"The Guardian has been told the board member that “led the charge” over the letter’s claims was Robbie Gibb, Theresa May’s former communications chief who also helped to found the rightwing news channel GB News.(…)
But many say the events of the past week also have to be seen in the context of a wider political effort to shift the BBC’s reporting to the right on key issues.(…)"
Note: apperantly this is what the Guardian was told by BBC insiders, so I marked this as [Opinion].
alt source Reuters
to shift the BBC’s reporting to the right on key issues
Correction: "to shift the BBC’s reporting more to the right on key issues.
Buckle up UK, you’re in for more of the American ride.
Same thing has been happening in Australia.
Murdoch’s organisations (nearly all the newspapers & TV) take every opportunity to criticise and attack the ABC (Australia’s public broadcaster, equivalent to the BBC). The constant claim is that they are biased and left wing, even though a number of studies have shown that their reporting is neutral.
The last couple of Chairman of the ABC have been ex-Murdoch employees. So they are now being attacked from inside as well. Cuts have been made to news, current affairs and investigative journalism shows.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they sold off Bluey.
Same thing happening here in Canada with the CBC and the Conservatives.
Seems to catch on with 5 certain companies, housing issues, healthcare issues, too much immigration issues, etc.
But how can the BBC deny the genocide they facilitated any harder
Lies, uh, find a way
alt source Reuters:
" Supporters of the broadcaster, including journalists at the Guardian and the Financial Times, and some BBC staff, believe there was an orchestrated right-wing campaign to undermine the corporation, according to public statements."
Did the misleading video not happen as claimed? The articles I read about it sounded pretty damning that they were intentionally edited to be misleading
Edit: To whoever is downvoting me, it would be more productive if you actually provided relevant information instead
As stated on Reuters about that:
“The most serious was the revelation that a Panorama documentary aired just before the November 2024 U.S. presidential election had spliced together two parts of a Trump speech so he appeared to be encouraging the Capitol Hill riot of January 6, 2021. The documentary was made by an independent production company.”
So there’s a few things at play here from what I can tell.
- The splice is real (?) And was produced by a third party and not the BBC itself.
- A splice is not exactly the fine British way of doing things. (Okay, I give them that, a splice shouldn’t be needed to get a point across)
- The thing the documentary was getting at, in other words that the orange did in fact encourage violence should the election go how it went in 2020, still holds true. Spliced video or not.
Is it a journalistic foul? Yes.
Do the facts presented hold up even if shown in a less honest way? Yes.
So the outrage is about less honest use of media, you know… The thing the far right is doing all the time. Rules for thee but not me and all that. Just another day in the playbook for the far right.
We absolutely must have standards that are higher and better than the far right. They are not what we want to compare with. This splice edit is fuel for the arguments of the far right. Shit like this is to be avoided.
I was kinda hoping that a personal note within the point that it was spliced was clear enough that we need to do better than them. Alas, here i am agreeing that we need higher standards than the far right. And that it was a dumb move given that there were plenty of other things they could have done. Like showing a collage of his twitter posts that were obvious.
In either way, that train left for now, we can just hope that other people in that business learn from that and that they don’t repeat that mistake.
