3 ms·

yeah, and Trump will no doubt retort that this is BBC fake news in the light of their legal battle over (improperly) editing his speech the BBC is required by

yeah, and Trump will no doubt retort that this is BBC fake news in the light of their legal battle over (improperly) editing his speech the BBC is required by its charter to provide a “balanced” view and this often result in unbearable smugness and vaulting to “we are the ultimate arbiters of truth” this is a big pity, because the alternative is Fox News / GB News

sometimes_all 6mo ago
> the BBC is required by its charter to provide a “balanced” view I find this hilarious; the BBC has rarely provided a balanced view on many things. Indians (at almost every point in the political and social spectrum) will easily notice the bias and smug holier-than-thou attitude on India-specific news/opinion.
- librasteve 6mo ago
  well yes, balanced as in the net Islington dinner party
  - librasteve 6mo ago
    as a brit that has lived in the US and EU and visited many places (not yet India) … I can well imagine that the BBC looks like the British imposing our views with a wrapper of intolerable righteousness … please allow me to apologise on behalf of all us licence payers
    - sometimes_all 6mo ago
      Why would you have to apologize? If I had to apologize on behalf of all the drivel Indian newspapers write, it'd take me more than a month. It's pretty clear that newspapers around the world are now decoupling from the actual wishes and necessities of their subscribers/licensees. The latter are not to blame, especially when they are willing to pay for their news. Plus I don't have to read the BBC if I don't want to, but media literacy, combing through nonsense and finding the actual necessary bits, etc. are important, and that needs me to read news from different sources and countries, including that of BBC sometimes.
      - GJim 6mo ago
        You clearly haven't spent long enough in Blighty to identify sarcasm.
        sometimes_all 6mo ago
        Apologies. I haven't even spent a minute in Blighty, so I took their post in good faith. I should've learned from my experiences with their news...
        librasteve 6mo ago
        who me?
GJim 6mo ago
>the BBC is required by its charter to provide a “balanced” view You say this like it is a bad thing. The BBC journalism is rather good and quite rightly seeks to be as impartial as possible. To compare the likes of Rupert Murdoch as a credible alternative to be BBC (or indeed, any news media which lacks a 'fairness doctrine') is simply idiotic.
- librasteve 6mo ago
  so, yes and no I believe in an active, pluralist and free press. Simplistically, this should emerge spontaneously from a free market in publications and subscribers. But newspapers are prone to capture by rich folk who can then manipulate political destinies (Heart, Murdoch, Bezos). Realistically, a state funded media channel such as the BBC is a good balance to that, but it is idiotic cant to pretend that a “neutrality charter” is meaningful since such organs tend to become captured by “dinner party activists” and foster groupthink about what neutral is. So I agree with the top comment that the BBC has a tendency to be a righteous preachy outfit.

sometimes_all 6mo ago

> the BBC is required by its charter to provide a “balanced” view I find this hilarious; the BBC has rarely provided a balanced view on many things. Indians (at almost every point in the political and social spectrum) will easily notice the bias and smug holier-than-thou attitude on India-specific news/opinion.

librasteve 6mo ago
well yes, balanced as in the net Islington dinner party
- librasteve 6mo ago
  as a brit that has lived in the US and EU and visited many places (not yet India) … I can well imagine that the BBC looks like the British imposing our views with a wrapper of intolerable righteousness … please allow me to apologise on behalf of all us licence payers
  - sometimes_all 6mo ago
    Why would you have to apologize? If I had to apologize on behalf of all the drivel Indian newspapers write, it'd take me more than a month. It's pretty clear that newspapers around the world are now decoupling from the actual wishes and necessities of their subscribers/licensees. The latter are not to blame, especially when they are willing to pay for their news. Plus I don't have to read the BBC if I don't want to, but media literacy, combing through nonsense and finding the actual necessary bits, etc. are important, and that needs me to read news from different sources and countries, including that of BBC sometimes.
    - GJim 6mo ago
      You clearly haven't spent long enough in Blighty to identify sarcasm.
      - sometimes_all 6mo ago
        Apologies. I haven't even spent a minute in Blighty, so I took their post in good faith. I should've learned from my experiences with their news...
      - librasteve 6mo ago
        who me?

GJim 6mo ago

>the BBC is required by its charter to provide a “balanced” view You say this like it is a bad thing. The BBC journalism is rather good and quite rightly seeks to be as impartial as possible. To compare the likes of Rupert Murdoch as a credible alternative to be BBC (or indeed, any news media which lacks a 'fairness doctrine') is simply idiotic.

librasteve 6mo ago
so, yes and no I believe in an active, pluralist and free press. Simplistically, this should emerge spontaneously from a free market in publications and subscribers. But newspapers are prone to capture by rich folk who can then manipulate political destinies (Heart, Murdoch, Bezos). Realistically, a state funded media channel such as the BBC is a good balance to that, but it is idiotic cant to pretend that a “neutrality charter” is meaningful since such organs tend to become captured by “dinner party activists” and foster groupthink about what neutral is. So I agree with the top comment that the BBC has a tendency to be a righteous preachy outfit.