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.
BBC's shoddy journalism prejudices murder enquiry
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
And the Beeb report it as if they're right to break the law!
Time to shut them down, as yet again they act contrary to all public interest whilst sucking copiously from the public tit.
Time to shut them down, as yet again they act contrary to all public interest whilst sucking copiously from the public tit.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
Someone had to.
I do not understand why the media should be allowed to report any details of suspects in criminal investigations.
Apart from the problems of prejudicing the trila it is grossly unfair to anyone who is found innocent but may remain tainted by the allegations made about them and broadcast to the world by our horrible media.
i cannot see why any such details are 'in the public interest'
And with the BBC that comes out of my pocket. As fucking usual.
It's grossly unprofessional.
Have the BBC been warned off?
As usual.
Funny how you don't find much time or space to point this out. Your mate's Rupert Murdoch's red-top tabloid, the Soaraway S*n, even published a photograph of the man now charged with the murders (a photograph in which he was jokingly strangling a woman at a party).
Such antics are a trillion times worse than the BBC has ever done. A a trillion times more frequent too.
But it's not the evil Auntie doing them so of course it's best to pretend they didn't take place.
What's Murdoch got to do with owt? Murdoch (for all his faults) doesn't send me to prison if I don't pay him.
We know you hate the BBC with a passion but it is still thousands of times better and more professional than anything else in the media world so if we were to close it down for its wrongdoings the rest of the press and TV and radio broadcasters would have been shut down decades ago.
Time to chill out a bit with Auntie... with Xmas upon us and all...
The Dirty Digger cannot send me to prison for not paying him. That is the crux of the matter.
If the BBC wants to bleed my wallet dry it needs to be responsible. It isn't. So it can fuck off and pay for itself.
Still, good to see that Gordon's seen sense- looks like they're going bust soon anyway :hyper:
If you have an issue with that you should be talking to the government or the judges who hand out such sentences.
Doesn't take much to dry your wallet does it?
Seeing as the BBC broadcatsts 24 hours a day, 365 days a week in hundreds of TV and radio channels and that you can only manage to find and post here a bad story once in a blue moon, I'd say the BBC is doing an extremely good a responsible job.
Naturally no company, business, individual or group is 100% perfect. Such thing is impossible. But that doesn't mean there is no such thing as a responsible company on Earth of course. Trust you to go about the very, very, very rare instances in which there has been a fuck up in order to justify your calls for the removal of the licence fee.
Luckily, other than the odd free marketeer and right winger, few people agree with your views.
Don't worry, the BBC won't go bust and the licence will stay.
The quality of programmes might go down as a result. But doubtless you don't mind that. Indeed, I get the feeling you'd be happy as hell in a cultural wasteland where the only things on offer on the telly are America's Dumbest Criminals, Dream Team and Big Brother if it means you don't have to pay the licence.
The funny thing of course is that you'd end up paying that amount- and probably a lot more- thanks to the extra pennies that will go into every single product you buy to cover the all-important advertising budgets of companies.
If we could ensure the current standards, output and quality would be preserved I'd be more than happy to get rid of the licence. But I don't think such thing exists. Even a combination of subscription and adverts would not be enough.
The bottom line is, once you introduce adverts you are regulated by commercial pressure and ratings. The more one cares about ratings, the more downmarket the product becomes. As poor ITV demonstrates.
Do you mean you see it as a moral issue ?
robbing bastards.
This could be one of the main reason Kermit is so pissed about the BBC and not simply because he is required to pay for the tv licence (or partisan views) but because he is required to pay for the license and feels like he is not getting the value for, in this case, the journalism. Because other media sources rely on private/advertising money to fund themselves, Kermit and other such people may not exhibit the same amount of intent in criticising other media networks (apart from partisan views). After all, we are not obliged to pay for them. See the difference?
I agree that the way the media in general and not just the BBC, as have been in past incidents, handled the reporting was quite careless.
What would be hanging over his head though? is it, that he was suspected of murder? Wouldn’t that be because of the police? What about others that have been suspected in other cases, but is cleared? Should we be sympathetic to them? This is how the police investigative system is, isn’t it? Should there be a way of rectifying any damage caused to those that have been suspected but later cleared? If so, how so? Should the media then apologise to this man? He did seem rather proud to disclose his relationship with the girls to the press.
We had a bit of shit with newspapers stealing our photographs a while back, and they got away with it by saying just that.
Fucking journalists, paracitic bastards.
Yes, it does.
If I watch a competitor of the BBC without paying the BBC then I will be fined £1000 (which goes into the BBC's coffers) and threatened with imprisonment if I then fail to pay the BBC. People do get sent to prison for failing to pay the BBC Tax.
If I buy the Sunday Mirror without first buying the News of the Screws then the Dirty Digger gives me a free DVD to try and tempt me back.
See the difference?
The way the BBC is funded actively prevents public accountability. If I disagree with something that a private company does I withdraw my trade from them- if everyone agrees with me that private company goes bankrupt. If I disagree with something that the BBC does, however, I am legally unable to withdraw my trade from them without being imprisoned.
I have no particular problem with the BBC's output, it is no better or worse than any other TV channel. But I should be given the choice of buying it. After all, if its so fantastic, everyone will.
Whether people get sent to jail or not for not paying the licence has nothing to do with the BBC. That's up to the judges or the law. Take up with them if you must.
The BBC sets the law, and the BBC prosecutes.
Unless you think that by calling its enforcement arm something else it is absolved of all responsibility?
Maybe I should try that. I should set up an extortion body called "Kermit Licensing" and then imprison people who don't pay me- do you think the judges will let me off?
Does it demand that people be jailed for the offence of not paying the licence?
No.
So let's not pretend otherwise please.
Happy Xmas by the way!