ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

Mr Jack said:
You really are hard of reading aren't you? Can you point to anywhere I said it's 100% publicly funded? No, because I didn't.

That would be.... public funding :rolleyes:

When you can't even understand really basic things like the difference between a state broadcaster and a publicly funded broadcaster it's no wonder you spout such an unending stream of drivel.
Click to expand...

Who owns it?
 
KillBoY_UK said:
When RT was created over HALF its budget came from the russian state directly with the rest publicly at 30million this year the russian state has given it 300 million with next to nothing commeing directly from the public. Is rarely critical of it self or Putin and his government

To you this is not state funded to you.

The BBC is 74% funded by the public via the licence fee, with just under 5% is from government grants (but is being phased out) with most of the rest commeing from the sale of programs and advertising out ouside of the UK. BBC is critical of it self and the governments of the time ,heck the current government and conservatives hate that fact its mostly public funded.

To you its a state broadcaster.

You must be off your nut.

You have nothing critical to say about RT or the Russian government (funny that) but yet love to be critical of the west, the UK, the bbc and the US.
Click to expand...

Same question: Who owns it?
 
RaohNS said:
Same question: Who owns it?
Click to expand...

Technically owned by the governments but is a Statutory corporation formed by the royal charter, it is funded by the public money mostly. It does not report to the government, it is not government accountable.

If it was privately funded or did not have the BBC trust or the royal charter oversight it runs the risk of being owned by private organisations and individuals with their own agendas. Like say FOX news or the Murdoc press etc. It’s not perfect and I would like some changes but it’s better than most similar organisations

Now answer question please

Who owns RT, who funds RT, who does RT report to, who does RT get a mandate from or even its agenda.
Are you ever critical of RT or the Russian government? There are plenty of people here who like the BBC but are still critical of the it and the UK government
 
Last edited:
I never argued who owns RT. I know its state broadcast and is funded and owned by the Kremlin.

BBC is owned by the state ergo it's a state broadcaster. It does receive govt and funding from elsewhere eg the EU. This was my point from the last few posts. Its fine saying some things but to just openly lie is another thing.
 
RaohNS said:
I never argued who owns RT. I know its state broadcast and is funded and owned by the Kremlin.

BBC is owned by the state ergo it's a state broadcaster. It does receive govt and funding from elsewhere eg the EU. This was my point from the last few posts. Its fine saying some things but to just openly lie is another thing.
Click to expand...

You have not answered all my questions still

He is a new one which more likely to be bias, a 75% publicly funded news organisation setup by a charter

or

One that was setup by a government with no accountability to the people it "serves" while it gets half its funding from the state directly and the rest from private organisation/companies.

You get very annoyed and are critical of bias media after all.
 
So the Americans are allied to ISIS now according to some on here? That really is such twisted logic. So whom have they been bombing all this time (Sarky comments aside about the recent mistake)? Not the Syrian government troops, Kurds or the 'moderate groups' they support.

If the lorries had just been set on fire why were there so many casualties? The UN survivors all claim they were attacked continuously by aircraft. Are they making that up after 20 colleagues were killed? According to some on here they are.
 
All this arguing and finger pointing on all news outlets etc is funny, who did this, why, it was them, it was us haha.

If people just sat back and took a breather because lets be honest, the people that matter already know who did this, and pretty much every innocent civilian attack or attacks on troops and aid workers etc etc that have been killed or injured.

There will be countries out there who have military tech, especially satellites etc that are just sat there, 24 hours a day, watching everything that goes on in Syria, and anywhere else in the world if they want to. We will only be shown what they want us to see.

Shirley
 
KillBoY_UK said:
When RT was created over HALF its budget came from the russian state directly with the rest publicly at 30million this year the russian state has given it 300 million with next to nothing commeing directly from the public. Is rarely critical of it self or Putin and his government

To you this is not state funded to you.

The BBC is 74% funded by the public via the licence fee, with just under 5% is from government grants (but is being phased out) with most of the rest commeing from the sale of programs and advertising out ouside of the UK. BBC is critical of it self and the governments of the time ,heck the current government and conservatives hate that fact its mostly public funded.

To you its a state broadcaster.

You must be off your nut.

You have nothing critical to say about RT or the Russian government (funny that) but yet love to be critical of the west, the UK, the bbc and the US.
Click to expand...

To me it's not who funds the BBC but who runs it and how many strings can the government of the day pull.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom