Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: Should Government Subsidize The News?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 4:48:19 AM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
Zzactly my point. When they have a monopoly why advertise ? It makes about as much sense as advertising a highway or a bridge.

What they are doing is buying influence.

T

(in reply to CruelNUnsual)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 8:21:29 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

...well done, you managed to put the words 'BBC' and 'bias' into a search engine and got stuff that mentioned BBC bias.


Google returned far more than a mere mention of BBC bias, but one must have a mind which is open in order to properly realize it.

quote:


However, one link on the page did leap out at me.....

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1942948.ece

.....The Times reports how the BBC commissioned a report into its own bias. Now, imagine the likelihood that Fox would commission then publish a report that accused it of bias. What are the odds?
Also, that report pointed to bias in BBC reporting of single issue politics. It also said that "its coverage of conventional politics is judged to be fair and impartial".


Why attack FOX, when FOX isn't the subject? Do you feel you need a distraction?

And about that little, tiny problem with "single issue politics" that you mentioned - let's look into that. From your own link:


quote:


THE BBC is institutionally biased, an official report will conclude this week. The year-long investigation, commissioned by the BBC, has found the corporation particularly partial in its treatment of single-issue politics such as climate change, poverty, race and religion.


It concludes that the bias has extended across drama, comedy and entertainment, with the corporation pandering to politically motivated celebrities and trendy causes.


Singled out is the coverage of Bob Geldof’s Live 8 concert and the Make Poverty History campaign. The report says there was no rounded debate of the issues.


The report also raises serious concerns about accompanying programmes, including a drama by the writer Richard Curtis and the finale of his Vicar of Dibley where Dawn French shows a minute-long clip of the Make Poverty History video.


Hmm. The BBC admits to its bias - no small matter, that - regardless of how you try to spin it. "THE BBC is institutionally biased,..." (emphasis mine). Do you even know what it means, when the BBC itself acknowledges that it is institutionally biased... ?


quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

All you've really managed to do is prove that the BBC actually tries to be unbiased, willingly and continually tries to avoid it and doesn't duck when it gets caught being biased.



Actually, I didn't prove nor disprove anything, and neither did you (as the links speak for themselves).


quote:

Oh, and next time you want to try and do a 'slightest bit of research', you may want to contrast and compare a google search of BBC bias with one of BBC impartiality.



I didn't do any research, I said "anyone doing the slightest bit of research..." will soon discover that the BBC is  hopelessly, shamelessly tilted towards the left... and then I provided a convenient link for a Google search for anyone who cared to have a go at it.





< Message edited by Sanity -- 5/10/2009 9:22:49 AM >


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to philosophy)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 8:28:21 AM   
CruelNUnsual


Posts: 624
Joined: 9/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Zzactly my point. When they have a monopoly why advertise ? It makes about as much sense as advertising a highway or a bridge.

What they are doing is buying influence.

T


How does placing ads buy influence?

They place ads for public relations and information purposes.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 8:35:02 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

Say you buy a $250,000.00 ad with a newspaper, so that the newspaper's editor is more likely to do some heavy editing of any articles which may cast you in a bad light.

There's one example...

quote:

ORIGINAL: CruelNUnsual
How does placing ads buy influence?

They place ads for public relations and information purposes.


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to CruelNUnsual)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 8:36:40 AM   
CruelNUnsual


Posts: 624
Joined: 9/28/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Say you buy a $250,000.00 ad with a newspaper, so that the newspaper's editor is more likely to do some heavy editing of any articles which may cast you in a bad light.

There's one example...

quote:

ORIGINAL: CruelNUnsual
How does placing ads buy influence?

They place ads for public relations and information purposes.



To use your own logic, why would they care if they are cast in a bad light by an editor if they have a monopoly?

Sorry, youre stretching with your public utilities example.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 8:48:23 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

Can't you think of any reasons why public utilities desire to have a good public image on your own? 

Put it this way - you don't want to spook the herd.


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to CruelNUnsual)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 10:00:42 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

Not directed at any one poster, but this thing with the BBC admitting to its own institutional bias raises a good point in the context of this thread, in the context of government getting in bed with the media...

The BBC is admittedly extremely biased, and yet its listeners are blissfully unaware of any bias at all.

That's a sobering reality, isn't it? Think about it...

Is that really the road we want to travel down here in the USA?



_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 10:14:39 AM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
Admittedly biased?

What I saw was them conducting their own investigation to try to correct any problems and ensure objectivity.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 10:24:42 AM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
Sanity, the link Phil used refers to an article by the Times. All this is is the Times guessing what the report may say. The BBC refutes the claim it is biased, its own report doesnt say the BBC is biased either. You cant claim something is true, ie "The BBC admits bias" When there is no evidence they have said this themselves. If you have such a link, or can find one, I would welcome it and admit I am wrong.

Here is the actual report referred to.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/18_06_07impartialitybbc.pdf

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 10:28:17 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

I guess people see only what their filters allow...  myself included, of course.

But we can at least try to see a little further, there is always hope.


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Admittedly biased?

What I saw was them conducting their own investigation to try to correct any problems and ensure objectivity.



_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 11:58:00 AM   
Sanity


Posts: 22039
Joined: 6/14/2006
From: Nampa, Idaho USA
Status: offline

That internal report is just as damning, Politesub53.

A few excerpts:

quote:

Suddenly the liberal consensus has discovered there’s a bit of a problem about this cultural diversity business. So these people who think that they are the truthful middle ground, actually a lot of the time they’re all rushing one way on the ship, then they’re all rushing the other way on the ship. They think that other people are the people with different views, and they’re the ones that have always got it right.
Dorothy Byrne, Head of News and Current Affairs, Channel 4


quote:

‘It’s a bit like walking into a Sunday meeting of the Flat Earth Society’, said The Daily Telegraph’s Jeff Randall about his time as Business Editor of the BBC. ‘As they discuss great issues of the day, they discuss them from the point of view that the earth is flat. If someone says, “No, no, no, the earth is round!”, they think this person is an extremist. That’s what it’s like for someone with my right-of-centre views working inside the BBC.’



quote:

Janet Daley, also of The Daily Telegraph, said it was not a systematic political conspiracy to impose party political bias, but ‘something more insidious: a kind of corporate conformity – the uncritical acceptance of smug, consensual, received opinion accompanied by a journalistic credulousness’.



quote:

Georgina Born (Cambridge University), whose in-depth study of the BBC was published under the title Uncertain Vision, said it was ‘a highly self-critical organisation’ with ongoing editorial debates that she had witnessed. ‘On the other hand, it has an extraordinary defensiveness, extraordinary arrogance and a great deal of complacency.’ What worried her was that ‘banging on about enlightenment values can become a cloak for an intellectual mono- culture within the BBC’.



quote:

Justin Webb, the BBC’s Washington correspondent, said the BBC and other broadcasters failed to ask serious questions about why the USA is ‘as successful as it is, why the system it invented works. And, in the tone of what we say about America, we have a tendency to scorn and deride. We don’t give America any kind of moral weight in our broadcasts.’ When Webb was asked about ‘a casual anti-Americanism’, he said he consciously tried to redress it.



quote:

Andrew Marr, former Political Editor, said that the BBC is ‘a publicly-funded urban organisation with an abnormally large proportion of younger people, of people in ethnic minorities and almost certainly of gay people’ compared with the population at large.’ All this, he said, ‘creates an innate liberal bias inside the BBC’.



quote:

Michael Buerk said he believed the problem lay with an insufficiently diverse employment policy. ‘Most of the people working for the BBC are middle-class, well-educated, young metropolitan people.’ He said that, although the BBC had made great efforts to widen ethnic and gender diversity, ‘the actual intake of those people has narrowed quite appreciably in terms of age, social category, and education’.
Roger Mosey, Director of Sport, thought that ‘the BBC has in the past been too closed to a wide range of views and we’ve had too narrow an agenda. And I have some sympathies with what Janet Daley says generally about a liberal/pinko agenda at times.’



And isn't asking the admittedly Liberal BBC to police itself a lot like asking, say,  Rush Limbaugh to police his own radio show for bias?  Having government pay all of Rush Limbaugh's expenses on top of that, while granting him almost a monopoly over the airwaves...


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Sanity, the link Phil used refers to an article by the Times. All this is is the Times guessing what the report may say. The BBC refutes the claim it is biased, its own report doesnt say the BBC is biased either. You cant claim something is true, ie "The BBC admits bias" When there is no evidence they have said this themselves. If you have such a link, or can find one, I would welcome it and admit I am wrong.

Here is the actual report referred to.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/18_06_07impartialitybbc.pdf


_____________________________

Inside Every Liberal Is A Totalitarian Screaming To Get Out

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 4:02:18 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
Thats just it, the BBC doesnt police itself. The BBC trust is independent, as is OFCOM the independent regulator for all broadcasting services.

You are correct though, some of the individuals you quoted work for the BBC and feel there is some degree of bias. If you think about it, if the organisation was biased, and didnt want to admit it, would they include adverse comments from others in the report ? All i can say is watching the news channel, day in day out, I truly dont see it. And for the record, I am not left wing, I am more center to right but also have socialist principals.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? - 5/10/2009 4:46:59 PM   
Jack45


Posts: 220
Joined: 12/20/2006
Status: offline
This is the LEFT subsidizing its own.
They really have nothing to stop them either.
Just as they did with the Banksters

Fed Refuses to Release Bank Data,
Insists on Secrecy
March 5, 2009 (Bloomberg) – The Federal Reserve Board of Governors receives daily reports on bailout loans to financial institutions and won’t make the information public, the central bank said in a reply in a Bloomberg News lawsuit. The Fed refused yesterday to disclose the names of the borrowers and the loans, alleging that it would cast “a stigma on recipients of more than $1.9 trillion of emergency credit from US taxpayers and the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.

(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 133
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Should Government Subsidize The News? Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.414