Reply With Quote... the BBC upper echelons ... the very model of champagne socialists ... hypocrites to the last of 'em.
Hall Of Fame
I think a lot of the problem is that journalists are primarily seeking to promote themselves. Hence the focus on opinion rather than fact and the constant pursuit of a headline grabbing angle on any story.
Hall Of Fame
... the BBC upper echelons ... the very model of champagne socialists ... hypocrites to the last of 'em.
Hall Of Fame
I have found the responses to this astounding, the general view is that its fair.
When it isn't, not even close. Usual stuff from sidders. The BBC is corrosive, a dripping tap. It doesn't bother to camouflage its hatred of the Tories anymore.
To me everything has an edge of poison to it, being critical of the Tories over everything, while sympathising with Labour. And so the rage over such criminality builds.
I don't know if you realise it but the far left and far right are the same people, just with different colours. The ultimate clash, Hitler v Stalin, resulted in the same result. If Hitler would had won, slavery would ensue, as it was when Stalin won.
The left is by definition dictatorial, it must be done this way, even though it fails constantly, and will always. When choice is eliminated trouble ensues. Always. The left has its own destruction printed into its DNA, it cannot succeed under any circumstances.
Human beings will always fight to be free, just as there are those trying to enslave it. Western democracy is at risk, if you think it will always be here, think again. Having said that, Putin will fall, as will China. Eventually. Some will never accept slavery, dogma, dictators, etc, even unto death.
Saying no will never die.
Hall Of Fame
Quite. I'd flush the BBC down the toilet because they are now simply a propaganda machine for the government terrified of losing the licence fee.Originally Posted by BigFatPie
Hall Of Fame
As long as there's an audience out there who want the BBC then it has every right to exist, but given that it competes with many other television channels it should earn its living in the same way and not exist in a privileged bubble.
Hall Of Fame
Unfortunately, in order to compete with the commercial offerings, it would have to cease being the unique and trusted institution it is and is admired globally for being. It should remain non-commercial within the UK and at the same time remain distanced from becoming a government mouthpiece. (I appreciate that some on here are of the opinion that it already is the latter)
The funding question is a massive hurdle to overcome. Personally I don't mind paying for the BBC as it is such a high quality 'product'. I use BBC radio, TV, iPlayer and the enormous range of web and mobile content daily but I also understand that those who don't use said 'product' are much aggrieved t having to pay for it.
What a conundrum.
Last edited by SwalePie; 11-06-2020 at 06:32 PM.
Hall Of Fame
Therein lies the point though. Opinions vary on whether the BBC is as unique and trusted as it once was, and the critics come from various different parts of society and all around the political spectrum.
To be fair, this isn't necessarily the fault of the BBC. The media world and the world generally has changed and the BBC was never likely to retain its special/unique status forever.
The licence fee played its part in kick-starting television broadcasting and laying the ground for the number and variety of channels we have today, but I think the days when people were willing to pay an automatic fee to sustain one particular broadcaster, which they might not even watch or listen to, are inevitably coming to an end.
Hall Of Fame
The issue is that the BBC is funded through the totally transparent licence fee, which admittedly isn't cheap. I just wonder how some people think apparent 'free' channels like ITV and Channel 4 and 5 are funded. They are funded through the stealth tax of advertising, which means that a 30 minute episode of Coronation Street is really a 23 minute episode with 7 minutes of ads. Who pays for these ads? We do of course. If we buy a sofa in the latest SCS megasale or a bag of Walkers crisps, part of the price we pay funds ITV etc. The media in this country in general has a heavy right wing bias, which makes BBC impartiality look left wing to some.
Hall Of Fame
I'm sorry, UTM, you know I'm normally complimentary about your posts but this one makes no sense. Shouldn't there be a comma between government and terrified? It makes a big difference.
Hall Of Fame
Here is an interesting dilemma for those of you who think the BBC is left wing biased. Track and trace has shown that 33% of the sample could not be traced so is it your opinion that the BBC should say:
The government track & trace problem succeeds in 2/3 of the sample OR
government fails to follow up with 33% of track and trace?
Come on, be objective PSAW and fellow anti's.
Posting Permissions