ScotsAlan Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 It's no coincidence that Eric Arthur Blair worked at the BBC prior to writing books under the pseudonym of George Orwell. Animal farm was a work of genius. A perfect description of stalin and mao. He predicted it, and it happened. Tens of millions died. But... Erm. No but. He was right. But... He is a right wing hero now. Was he left or right?( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotsAlan Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 It's no coincidence that Eric Arthur Blair worked at the BBC prior to writing books under the pseudonym of George Orwell.Animal farm was a work of genius. A perfect description of stalin and mao. He predicted it, and it happened. Tens of millions died. But... Erm. No but. He was right. But... He is a right wing hero now. Was he left or right?( Edit. Sorry for double post. The great firewall produces strange effects. Han legs are better than any other legs in my neck of the woods :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hissingsid Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 The BBC is totally biased first on Brexit now on Trump, it is a national disgrace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 Channel 4 just as bad. The condescension is cringe worthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stinking enigma Posted November 28, 2016 Author Share Posted November 28, 2016 http://www.activistpost.com/2016/11/fake-news-alert-cnn-finally-admits-white-helmets-staged-fake-video.html The only one though obviously Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinkle Posted December 7, 2016 Share Posted December 7, 2016 I quite like breitbart very concise in depth reporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted December 8, 2016 Share Posted December 8, 2016 I quite like breitbart very concise in depth reporting. Ohhhhhhhhh really...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted January 8, 2017 Share Posted January 8, 2017 I'm reopening this topic as it is still rumbling on in various other threads. I wonder if it is misdirected. The topic Stinky asked us to discuss was the most unbiased news source. I was very critical of this arguing very strongly that all news sources are biased and it was impossible to have an unbiased news source. A far more important issue is whether a news source is consistent within its Dao [ethos, philosophy, direction, way of viewing the world], and also whether it is an accurate news source. The Daily Mail is pretty consistent in its biases, but it isn't a particularly accurate news source. The BBC, in my mind, is also consistently biased, but also a more accurate news source, as is the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times. No news source is perfect, and they often do let their biases distort the accuracy of their reporting - I find it very ironic that Stinky felt he was making some sort of point dragging up that the New York Times' Russian reporter in the 1930s was biased towards Stalin - I would also love to read the entire articles quoted as I suspect some of them are quotes of Soviet officials accurately (but probably uncritically) reported. Good journalism has to be critical and challenge its sources and be self aware of its biases. What news sources do this well? I'm not sure I can give a definitive list, but Russia Today, Fox News and the Daily Mail are lower down my list than the Economist, the FT and the Guardian. I think Pongo has made his points very well and very much agree with what he has written. Bloggers aren't good journalists and you are rarely going to find journalism on Facebook or in the comments. Journalism is more than reportage - it also needs critical thinking of why the source is saying what it is saying and analysis of it. That will always come from a biased position, but that need not effect its accuracy. There is then something different - those paid to support a particular political line and discredit those in opposition to it. Do people think that is something common within UK journalism? It does exist - the smoking and oil lobbies definitely try to influence reporting, and I suppose Woolley would insist Green Peace does too. For me it is noticeable in the continual regurgitation of long dismissed myths in Climate Science by the likes of the Daily Mail, but I don't think there is anything as explicit in the UK as China's 50 Cent Party [link1, link2, link3 - I hope VOA, Freedom House and the New Statesman are eclectic enough in their Daos to satisfy Stinky!!] What has happened in my view is that this more manipulative sort of commentary has gone global in the last few years, with political agendas crossing borders. Fact checking is important, and too often lost nowadays in the internet's noise. Will good accurate sourcing and fact checking be able to survive the internet age? I hope so - the problem is the inherent ability of the internet to become an echo chamber where people only listen to sources that agree with their point of view. So there is no unbiased news source - and all you can do is read widely and learn which sources are consistent and reliable. No doubt we are being manipulated, but then again that is as human as breathing so should we be so surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted January 8, 2017 Share Posted January 8, 2017 No. We should not be at all surprised. You are correct on this as you were in your assessment of the BBC's peculiar brand of bias. If there was such a thing as totally unbiased objective reporting I doubt that it could be produced by humans at all. They all have interests and beliefs and they are all susceptible to their preconceived bias even if they don't realise it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Front page of one of the red tops yesterday: "George Michael had 500 lovers" You've got to love the British print media. Front cover spread plus "more scandal inside". I'm willing to bet the same red top gave next to coverage to the Israeli manipulation of our MPs and our political system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paswt Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 Front page of one of the red tops yesterday: "George Michael had 500 lovers" You've got to love the British print media. Front cover spread plus "more scandal inside". I'm willing to bet the same red top gave next to coverage to the Israeli manipulation of our MPs and our political system. What only 500, what a lightweight Omar Shariff (spelling?) was said to have had thousands. I remember being in an office when this was being discussed by some women and a tear rolled down my leg when I heard " Yes but was he really happy?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 What only 500, what a lightweight Omar Shariff (spelling?) was said to have had thousands. I remember being in an office when this was being discussed by some women and a tear rolled down my leg when I heard " Yes but was he really happy?" The point being that its garden fence gossip not news. Most "news" these days is celebrity bollocks with the odd smattering of what is actually happening in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 What only 500, what a lightweight Omar Shariff (spelling?) was said to have had thousands. I remember being in an office when this was being discussed by some women and a tear rolled down my leg when I heard " Yes but was he really happy?" The point being that its garden fence gossip not news. Most "news" these days is celebrity bollocks with the odd smattering of what is actually happening in the world. If you're lucky! (But it doesn't sell papers to the market they are aiming for). What bit they cover will be dumbed down for the obligatory 10 second attention span. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 rmanx why are you expecting news in a red top? There are better sources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmanx Posted January 11, 2017 Share Posted January 11, 2017 News in a news paper? You would have thought? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.