use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~1 user here now
This sub is for analysis of the behavior and messaging of the media systems, both domestically and abroad.
Fresh questions over BBC impartiality after reporter called for 'clown' Boris Johnson to be sacked
submitted 1 year ago by Chipit from dailymail.co.uk
[–]snub-nosedmonkey 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (10 children)
This is a non-story. The comment was made on her personal Twitter account before she joined the BBC. Everyone is allowed to have personal political opinions, that doesn't mean they can't adhere to impartiality guidelines.
[–]Chipit[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (9 children)
So she suddenly discarded these extreme political opinions just because she was hired at the BBC?
I doubt it. It is far more likely, based on the BBC's track record, that she was hired because she publicly displayed such extreme political opinions.
[–]snub-nosedmonkey 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (8 children)
Describing Boris Johnson as a clown isn't an extreme political opinion. Lots of people from both sides of the political spectrum describe his behaviour as buffoonery or clown-like.
If she had described a left-wing politician as a clown, should she have been exempt from being hired? Every single person has political opinions. My main issue is this headline is incredibly misleading as it suggests she was a BBC reporter at the time and didn't specify it was on her own personal account.
[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (7 children)
If the BBC didn't have such a pervasive pattern of bias you might have a point. But it does, and it ruins the whole thing.
The BBC lost all credibility with the coverage of Brexit where they utter contempt for anyone that dared show their face and support Brexit. They had thousands of people on air that were remain supporters but as soon as someone said they were pro-Brexit they were mocked and shamed and made to look bad by not even allowing them to get their point across. I lost all respect and support for the BBC from their biased coverage, or should I say hackjob.
Watch this video and tell me the BBC isn't biased. They have clearly picked a side. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sfhc_e5P88
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (6 children)
Reality has a liberal bias.
[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (5 children)
Negative. A conservative is just a liberal who has been mugged by reality.
What you're talking about is confirmation bias created by only being exposed to a biased media that regularly refuses to cover stories inconvenient to its narrative.
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (4 children)
Sorry, I realize my response was extremely shitty and didn't address your point. It's pointless to exchange Red vs Blue slogans, especially if we're wanting to have an actual discussion. Rooting out bias in reporting is a daunting task -- dare I say impossible to attain. Especially with the trend of 24-hour media. Especially with twitter journalism and the relentless pursuit of clicks. That's not to say it shouldn't be a goal.
Journalism, as a profession, attracts narcissists, whose only real desire is to be seen as an influencer, without any real qualms about whether the information they report on is real and factual, so long as it keeps them in the limelight. Any prestigious media outlet will seek out prestigious journalists from prestigious universities (or of prestigious parentage). This means that any mainstream journalism will favour the elite, with a inherent bias of promoting the status quo.
The problem with all of this is that the mainstream media are also often right on things. They have the resources to, and often do, put out excellent coverage. But folks, like yourself, have given up wholesale on mainstream media because of the bias you mention. This pushes more and more people to fringe media coverage, which is sometimes right, but certainly not elitist.
It sucks. I wish there were a go-to source of truth. It's exhausting to read a well known newspaper for their coverage on a topic that's interesting, but then to see their bias immediately rear up in the next article about the politically incorrect boogieman of the moment. It means you never get comfortable relying on media. The only person you can rely on is yourself, to think critically, consume multiple sources on a topic, and decide what the real story is.
[–]Chipit[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (3 children)
They've been caught lying so many times it's not funny. We know for a fact they colluded with the Democrats and coordinated coverage with them. These BLM protests are the same thing. We see every day their ugly, biased, unfair coverage that clearly marks them as political activists, not journalists. They are the enemy of the people.
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (2 children)
What do you mean about colluding with Democrats?
[–]Chipit[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 1 year ago (1 child)
Wow, you don't know?
In the 2016 election, the Democrats were exposed as working hand in glove with the media. Journalists sent stories to the Democrats for approval before publication. Yes, this happened.
One notable offender was Glenn Thrush of Politico, who even said "I'm such a hack". His punishment? Banned from the industry forever, you'd think? Nope. He was hired by the New York Times after the election.
You know why Trump is president? The Democrats ordered the media to cover him under their "pied piper" plan. The media was to promote Republican candidates the Democrats considered terrible. Obviously this backfired on them big-time. Yet another reason biased media is the enemy of the people.