4 ms·

The live coverage is pretty good. I've quit watching TV for ages. But oddly, i'm hooked on their coverage for the past 48 hrs, via the live webcast. It remind

by vimalg2 16y ago

The live coverage is pretty good. I've quit watching TV for ages. But oddly, i'm hooked on their coverage for the past 48 hrs, via the live webcast. It reminds me of the good old BBC (before i found out they practiced censorship)

tarkin2 16y ago
Out of interest, can you link to sources detailing the censorship?
- JonnieCache 16y ago
  The BBC charter, the documents that detail the BBC's legal obligations as recipients of the license fee, includes extensive rules on political impartiality in broadcasting. http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/page/guidelines-impartiality-introduction http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/page/gui... However, these are simply the BBC's own internal guidelines which complement the legal codes of "due impartiality" which apply to all television in the united kingdom http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/impartiality/ http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-code... Observers sometimes construe this as state censorship. In fact it is only applied in response to mass citizen complaint against blatantly objectionable programming, and in to my memory works more often against the government than in their favor.
hcho 16y ago
And not without a reason, they have a sizeable amount of ex BBC people in their staff.
- borism 16y ago
  Heck, they have Sir David Frost himself!
bane 16y ago
It's like watching the kind of news I remember when I was a kid, not the present information free, opinion laden broadcast we get in the States these days. It's actual journalism. Just watching now I heard "he can't confirm this yet, but this is what we heard" which is something so very rare to hear these days. The American media will often report even the vaguest rumors without the necessary caveats. Fox will even run questions along the bottom "outrageous thing is true?"

by vimalg2 16y ago

tarkin2 16y ago

Out of interest, can you link to sources detailing the censorship?

JonnieCache 16y ago
The BBC charter, the documents that detail the BBC's legal obligations as recipients of the license fee, includes extensive rules on political impartiality in broadcasting. http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/page/guidelines-impartiality-introduction http://www.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/page/gui... However, these are simply the BBC's own internal guidelines which complement the legal codes of "due impartiality" which apply to all television in the united kingdom http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code/impartiality/ http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-code... Observers sometimes construe this as state censorship. In fact it is only applied in response to mass citizen complaint against blatantly objectionable programming, and in to my memory works more often against the government than in their favor.

hcho 16y ago

And not without a reason, they have a sizeable amount of ex BBC people in their staff.

borism 16y ago
Heck, they have Sir David Frost himself!

bane 16y ago

It's like watching the kind of news I remember when I was a kid, not the present information free, opinion laden broadcast we get in the States these days. It's actual journalism. Just watching now I heard "he can't confirm this yet, but this is what we heard" which is something so very rare to hear these days. The American media will often report even the vaguest rumors without the necessary caveats. Fox will even run questions along the bottom "outrageous thing is true?"