Who's Mrs Hopkins. I've never heard of her. Someone did say why the BBC are like they are on ITV, I think it was,it's about where they recruit and the kind of people they recruit. I'm pretty sure there has been a few well known people leave the BBC in the last 10yrs or so who obviously didn't think they fitted in there anymore. Can't think of names, but they do pop up on other channels where they seem to be more able to air their views.
They might as well put adverts on,the amount of time they waste between programmes advertising all their other programmes. Cut that lot out and make some money.
Fully accept that the NHS has just one purpose and despite that, it is failing. Also fully accept that the BBC is not just one channel, nor did I say that absolutely every single thing that the BBC output was bad or wrong - however, the BBC, just like the NHS gets held as some sort of religion.. untouchable, and if you dare criticise it, you get a load of handwringing and the usual "you'll be sorry if it was to go" routine The holier-than-thou attitude from both of those institutions and in particular the refusal to accept that there are issues, big ones, and resolve them is exactly what IS going to lead to the downfall of the organisations. I used to genuinely love the BBC for many things, watching and listening to it for a significant majority of my day - now, I barely go near it. The only reason I still pay the licence fee is because others in the house watch live TV - if I lived alone, I would join the many millions who have deserted the BBC. If, as we keep being told, the BBC is so good then let it stand on it's own two feet commercially - make it a subscription model and if you want to pay for it, you can. They won't go down that path though, because they know that if they did, revenues would collapse even further thus proving just how unpopular and disliked it has become.
I don't want subscriptions as i don't pay for anything online with credit card or dedit card, tv is just getting bad for repeats, i don't know how many times i've watch back to the furture or some of the other stuff, i don't mine watching the repair shop at the mow but as that's now repeats it will start to put me off I don't have an internet tv so nitflix, amazon,sky etc are off as i'm not going to watch it by a computer
I don't think you can claim to be able to read my mind nor can you assume that I am unable to correct my views if incontrovertible evidence comes to light. I'm just as happy to call your president and his policies to account as I am my own and that of other countries. You failed to answer about how Fox News is funded or how you personally decide whether news reports are factual or not no matter where they come from. I already made clear that I thought if the editing of the Trump Speech was wrong, he had a right to complain. I also seem to recall that he pardoned one or more of those involved in storming the Capitol building when he became president so presumably condoned their actions. No getting away from the fact that he also chose the wrong word ie "fight" in his speech.........a word which most people associate with violent behaviour of some sort.
One thing that annoys me (apart from the continuity announcer talking all over the end credits), is the latest thing of them adding that the BBC is funded by me and they thank me very much. It's not like I have a choice! Off the top of my head, the main BBC programmes I watch are Strictly (although I honestly think it could do with a break), The Repair Shop and Bob Mortimer and Paul Whitehouse's fishing programme.
I can't comment on the BBC because I only watched it "live" while visiting there but our CBC is deeply funded by tax dollars too and you'd think it would be unbiased but no, it spouts opinions, not news. I'm glad I get my news from several other sources. I do know that Trump is trying to takeover my country through economic bullying and so far he is not winning. We are going to ally with Greenland and other countries to set up a "friendly" defense association to create a cohesive line of resistance. I really believe if the man doesn't stop trying to dictate to the world, it will indeed turn out to be the U.S. vs the rest! After all, the "big" ones (U.S., Russia, China, India) don't trust each other. Just my opinion but Trump seems to be nothing more that a spoilt, greedy, childish monster. And unfortunately many are starting to think that all of his supporters must not be much different. Or they are blind.
Trump's general behaviour and his destruction of boats in the Caribbean has prompted the EU and CELAC (Latin American and Caribbean states) to hold formal talks this week on strengthening cutural, political, trade and defense ties. Hardly surprising then that the UK stops sharing intelligence about Commonwealth countries in that region. Trump has not only pardoned people found guilty of assorted illegal activities on Jan 6th 2020 but he's appointed some to office in his government. Not the behaviour of an honest, rational, law respecting person, let alone a president. We have all sorts of evidence to show that he not only does not know the Constitution but doesn't understand when people point out the law and cares less. Civil rights under Trump have been so far eroded that the USA is now on the international Civic rights watchlist - USA Watchlist 2025 - Civicus Monitor Read and weep because Farage is a fan. As for BBC news, I think day to day news reporting at home is still good tho sometimes wonder about what they don't report in favour of other stories. I do find the quality of questioning of suspects and witnesses in some situations - fraud, cons, judicial enquiries - can be facile, if not downright stupid but I always thought Panorama's mission was to bring in-depth investigation and reporting of events at home and abroad and expected the highest standards of impartiality but this faith has now been shaken. As has been said, the BBC manages to be judged as biased by all sides of the political spectrum so they must be doing something right but they do need a shake-up in the News and Current Affairs department. I do not believe suscription would improve matters and I don't want to see ITV news sold off shore. Murdoch, Bezos, Musk and other non resident owners of newspapers and media outlets are bad enough without giving them ITV news too.
I would suggest that everyone is "biased" in one way or another - or should we say they hold a "belief" ? Whatever you wish to call it, it exists and in many respects, it is no bad thing. Reasoned debate would never exist if everyone thought the same about everything. What upsets the apple cart is when it is used by powerful/influential people/govts./organisations ( public or private ) to force their own beliefs on everyone else. If you think it is right to invade or attempt to control another country, then several current world leaders will have your support. If you think illegal activity is acceptable, then ditto. If you think women should be treated as 2nd class citizens, then you have a number of religious leaders to choose from as well as the obvious mysoginists who proudly spout their beliefs on social media. If you believe that state or local officials can rightly ignore the various laws in place to protect the environment, again take your pick. There are a lot more issues of course - I'm sure everyone here can add to it if they haven't already done so. It's a sad world we live in.
I agree that there is no such thing as someone who doesn't have some bias or other - the way that organisations such as the BBC could/should counter it is to present both sides of an argument or to have various types of people to give that balance; whilst that is never going to be perfect, they did used to be a hell of a lot better at it than they are in the past 10 years or so. Bias aside, one of the main things they need to focus on is honesty and in particular how they present information that whilst technically factual, is often misleading because of the way they have chosen to present it. Only today, they have yet again been caught out trying to push an 'angle' What he had asked for was a referendum on the death penalty for foreign and domestic criminals. The article, since deleted, removed the domestic and said that he had only asked for a referendum on the death penalty for foreign criminals. Whilst neither option is palatable to most people, the facts should have been reported as they actually were and not altered/redacted to encourage the 'he is nothing but a racist' routine. This is the sort of nonsense that the BBC has been guilty of for a very long time - much of it seemingly very 'low level' and able to be swept away with the 'oops, we're not perfect' type response, but the reality is that they've seen themselves as moral arbiters for far too long. Report, truthfully on what HAS happened and not on what you THINK is about to happen or alter/redact anything to change the tone of the story. By all means educate, inform - but let's lose the preaching... especially given that their own house is in disarray.
Who is Dr Matthew Goodwin? Is he a medical doctor? Why should I or anybody else value his opinion over anyone else's opinion. I've never heard of him
