the oceans... rivers .. and streams ... and showing it worldwide when big businesses and America. England, Europe and Australia (THE WORST CULPRITS)are doing a better job of it.. ITS SO HYPOCRYTICAL AND LETS OUT EMOTION OF ANGER AND HATRED AT THE HYPOCRYCSY. They even have the cheek to blame the locals...huh!!
2006-12-09 17:35:45 · 2 answers · asked by Saddam 1 in Environment
You need to look to the function of the BBC. It is not a conservation association, it doesn't have a hundred environmental workers sitting around just doing nothing, it is a news organization. As such, broadcasting the news, letting people like you know about the problem, is the most it can do.
Now that you have seen what the problems are, the BBC has fulfilled its obligation to the environment. Now are you going to do something to help the environment, donate money, volunteer time, or will you sit at the computer and gripe?
=)
2006-12-09 18:16:47 · answer #1 · answered by wdmc 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe because if they blame the locals who can't harm the BBC it's safer then blaming big corporations who buy advertising on BBC? In the end, it's always about money, they don't care about people, the people are chumps and nod their heads when the TV tells them to.
2006-12-09 17:44:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋