5 ms·
Huh? Thomson Reuters isn't government owned. BBC are a statutory corporation, as are Channel 4, but there is no direct government involvement in either.
by NeedMoreTea 7y ago
Huh? Thomson Reuters isn't government owned. BBC are a statutory corporation, as are Channel 4, but there is no direct government involvement in either.
- roenxi 7y ago> Huh? Thomson Reuters isn't government owned. Might have been talking about the Canadian Broadcasting Commission; but I don't know anything about Canada. > BBC are a statutory corporation, as are Channel 4, but there is no direct government involvement in either. I found it interesting that there seems to have been something like a minor scandal in 1985 when it was revealed that MI5 was vetting who held BBC leadership positions [0]. 1985 was a long time ago; but there is a history there of quiet coordination between government and BBC. I'd still rather have the BBC than CNN or Murdoch though. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC#MI5_vetting_policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC#MI5_vetting_policy
- NeedMoreTea 7y agoAye perhaps, but I thought Reuters were a fair bit bigger than CBC. I think CBC are a similar sort of hands off corporation to C4 and the Beeb, but I don't know Canadian laws too well so there may be differences. Asking for a security vetting of senior staff isn't so different to BAe (at the time) or a local council asking for one. There'd be a far larger scandal if someone revealed a fascist or communist ended up running the place, no? Hardly interference in programmes... Agreed on Murdoch. :)
- pjc50 7y agoThe BBC was never entirely free given that until ECHR we had no legal right to free speech of any kind. Examples from the 80s were the ban on Sinn Fein speaking, and the "Zircon affair".
- Mikeb85 7y agoWas referring to CBC. Reuters might be Canadian owned as of recently, but it's certainly not one of the top 3 popular news sources within Canada.