If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Murdoch: 'Blair Attacked BBC Over Katrina Coverage'
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Story
Rupert Murdoch has said that Blair has criticised the BBC's coverage as impartial and 'full of hate' for the USA. In my eyes there wasn't any but I'm sure others will disagree.
However my point is, is how can Murdoch criticise anyone about impartial media coverage while his scummy little rag has done it's best to demonise certain groups of people ay?
Rupert Murdoch has said that Blair has criticised the BBC's coverage as impartial and 'full of hate' for the USA. In my eyes there wasn't any but I'm sure others will disagree.
However my point is, is how can Murdoch criticise anyone about impartial media coverage while his scummy little rag has done it's best to demonise certain groups of people ay?
0
Comments
He's just trying to sell more papers.
The complaint was referring to BBC World Service I believe. The BBC’s domestic coverage and World Service reporting do vary quite considerably. And I’m guessing your opinion is based on the BBC’s domestic service.
It’s difficult to make direct contrasts but compare the BBC’s coverage of Hurricane Katrina with their coverage of the 2003 heat wave in France In both countries many people died - in part due to government incompetence. In terms of numbers what happened in France was worse yet I don't remember the BBC being at all critical.
Comparing the BBC to privately owned media like the stuff Murdoch owns is irrelevant. Nobody is forced to support the Sun, Sky News and the Times financially. Anybody that owns a TV has to fund the BBC. If you don’t like the bias of the Times you can buy another newspaper, etc. If you don’t like the BBC you still have to pay for it. And Murdoch doesn't claim that his media is impartial, the BBC claims itself to be neutral. Obviously only the most naive believe that but the BBC continue to push that lie...
Edited.
I read that as Clinton saying that the BBC reporting didn't contain any factual innacuracies, i.e. refuting Blair's alleged comments.
Oops. :eek2: Tired and hungover, never helps.
I think I skim-read it and saw the bit about Clinton who and didn't read the rest properly.
Perhaps - the main problem I see is that I think if this had happened in France or somewhere in Europe the BBC would not have been as critical. I know it's a while ago now but the reporting of the French heatwave in which thousands died was nowhere near as critical. And the French government there could like the US govt with Katrina have done more.
Why not?
One was a natural disaster, the other a heat wave was too a natural phenomenon.
In both cases government incompetence clearly worsened the situation. Can’t you see that?
Would the French elderly who died in residential homes have died if they had air-con?
These ladies and gentlemen are the sources that govern the daily news.
Hear all, trust nothing. - Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #190.
Other than the obvious geographical differences between the two I don’t see any real difference and you’re claiming that they’re different and not explaining why doesn’t really help either.
Are you trying to say that France’s poor response to the heat wave was because France isn’t the richest country in the world? If so that’s just about the stupidest thing I think you’ve ever said. France is still one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Like the American federal government with Katrina the French government was incompetent.
An obvious difference is the power of the two governments to affect the two disasters outcomes. France wasn't in the position of refusing to build more clouds, against the advice of every expert and it's own army, or was it?
On the other hand, a good percentage of it's staff weren't thousands of miles from home collecting oil.
The two situations are not comparable in any way. The US could have helped by not cutting funding, and by laying on a few buses to get the poor out, instead of just leaving everyone to rot. The heatwave was a lot different, in that it did not effect one limited geographical range, and was not avoidable by simply moving people and actually providing some food and water. Laying on 50 million air-con units isn't quite as achievable as laying on a few hundred buses and some military ration packs.
But to get back to the point.
Anthony Blair very probably did condemn the BBC for attacking his dear little chum Dubya. That says more about the toothy cunt than the BBC, I think. The BBC are not "Government-owned", but the simple fact is that if Blair says jump, the Beeb do ask how high, in case the Government don't allow the tax-scroungers to impose yet another inflation-busting tax increase on the poor.
The BBC should be shut down immediately, the money-wasting tax-cheat benefit scroungers that they are. It has no place in a modern world.
Who really believes anything Rupert Murdoch says anyway?
Let along hearsay in a supposed private conversation.
If the hearsay is true, and thats what Tony blair did say, hes only hurting still from his government being caught out robbing from the internet to pad out its dossier on Iraq.
What a hideous clueless **** Tony Blair is :mad:
I think kermit just about covered it.