US bashing and Bushate are all the rage in Britain and the BBC has apparently thrown in the towel and joined Reuters in printing salacious headlines and vacuous articles.
Example:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6376639.stm
This article has a great headline but when read it doesn't match the story. The article provides no facts supporting the headline, it just cites the guesses of their security correspondent. It mentions Central Command in Florida but never relates it to the story.
Why would the BBC stop so low just to take a shot at the US from across the Atlantic? In order to pander to the anti-American crowd in Europe they have forfeited their reputation as an unbiased news source.
2007-02-20 06:33:01 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Saying it doesn't make it so, Jesi. I find it ironic that you cite a lack of facts in the story, but actually it reads a lot like one of your own posts. I don't get any "U-S bashing" or "Bush hate" from this piece, just a tactical overview of what may lie in store for Iran.
Now go get your tinfoil hat adjusted and report to your masters at Faux News that it pays to read something more than once. Your mastery of the slanted, leading question makes it all the more curious that you should attack a reputable media organization for being biased.
Have a nice day.
2007-02-20 06:38:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 2⤋
I agree. I used to love listening to BBC news on Sirius and reading the BBC news website, but stopped doing so about a month ago. Ok, I admit I still check the EPL news on BBC Sport, but that's it, I swear. Ok, so I still read the BBC news page, but nevertheless, it does upset me when I do.
As for why there has been such a change, I am not certain. The UK public has never truly supported the war in Iraq and it could be that the BBC is starting to catch that bug as well. Too bad.
2007-02-21 04:07:44 · answer #2 · answered by btmead21 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A couple points...
First, I do believe that the BBC is more likely to take the "mainstream media" approach (left-leaning, whether they know it or not). It's almost a systemic condition.
Second, I HOPE we do have plans for how to attack Iran. What kind of a hairbrained military central command would NOT have contingency plans for potential future conflicts?
We better have plans for some other rogue states as well. If Hillary gets elected, she can have a party with Nancy Pelosi and John Murtha and Jane Fonda and burn all of our military preparedness plans!
2007-02-20 11:10:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure which version of the BBC News you're watching, but I'm having a hard time figuring out what you're talking about.
In the US we have CNN and Fox News. Fox has a stated purpose of being conservative and more right wing. They justify it by saying CNN is more left wing.
And CNN, what the hell was with all that crap about Anna Nicole Smith?
Good God! You would've thought a nation's president had died.
She was a stipper!
So then you're left with the BBC. At least they seem to know there's a rest of the world. Looking at America's "news" sources, you would never know anyone else existed but us.
2007-02-21 01:12:14 · answer #4 · answered by buzzzard 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why? Well first of all the form of your question implies that your assumption is true. There are not neccessarily facts in evidence to support your statement that 'the BBC surrendered it's reign as the world's preeminent news source and became a tabloid', so asking 'why' it did is disengenuous.
However, IF it did, and you REALLY wish to know why, it's because there is more money in tabloid news than there is in hard journalism. Ask Fox News if you don't believe me.
2007-02-20 06:44:50 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I really don’t see the connection in the article that you linked to. I’m sure that most people know that the U.S. has targets in Iran already picked out (and I hope they have a few picked out in Syria, North Korea, Russia, China…..).
I have always found BBC World News to be so balanced and unbiased that it is almost boring. I don’t know of any other news program that reports just the facts with so little opinion.
2007-02-20 14:24:36 · answer #6 · answered by Walter D 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I didn't see any hate america or bushate in the article. What, if its not Fox news, its bashing us?
Newsflash-- there are alot of people in the world unhappy with what we've done in Iraq-- how do you not know this?
You've got to be awfully naive to think that planners would not be thinking of what to target in Iran "should" it come to that. There are tons of contingency plans in the military so that if somebody says go open up a can of whoop-a** on them, it happens quick.
2007-02-20 06:48:01 · answer #7 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
We, Modern Humans, are media whoremongers, the media whores make lotta money from exciting,shocking. News is boring. Haircuts are not newsworthy, naked royalty is not newsworthy, hot babes are not newsworthy, muscle men are not newsworthy, they are just following the shiny coins trying to catch a few before they roll into the sewer pipes.
When the media makes the news, and we believe it as Gospel Truth, then we all have lost perspective.
§☺§
2007-02-20 06:49:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
People began to see that there were less facts in at the BBC than in the tabliods.
2007-02-20 06:38:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Trash sells. Yet to figure it out myself but oh well can always line the birdcage with the NYT paper and now tune out the BBC.
2007-02-20 06:37:41 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋