Go GO BBC!!!!

[Voltar]

I am fed up of this atrocious news broadcaster. They cannot keep their government supporting views to themselves and it made me annoyed when I read:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7314812.stm

I cannot stand it when people like this speak this way about 'it' in conjunction with Labour's trusty messenger pidgeon giving a nice spin to it.

Refer to content as 'it' please so that we can keep this family friendly.

I'd just like to say that 'it' isn't for everyone and has different effects, but the whiney undertone from this person just got me foaming with anger. Misguided and completely biased in an utterly objective way.

It's like hearing of a murder that a chav committed (eg.):

'Wayne had been drinking and had smoked 'it' a few hours before he took young Haley's life away.'

not the drinking that counts. Just the 'it'.

Sensible answers please. Don't want a list of your achievements with 'it' or anything else. Just a response to this article and my post.

Thankyou , and if this gets out of hand please close it Mods.

 

[Voltar]

Thankyou for your response. It is just so very irritating that an impartial news broadcaster can get away on many repeated occasions with blatant and unfair bias.

 

[Voltar]

Yes but taht's because most media is revunue making.

The bbc is paid by are fees. Hence it's mandate is to be impartial.

Exactly! But why doesn't anything get done about it.

Also what they've done to the English language is shameful. The whole 'dumbing down' thing is so true.
Has anyone else noticed this descent into mediocrity?

 

[Voltar]

I agree with you Platypus. For an 'establishment' like the BBC which foreigners always rant about like some of my tutors here in Spain, BBC is so good etc. You have to really wonder. They are becoming no better than the Sun at this rate, in fact it's worse given their reputation and the actual sad truth that they are just Labour Government funded sensationalist scaremongers.

 

[Voltar]

Thanks for your responses people!

I still after having considered the article and the subsequent show, cannot see what anyone is going to gain from this. In some areas they are just stating the absolute obvious: 'stronger than in the 60s'... well no st sherlock, it's probably similar for almost everything else. Even, for example, wine has gotten stronger in terms of %. I imagine in 1960 it was rare to find 14% wine or more. (unless fortified).

The idea of making an attempt to inform people on this issue is going in line with guess who's education-pap-policies. It is nice that they want to inform people, but OcUK:


"To what extent does publicity add to a worsening social endemic?" Discuss. Interpret this title however you like and put as much or as little consideration into your answers as you see fit.

Opinions/responses much appreciated!

 

[Voltar]

Read it analytically please. It is clear from the wording and the tone that it does indeed convey a pejorative bias. IRRESPECTIVE of the half-baked conclusion at the end.

 

[Voltar]

I think that in response to your comment Evangelion, I think that's a bit immature to say that edit: not the post above mine but at te top of this page. Why? Because the BBC are obviously not going to present this in a totally good light are they? Then we'd have people up in arms over the glorification of cannabis and harmful substances would we not?
The only possible way for them to deal with this is to put it in a negative light with about 30 seconds dedication to 'rounding' the article with some cant about possible good effects. Then by idiotic logic, they are not biased and present it 'openly and honestly' do they not?

 

[Voltar]

Written in perfectly rational English. Or if you prefer I'll put it into tetrameter.

It does address those given facts
journalism cannot give praise
to certain illicit products
lest it incur the great wrath of
the omnipotent commissar.


That better? And I haven't put any side to what I'm saying. Nor have I given my opinion on the subject matter.
A news site cannot portray that which is illicit as being good or beneficial: it contradicts and undermines the current legislation. Thus, this woman's 'conclusion' comes across as contrived. Think about it.

However, it's nice to have an open debate with someone taking the opposing stance.

 

[Voltar]

'Raising awareness' is a big favourite amongst the reds atm as well as in the Cameron camp.
It is indeed an undeniably good thing to 'raise awareness' and 'educate' people. Just the way that they approach it is unfortunately not. Good intentions don't produce good results necessarily.