Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
& who killed it?pk said:
Rapid Response Media Alert: Targeting Iran – The BBC Propaganda Begins
- Thread starter bigfish
- Start date
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
i can't recall any bbc interview where government ministers were asked how resolution 1441 authorised any military action against iraq. and i watched a lot of them. the bbc interviewers never tried to point out the vast gulf between what the government was saying, and the truth, be that with 1441 or the french position on an invasion of iraq. at best the bbc didn't ask tricky questions on those subjects, at worst they followed a path so close to the government's desired line that they could be argued to have colluded in the government's lying.pk said:
i see this less as the failing of a single reporter, or group of reporters, than something which must have come from somewhere high up in the bbc - unless one believes that everyone in the bbc is so brainwashed as to report what the government wants without instructions.
Then how do you explain how it was that more than 40% of the British population did not support the war and did not buy the lie? Where in the entire coverage of the lead up to the war were their voices? As pointed out earlier, the Tenon report found that only 2% of the BBC's coverage was made up of anti-war voices, one would think from watching the BBC that there was no opposition to the war at all!pk said:
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
and with adverts, one just has to look at newsroom se, which contains many plugs for forthcoming plays and similar.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
any danger of addressing the more serious points raised first?pk said:
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Pickman's model said:
What?
An advertisement is a a paid inclusion into a broadcast or printed media format. The BBC receives no payment for promoting local productions or cultural events in it's regional broadcasting units, if which Newsroom SE is one.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
they wash over me as i wait for something interesting to come on the news. don't fret, i'll keep a diary of them for the next few weeks.pk said:
now, returning to the more serious issue of the bbc meekly and cravenly allowing politicians to spout lies unchallenged?
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
They aren't paid for. Part of the BBC's regional charter says that it has to support local arts and culcha.
Do I have to say it one more time?
Do I have to say it one more time?
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
bollocks is it. an advert is publicity, whether paid for or gratis, which promotes something. in media terms, i'd say that it's publicity which directly promotes a commercial venture or charity. a play is a commerial venture. and if you disagree that plays and films are promoted by the bbc, watch the news more carefully over the next few weeks, where plugs for films and plays abound.kyser_soze said:
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
so the bbc subsidise these promotional slots?kyser_soze said:
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
It comes under the public service remit, especially for the regional units.
So in that sense, yes it does 'subsidise' them, but under the terms of it's charter.
So in that sense, yes it does 'subsidise' them, but under the terms of it's charter.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
hmm...kyser_soze said:
if they want to do that, they should have a regional culture programme, as plays don't fall into most commonly understood definitions of news.
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
You're talking absolute shit, Picky, and you know it.
Maybe you don't.
Either way, you don't really understand how the BBC works, nor do you have anything to say apart from sneering remarks over how my expenses work, something which you would have no grasp of anyway.
Maybe you don't.
Either way, you don't really understand how the BBC works, nor do you have anything to say apart from sneering remarks over how my expenses work, something which you would have no grasp of anyway.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Pickman's model said:
So newspapers shouldn't carry listings of plays then? Or reviews?
A new play opening, or an existing one gaining say a new lead, is news about culture. But that clearly should be placed in a ghetto marked 'Arts Review' as opposed to a news programme which is watched by more people?
Right.
redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
But plenty of people didn't believe them.pk said:
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
and on the question of the bbc accepting and propagating lies?pk said:
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
the bbc is not a newspaper, they air a wide range of programmes. why can't they put what's happened in one programme, and what will happen into another?kyser_soze said:
pk
drink flounce rinse repeat
And plenty of people were interviewed, the detractors from the Labour cabinet who went on to resign were given their airtime, in time of war ...
There is no doubt that the BBC could do without the strings of Government in many areas, as a public service it needs to mutate to keep up with the independent market, tasteful sponsorship for certain programmes would free up a lot of talent, and they could produce some terrific stuff with their vast resources.
But, they do not have adverts.
What are you on about?
Specifics?
There is no doubt that the BBC could do without the strings of Government in many areas, as a public service it needs to mutate to keep up with the independent market, tasteful sponsorship for certain programmes would free up a lot of talent, and they could produce some terrific stuff with their vast resources.
But, they do not have adverts.
What are you on about?
Specifics?redsquirrel
This Machine Kills Progressives
Most of whom went on about how the government was mistaken rather than the fact that they were/are lying bastards. Anyway those people are part of elite themselves so it not surprising that the BBC allowed them some say (so long as it was kept within boundaries).pk said:
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
yeh, right, so antiwar people were interviewed. someone posted above that these interviews were something like 2% of the time of those for pro-war interviews or something like that.
how fucking pitiful.
how fucking pitiful.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
i suspect it's something like 'tell me lies' by david miller. i think i posted a link to his website earlier in the thread. but how would i know? you've as much chance of certainty on that as i have.pk said:
The Tenon Report.pk said:
You havent answered my question as to why it was the BBC were persuaded by govt lies but over 40% of the British population weren't? And to repeat myself, you would think that there was no opposition to the war watching the BBC coverage at the time.
A separate study by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung [conducted by Medien Tenon] of news networks in five different countries showed that the BBC offered the least airtime of any broadcaster to opponents of the war: just 2% of its coverage. (Even ABC news in the United States gave them 7%). Channel 4 News, by contrast, does well: it seems to be the only British network that has sought to provide a balanced account of these conflicts.
One BBC journalist told the Glasgow team that he had been instructed not to provide "explainers": what the editors wanted was "all bang-bang stuff". Analytical and investigative reporting has given way to breathless descriptions of troop movements and military technology.
Just 23 percent of the BBC stories about Iraq featured casualties whereas 40 percent of Channel 4 news stories referred to them. The report also found that the BBC was the least likely to report the unhappiness of Iraqi people over the US and British invasion.
The BBC was also less likely than Sky, ITV and Channel 4 to quote independent sources on what was happening, such as the Red Cross. Deputy head of the journalism school at Cardiff, Justin Lewis, told the Guardian:
"Far from revealing an anti-war BBC, our findings tend to give credence to those who criticised the BBC for being too sympathetic to the government's pro-war stance."
One BBC journalist told the Glasgow team that he had been instructed not to provide "explainers": what the editors wanted was "all bang-bang stuff". Analytical and investigative reporting has given way to breathless descriptions of troop movements and military technology.
Just 23 percent of the BBC stories about Iraq featured casualties whereas 40 percent of Channel 4 news stories referred to them. The report also found that the BBC was the least likely to report the unhappiness of Iraqi people over the US and British invasion.
The BBC was also less likely than Sky, ITV and Channel 4 to quote independent sources on what was happening, such as the Red Cross. Deputy head of the journalism school at Cardiff, Justin Lewis, told the Guardian:
"Far from revealing an anti-war BBC, our findings tend to give credence to those who criticised the BBC for being too sympathetic to the government's pro-war stance."
Similar threads
