This is neither an excuse for BBC or Royal Family bashing, but can someone please explain to me what all the fuss is about? :confused:
Printable View
This is neither an excuse for BBC or Royal Family bashing, but can someone please explain to me what all the fuss is about? :confused:
Our national broadcaster, an organisation that you and me are obliged to pay for BT, lying to procure an interview with Di, then covering it up for 25 years. This is an organisation that runs a 'Fact Checker' and warns us against 'Fake News' and advises us on how to identify it. On top of the Jimmy Saville, Cliff Richard and Lord McAlpine scandals, to name just three, it might just be the straw that breaks the camel's back, and this dysfunctional organisation is sorted good and proper this time, although it probably won't be. Whatever, this is a serious crisis for the good old Beeb, it's been caught out once too often.
In one respect it's a bit like Burnley FC, chickens are finally coming home to roost. ;D
I think Princess Di fluttering her eyebrows for the Beeb, might have a tad less importance than Saville's peeedo ring run from inside Shepherd's Bush though eh sinkov? :blue:
I don't see why Martin Bashir is being vilified so much, perhaps if he had worked for the Sun it would have been seen as normal journalistic practice, anything to get a story.
That misses the point imo BT, it's not the story per se that's important, it's the fact that BBC employees lied and used forged documents to procure an interview, persecuted whistleblowers, and the top people connived to cover up the story, that is the relevant issue, not the subject matter of the story itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bedlington Terrier
You're probably right Chris, but he didn't work for the Sun did he, he was working for, and on behalf of, the BBC, our national broadcaster, which routinely sneers at the Murdoch Empire, and newspapers like the Mail and the Sun. It would have us believe that it holds itself to higher journalistic standards than the gutter press, as indeed it should, but it turns out it's employees occupy the same sewer. Which is why imo, Bashir is being vilified.Quote:
Originally Posted by kritichris
Thank you sinkov. I get it now, it's an hypocrisy thing. >:(
Journalistic standards I'd say BT, the BBC should be beyond reproach, but I do love Lefty hypocrisy being exposed, always makes my day. XDQuote:
Originally Posted by The Bedlington Terrier
In a nut shell they lied about a lot of rubbish and the poor women lost her life some would say based on what they broadcastQuote:
Originally Posted by The Bedlington Terrier
Martin Bashir should not have committed or incited someone else to commit, forgery.
Likewise, Lord Hall should have acted to dismiss Bashir when he found out about it.
The point that is being made in certain elements of the media and Royal family is that this interview had an adverse effect on the marriage of Charles and Diana.
I can see why that is being touted by the Royal family as in the interview Diana revealed that there were three of them involved in the marriage, Charles, Camila and herself. This showed just what type of person Charles really is, totally self-centred.
Surely the cause of Diana’s problems was that Charles was unable to keep to his marriage vows and had an extra marital affair with Camila.
In 1938 the then king Edward VIII, had to abdicate if he wished to marry Wallace Simpson and further more be exiled from the country. This was supposedly because the reigning monarch is the head of the church of England and divorce is frowned upon by the church.
If Charles is to become king on the death of the Queen, have the rules change regarding marriage and the church of England. Surely, we are not going to have Queen Camila, as that would present a constitutional crisis in my opinion.