Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Rio de los Brazos de Dios
Posts: 3876

A correspondent named David Rennie who works for the Daily Telegraph of London was interviewed on Bill O'Reilly tonight on Fox News. Rennie really unloaded on BBC as being terribly biased to the left. Even to the extent that they rewrote the dispatches from BBC personnel in the Pentagon in order to make them have an opposite slant and that the BBC coached its reporters into a liberal left position. nAprpos of nothing Rennie gratuitously remarked that an anchor named John Snow at BBC admitted on the air the other nighjt that he had not ever read the Geneva Convention.

Is it possible that Rupert Murdoch owns The Daily Telegraph of London?

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

oxsan


Don't kick until yer spurred.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: Playa d'en London
Posts: 9826

theres a war in iraq and a war in the media. its diffcult to really know whats going on in both instances.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: The Bottom of the Toyem Pole
Posts: 9455

Bill Oreilly's program isn't a very good source of objective opinion.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35669

When Margeret Thatcher was in power, her party complained that the BBC and ITV were biased to the left. Blair's lot, since achieving power, have complained that they go after them too much, too.

Even my father (as right wing as anyone I ever met) doesn't complain about the BBC too much (he'd watch it over other news). I think that it may well be true that the personal political opinions of the majority of the BBC journalists may indeed be left, but I haven't felt that they have given Blair an easy ride, say (which would have offended me enormously), despite the fact that Blair has basically saved the left.

There are two brothers Snow; if I am right, Jon Snow is the one who flails his arms around at large graphics during elections and wars and appears to be something of a loon and Peter Snow is really the anchor (bot on Channel 4, I think, rather than the BBC).

I have always felt that the BBC reports on its items fairly (although there are always the problems with foreign correspondents sympathising with the people that surround them) and also that its choice of items is pretty fair. I quite like the Telegraph, but their journalists are in a poor position to accuse others of bias (given the Telegraph's rightwing bias); I'll think about it, though.

What did occur to me the other day was that the news channels, BBC included, are almost keen for things to go wrong with the war so that they have something to fill the huge timeslots that they have allocated to it.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

Has anyone ever noticed that everyone always moans at the BBC? I think that ought to be telling. What I mean is that whether reporting at home or abroad every single side on an issue usually accuses the Beeb of bias. The Tories accuse it of being to Labour, Labour accuse it of being to Tory. This ought to tell you something about the 'how' the BBC achieves it's balance. In some sense, and I hate to say it about a Murdoch outlet, but Sky has had to do the same thing with it's style, hence it's popularity over here now. Its taken the Beeb mantra for 'how' it reports issues, and added it to the capital available under the News Corp banner (a representation of pure evil of course because its related to that wanker Murdoch).

The Beeb is biased only when it says something against ones own beliefs, but if you listen hard they will do the same to the other side.

quote:

---

Is it possible that Rupert Murdoch owns The Daily Telegraph of London?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Rio de los Brazos de Dios
Posts: 3876

I have always had the utmost respect for the objectivity of the BBC even to the point of considering them at times dull because they would refuse to take sides in an issue. Since the Iraq war started I have not watched then as regularly as before because they have been frequently pre-empted by war news reporting or other news. Rennie's accusation s seemed a bit shaky and shifty eyed. I thought it odd also that a fellow-country print outlet would attack BBC.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

oxsan


Don't kick until yer spurred.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2000
Location:
Posts: 3030

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nutrimentia
Bill Oreilly's program isn't a very good source of objective opinion.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: ........
Posts: 15003

Every once in a while when I get away from this fucking internet I listen to the BBC World Service radio which is also available online I believe.

That is in my opinion fairly free of bias, maybe due to it's international nature.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

quote:

---

Originally posted by nymbus
He does, however, bring guests on with a wide range of opinions. Of course, I think he brings the liberals on in order to rip them to shreds, but they are there, stating their opinions.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Rio de los Brazos de Dios
Posts: 3876

Would it be proper UKese to describe Flaxman as "cheeky"?

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

oxsan


Don't kick until yer spurred.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2000
Location:
Posts: 3030

quote:

---

Originally posted by Phil
that is not how you create balance though nymbus. Having all points of view available on an issue is pointless if the presenter is going to viciously attack one side and not the other. If O'reilly wants to be balanced then he has to viciously attack everyone like decent journalists do, see Jeremy Paxman for details. A good journalist is the one that when asked 'how do you vote?' says 'that's none of your business'

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Rio de los Brazos de Dios
Posts: 3876

You are right Nymbus. O'Reilly states on nearly every episode that he is NOT A JOURNALIST, HE IS AN ANALYST" and he freely
admits that he is driven by his own concepts in analyzing the news. He usually invites the other networks to have someone oppose him with an opposite view if they wish. None has so far been successful. The ratings of Donahue, King and Chung have been miniscule compared to O;Reilly.

O'Reilly is enjormously popular among VOTERS OF MIDDLE AMERICA who are far more conservative than the media likes to admit. He has forced the media to accept the fact however that a large and loyal population of America likes kis brand of analysis.

He ain't very popular in California, Oregon and New York City.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

oxsan


Don't kick until yer spurred.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2002
Location:
Posts: 16327

Oxsan, O'Reilly is not nearly as unpopular in Oregon as you might suppose. Outside of the single mid-sized city in the state (Portland), he is unfortunately very popular.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Rio de los Brazos de Dios
Posts: 3876

Good, I like Bill O'Reilly.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

oxsan


Don't kick until yer spurred.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

quote:

---

Originally posted by nymbus
I never said his show was balanced. I wrote that in response to Nute saying that it was not a source of objective opinions. Big difference. Alternate opinions are represented on the show by the guests that he brings on. He then tears their arguments apart.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: ........
Posts: 15003

quote:

---

O'reilly actually damages the process of politics by ensuring that division is maintained rather than consensus, through the manner in which he deliberately polarises a debate.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

I should add, that to me a decent analyst should not be ripping anyone's arguments apart as such.

It ought to be the case that he/she puts a question to one guest, about say a policy of the other guest's political party. The first guest than expresses her opinion, he/she then turns to the other guest and paraphrase's the first guest's argument towards the second guest, preferably with a sneer on the end and the insinuation that the second guest is incompetent for soem reason. He/she should then listen to the second guest, possibly interupt him and use some figures that the first guest gave in order to make the second guest look stupid. He/she should then turn to the first guest again and accuse them of lying or some such because of what the second guest just said, thus pointing out that although he was being agressive as hell to the second guest he was in fact listening to what he was saying. This 'go between' sparring in which the analysts merely facilitate the two or perhaps sometimes three or four sides to discuss a subject should go on for approximately five to ten minutes or so, where upon ending it is simply 'thank you to my guests' and no opinion from he/she is given on the subject at all.

This is far more entertaining and you actually see some consensus a lot of the time, because of the manner in which the analyst goes about addressing any given issue of the day. The good tv news analyst is an arbitrator with an inquisatorial manner, as opposed to someone who just wants everyone to know what he thinks and very little else.

And before anyone points it out, yes, I would more than likely be a very bad tv news analyst.

Last edited by philjit on 03-30-2003 at 11:58 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Rio de los Brazos de Dios
Posts: 3876

There is no question that O'Reilly tears apart liberal positions and analyzes the news and opposing views with a very conservative position. He admits as much. It is the analysis and opinion that
most of America wants to hear----as the ratings indicate. We don't really want to hear his opposites such as Ellen Ratner (now in England BTW) who never had a neutral or consewrvative opinion in her life. The Hannity and Colmes show has Alan Colmes
(a true and honest liberal) just as contrast to Hannity. Greta van Sustern used to be on Clinton's PR team. If you want to hear true liberal bias go to PBS or NPR they have nothing but that.
I like O'Reilly---as you may can tell. I listened to George Stephanapolous today until my vomiting became serial and I cvouldn't take it any more (well actually I did not vomit but I thought of it)

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

oxsan


Don't kick until yer spurred.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: library
Posts: 19584

Heh, I disagree with that oxsan. I happen to get a large portion of my news from NPR, and much like phil mentioned earlier about the beeb, you get to hear both sides bitching about it.

They have a listeners comments section where they air comments, and recently they've been hysterical, or at least to me, and I somehow imagine the staff are supressing giggles, or at least snorts of derision. One of the last segments I heard, they read several comments denouncing them for being rabidly pro-war and demanding why there wasn't more attention being paid to the protests. The next several comments denounced them for broadcasting nothing but news about protests.

I am forced to shake my head, news is biased any time it broadcasts something contrary to what one desires to hear.

-m

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Location Location
Posts: 26420

quote:

---

Originally posted by oxsan

O'Reilly is enjormously popular among VOTERS OF MIDDLE AMERICA who are far more conservative than the media likes to admit. He has forced the media to accept the fact however that a large and loyal population of America likes kis brand of analysis.

----------------------

There is no question that O'Reilly tears apart liberal positions and analyzes the news and opposing views with a very conservative position. He admits as much. It is the analysis and opinion that
most of America wants to hear----as the ratings indicate.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Rio de los Brazos de Dios
Posts: 3876

quote:

---

I am not disagreeing that BBC is biased

---

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

oxsan


Don't kick until yer spurred.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2001
Location: ........
Posts: 15003

Just read that the Israel cable companies are considering removing the BBC from their service due to "financial" reasons.

http://www.gush-shalom.org/bbc/index.html

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged