if someone's going to die, but we'll say so just to scare you
Black = We think someone's going to die, we just don't know who
Black special = Someone's going to die, we just don't know who either
Amber = Everyone's going to die, we just don't know when
Red = Everyone's about to die
Charred wooden board = Everyone's dead

Re: BBC is biased

David Oliver — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:29:12 GMT

andokai wrote:

He must be part of the seperatist PPIRA (Plastic Paddy IRA), they live in the past and so I guess it might be another 20 years or so before the news might filter through.

Hey eagle here's a message from your "homeland". We've moved on and become one of the wealthiest nations in the world. Perhaps you should follow our lead.

I'm an english-man with prody and catholic irish friends and family that live in the north and south. We all lost family and friends in the troubles.

At the family BBQ this year you wouldn't know it.

The key is that no one wants to live in fear, hate and volience and we all got over it because we didn't want to live this way and we didn't want to pass this on to our kids.

Get over it Eagle ... the rest of us have!

Re: BBC is biased

Ping — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:02:05 GMT

Politics makes sick, elections is only sort of games that joggling the power from one hand to the other, everything is hypocrite, and they need good media weapons to mislead people. Media is work for the government in some kind of way, otherwise BBC won't last long. Media likely make up some fact based on what they think, or just show the people one side of view.

Re: BBC is biased

Another_Darren — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 11:51:45 GMT

blowdart wrote:

andokai wrote:
Rossj wrote:his pro-terrorist (IRA) agenda.

Am a slight innacuracy there, while historically you may have been correct one or more reports state that the IRA are no longer engaged in terrorisim.

And it depends which bit. Splinter groups certainly are.

Not long after the IRA announced they would destroy their weapons the 'Real IRA' popped up and claimed they would continue the fight.

Re: BBC is biased

Massif — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:30:00 GMT

blowdart wrote:

Massif wrote:
I always wondered about that, why bikini state? what does "bikini state alpha" mean? What is it with Marines and wearing skimpy swimming costumes?

Alpha? I don't think there ever was an alpha; it goes

Red
Amber
Black Special
Black
White

I've never seen it below Black Special either.

That would be my memory failing. But it was 15 years ago, so I think I'm allowed a little slack. Perhaps I confused Amber for Alpha, as Alpha sounds much cooler.

I'm still confused by the whole thing though.

Re: BBC is biased

blowdart — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:23:26 GMT

KevinB wrote:

What did you mean by your accent thing btw? Where are you from originally?

Coleraine.

Re: BBC is biased

blowdart — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:22:39 GMT

Massif wrote:

I always wondered about that, why bikini state? what does "bikini state alpha" mean? What is it with Marines and wearing skimpy swimming costumes?

Alpha? I don't think there ever was an alpha; it goes

Red
Amber
Black Special
Black
White

I've never seen it below Black Special either.

Re: BBC is biased

KevinB — Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:19:41 GMT

blowdart wrote:

KevinB wrote: Honestly, I don't see why people keep bringing up politics on a technology forum. Especially when you don't seem to know what you are talking about....

Ah now don't start making assumptions.

Funnily enough I was living just down the road from Warrington when it happened, and some bugger threw a punch at me when he heard my accent in a pub.

A couple of days later I turned up at work to be greeted by the sight of an army official and armed escort. Panic ensued, until it turned it they wanted me to help with the positive vetting of a friend for a job.

Sorry blowdart, that last bit wasn't directed at you, more at RossJ, although I pretty much instantly regretted posting it and was just going to edit it out when you quoted me lol.

I am not posting to this thread anymore, no good can come of it.

What did you mean by your accent thing btw? Where are you from originally?