3 ms·

You can't have the government report on the government and expect full independence - even if it is independent of the executive, you still need to fund it some

by Aloha 8y ago

You can't have the government report on the government and expect full independence - even if it is independent of the executive, you still need to fund it somehow, which is going to make it beholden to someone. Both the BBC and CBC have a history of government influence in their reporting - this is not a civil society function I can trust to government.

NeedMoreTea 8y ago
> Both the BBC and CBC have a history of government influence in their reporting Citation absolutely required. The BBC have always sought to be impartial - which brings its own, occasionally absurd, biases. Their charter has always required they separate from government and impartial. They've managed to piss off almost every government, of every colour, in almost equal measure.
- Aromasin 8y ago
  They have a wonderful knack of appearing biased to Labour or Conservative, depending on whether you're Conservative or Labour supporter.
door5 8y ago
>You can't have the government report on the government and expect full independence - even if it is independent of the executive, you still need to fund it somehow, which is going to make it beholden to someone. And private media, controlled by unaccountable billionaire capitalists and funded by corporate advertising, can be trusted? With publicly funded media, there can be far more scrutiny, openness and criticism. I mean, look at the UK and compare the BBC, which has its flaws, to the absolutely repulsive, dishonest and dogmatically right-wing private press.
- zby 8y ago
  At least the private media would compete between themselves.
  - mijamo 8y ago
    Citation needed here. In many countries it does not happen at all. It only works if you have enough billionaires with very different interests to compete against each other. And it does not mean they will compete about everything either.
jayflux 8y ago
> Both the BBC and CBC have a history of government influence in their reporting Do you have a link for this? The govt can’t tamper with the editorial output of the BBC, that’s not how it works.
- vntok 8y ago
  This is false. Check out the D-Notice system (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSMA-Notice https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSMA-Notice) and note there are very recent examples of government interference, notably during Snowden's leaks and the Skripal affair.
  - NeedMoreTea 8y ago
    That hardly makes them government controlled. First D notices apply to all media, second they are a voluntary "government request" to not publish. Various outlets, including the BBC, have plenty of history ignoring these. Some are actioned. Essentially the media body has to be convinced there is a national security case to follow the request. They're not mandatory and not following one results in no government or court action. Just words. Cameron emptily threatened to bring in tougher measures to restrict all media, not just the BBC, during Snowden.

by Aloha 8y ago

NeedMoreTea 8y ago

> Both the BBC and CBC have a history of government influence in their reporting Citation absolutely required. The BBC have always sought to be impartial - which brings its own, occasionally absurd, biases. Their charter has always required they separate from government and impartial. They've managed to piss off almost every government, of every colour, in almost equal measure.

Aromasin 8y ago
They have a wonderful knack of appearing biased to Labour or Conservative, depending on whether you're Conservative or Labour supporter.

door5 8y ago

>You can't have the government report on the government and expect full independence - even if it is independent of the executive, you still need to fund it somehow, which is going to make it beholden to someone. And private media, controlled by unaccountable billionaire capitalists and funded by corporate advertising, can be trusted? With publicly funded media, there can be far more scrutiny, openness and criticism. I mean, look at the UK and compare the BBC, which has its flaws, to the absolutely repulsive, dishonest and dogmatically right-wing private press.

zby 8y ago
At least the private media would compete between themselves.
- mijamo 8y ago
  Citation needed here. In many countries it does not happen at all. It only works if you have enough billionaires with very different interests to compete against each other. And it does not mean they will compete about everything either.

jayflux 8y ago

> Both the BBC and CBC have a history of government influence in their reporting Do you have a link for this? The govt can’t tamper with the editorial output of the BBC, that’s not how it works.

vntok 8y ago
This is false. Check out the D-Notice system (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSMA-Notice https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSMA-Notice) and note there are very recent examples of government interference, notably during Snowden's leaks and the Skripal affair.
- NeedMoreTea 8y ago
  That hardly makes them government controlled. First D notices apply to all media, second they are a voluntary "government request" to not publish. Various outlets, including the BBC, have plenty of history ignoring these. Some are actioned. Essentially the media body has to be convinced there is a national security case to follow the request. They're not mandatory and not following one results in no government or court action. Just words. Cameron emptily threatened to bring in tougher measures to restrict all media, not just the BBC, during Snowden.