• @[email protected]
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    109 months ago

    As much as we love a good conspiracy centered around the BBC:

    1. Are they also ignoring pro Brexit rallies?
    2. What other outlets comparable to the BBC have covered the rally?
    3. Was it this rally or all pro remain rallies?

    Ultimately the BBC needs to be free to make editorial decisions on its own and unless people have actual evidence of bias I’m going to say this is just Twitter conspiracy crap. But each to their own 😅.

    • @oroboros
      link
      139 months ago

      The BBC has always fundementally been state controlled media. BBC world, which isn’t readily available within the UK, has in the past done a good job of keeping up the pretence of being neutral for obvious reasons.

      The current set of cunts in power have been really hamfisted and crass in their steering of the narrative. One recent example being Lineker showing the most basic level of humanity nearly getting him fired because it went against these cunts narrative. Lineker is not someone I’d count as a radical…

      Many massive protests on workers rights, police brutality, climate change have got no coverage on the BBC. I think they’ve been pretty free in their editorial decisions, at this point it’s just a dry version of gbeebies.

      Thinking this is some twitter conspiracy crap is either disingenuous or you need to touch grass.

      • @[email protected]
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        -39 months ago

        One recent example being Lineker showing the most basic level of humanity nearly getting him fired because it went against these cunts narrative. Lineker is not someone I’d count as a radical…

        Lineker expressed an opinion that was political in nature. This goes against BBC rules for presenters specifically created so that all presenters can be seen to be impartial. You can argue the rule is stupid (probably correct for a sports presenter that is not involved in news) and you can argue that his opinion was correct (the HomeOffice policy is utterly shit) but if you’re arguing that by applying their own impartiality rules as they were written they are somehow in hock with the government is laughably reaching into conspiracy theory land.

        Thinking this is some twitter conspiracy crap is either disingenuous or you need to touch grass.

        Feel free to provide some evidence that isn’t “the BBC don’t cover things I am interested in therefore they must be biased”.

        • @oroboros
          link
          49 months ago

          Nah, I’m not going to bother providing a lit review. You’re whole response is bad faith or I’ll ill-informed given you don’t seem to know that they were specifically called out for being very selective in there enforcement of said impartially rule, or you are also being selective… c:

          • @[email protected]
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            09 months ago

            Obviously your burden of proof seems very low. Everything is wrong and bad faith if it disagrees with your point of view: there’s absolutely no room for explanation I must be ill informed. Fair enough. I don’t think we’ll agree here. Have a great day 🌷.

      • @oroboros
        link
        29 months ago

        Lineker the far left radical lol, definitely the most surreal one that came to mind for me as well!

    • @funkless_eck
      link
      39 months ago

      Every single protest in the entire UK complains they weren’t on the news (usually to try and get on the news).

      If the BBC had to report on every protest, that’s all the news would be, especially as people would game the system to get themselves on the news.

      So, for the BBC to report on it, it has to be newsworthy: so more than 100,000 people and for it to be about something currently affective and effective. For example, if 20,000 people marched in solidarity with Palestine, is that truly newsworthy? There’s protests about Palestine all the time — how would this one be new… …s.