Truth Seeker Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Also don't forget the BBC receives funding from the EU, I'm sure that will make them impartial with the EU Referendum debate. BBC admits receiving millions in grants from EU and councils. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9055183/BBC-admits-receiving-millions-in-grants-from-EU-and-councils.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 But is it preferable? I don't mind adverts. Besides, with product placements, etc. even that has gone now. I think TV tax should be scrapped. If the BBC is so good it will survive. If not, bye bye. Vastly preferable to ads from my point of view. I also feel like the programming is of higher standard at the BBC than the likes of ITV/C4/whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Especially on radio, adverts are intrusive are rarely in keeping with the tone of the broadcast. Imagine a Today piece on child abuse followed by and advert for Sugar Puffs. The Shake 'n' Vac lady popping up during an intermission in the Proms. Alex Brindley spending 10 minutes prattling about pizza toppings when you're waiting for the local news, because a Dominos have sponsored the quiz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Well the UK is fully digital now. The technology is already in place for encrypted transmissions and conditional access, just like Sky. No real need for the licence fee any more now. Just a smartcard with a minimal annual fee to pay for the basics like transmitters and suchlike giving you the free stuff then add on subscriptions for additional content. Sounds mega expensive to implement, but it'll probably cost less to administer than the current postal bill for the threatening letters alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trumps Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 The BBC is completely out of control An Independent Scotland will see the end of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Well the UK is fully digital now. The technology is already in place for encrypted transmissions and conditional access, just like Sky. No real need for the licence fee any more now. Just a smartcard with a minimal annual fee to pay for the basics like transmitters and suchlike giving you the free stuff then add on subscriptions for additional content. Sounds mega expensive to implement, but it'll probably cost less to administer than the current postal bill for the threatening letters alone. But it will - without even a shadow of doubt - end up costing users many times what they currently pay. For the shareholding money-grabbers, I can't see them somehow objecting to how much the public pay, as long as they get the fat cat cheque! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Turning off your television screen is a revolutionary act. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 Also don't forget the BBC receives funding from the EU, I'm sure that will make them impartial with the EU Referendum debate. I was reading a BBC news article earlier today about the Crimea situation. It's already very apparant that they have a pro-EU agenda. Take a look at this paragraph: Russia annexed Crimea in southern Ukraine last month following a controversial referendum branded illegal by Kiev and the West. The peninsula has a majority ethnic Russian population. Source A 5 year old could see how this paragraph constitutes misleading and one-sided news coverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Isn't that what happened? Russia took over The Crimea without negotiation. There was a referendum. There are serious doubts about the manner of that referendum. But had it been properly conducted the referendum it would probably go the same way. Which of those facts from the paragraph is incorrect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Isn't that what happened? Russia took over The Crimea without negotiation. There was a referendum. There are serious doubts about the manner of that referendum. But had it been properly conducted the referendum it would probably go the same way. Which of those facts from the paragraph is incorrect? The first line, perhaps? The last line is probably the most accurate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 From Chambers - annex /ə-neksˈ/ transitive verb To add to the end To join or attach To take permanent possession of To purloin, appropriate (informal) To affix To append Isn't that what happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 The deception is in these words, or more importantly what is not said in these words: a controversial referendum branded illegal by Kiev and the West. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Which is all true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 It's also true the UK and US war in Iraq was illegal under international (and national) law but you don't see the BBC refer to it as such. They cherry pick the bad about UKGov's enemies and cherry pick the good for UKGov. Where's the mention of the referendum being considered legitimate by others? They could have said "a referendum branded legal by everyone but the US/EU who have a vested interest in presenting it negatively as controversial and illegal". Or why not mention the majority democratically voted in favour of joining Russia, which is hardly ab unlikely result given the demographics. I for one would like some explanation as to why they think it "illegal" to have a referendum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.