06-05-2006, 08:55 AM
|
 |
Guru
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Boston
Posts: 12,184
|
|
Impartiality?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nawbut";p="
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rebellion";p="
if good is the same as skewed like hell to the left then the news will be absolutely fantastic. I've seen enough, they are as biased as the old CNN.
|
The BBC enjoys a reputation worldwide for having the highest standards of impartiality in news journalism. Just because they dont aceept uncritically all news direct from US administration and military sources, or view those sources as the final arbiters of 'truth' in certain matters, it does not then follow that they are 'skewed like hell to the left'. That has become the defining characteristic of some people's determination of 'left' or 'right' bias in media - do they accept uncritically, in a time of 'war', the press war of the one side or the other? I presume we have heard of psyops, propoganda? 'The first casualty of war...' etc?
The BBC plays for neither the one side nor the other. This pisses off both (often, their own government from whom they receive funding), for obvious reasons... |
Apparently not, this link has several links to those who say otherwise. This would include other governments. Oh, and the BBC's own former chairman admits that their news is left. Not only are they not impartial I'd say they're more impartial than Fox, just to the opposite side.
http://www.politicalforum.com/viewto...&highlight=bbc
__________________
JMS gets another English lesson:
Quote:
|
there is no "mostly unique;" thats like saying "sometimes always," its an oxymoron - its either one or the other.
|
The result:
Quote:
|
By the mid-19th century unique had developed a wider meaning, “not typical, unusual,” and it is in this wider sense that it is compared. The comparison of so-called absolutes in senses that are not absolute is standard in all varieties of speech and writing.
|
|