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
"Unbiased" BBC block investigation into Hinduja Brothers
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
That bastion of unbiased and open news reporting, the BBC, have now taken the step of blocking the screening of an investigation into the Hinduja brothers by Mark Thomas.
No internet link for ths story I can find, but it was in today's Independent if anyone wants to read it.
Basically Thomas did an undercover investigation into the Hinduja brothers selling arms illegally, and was able to obtain various pieces of military kit form them, including military personnel carriers. This was to be screened on the BBC. Twice now Auntie has pulled the programme after "consultation" with the Hindujas and their lawyers, and now the programme will not be screened at all.
And yet the BBC supporters continue to justify its immoral existence with comments about the "impartiality" of the corporation, and how "business interests" don't get in the way of the news. So good to see this theory de-bunked yet again, I feel.
So much for impartiality and news reporting without bias or outside interference.
No internet link for ths story I can find, but it was in today's Independent if anyone wants to read it.
Basically Thomas did an undercover investigation into the Hinduja brothers selling arms illegally, and was able to obtain various pieces of military kit form them, including military personnel carriers. This was to be screened on the BBC. Twice now Auntie has pulled the programme after "consultation" with the Hindujas and their lawyers, and now the programme will not be screened at all.
And yet the BBC supporters continue to justify its immoral existence with comments about the "impartiality" of the corporation, and how "business interests" don't get in the way of the news. So good to see this theory de-bunked yet again, I feel.
So much for impartiality and news reporting without bias or outside interference.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
However you must keep in the mind that for all its faults, including this incident, the BBC remains infinitely more impartial and unbiased than any other broadcaster in the entire world, and most newspapers as well.
And it would be even more impartial if more people would have supported it at times when it needed support, such as during the Dr. Kelly affair and the disgraceful Hutton report. That way we would still have a truly independent chairman and board of directors, instead of an increasingly government-controlled boardroom.
Still, you can rest assured that on the whole the rest of the media world doesn't deserve to kiss the ground the BBC walks on when it comes to unbiased reporting.
Now, if the second hypothesis is correct then Kermit hasn't got a point at all. I would have thought that as a lawyer Kermit is only too aware of the consequences of making claims you cannot prove beyond reproach and being sued for them. And if the BBC had gone ahead and screened that programme against the advice of lawyers and had to end up paying several million Pounds in compensation, Kermit would be the very first one to complain here about his licence money being wasted in lawsuits due to incompetence.
Not that the BBC is perfect by any means, their coverage does have a slant, its just significantly less slanted than other news outlets.
http://news.independent.co.uk/people/pandora/article327321.ece