LeBizzier69

Cheers my man, I’m off to the footy. I’ll let you wrestle with that conundrum.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000z95y https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/n3csvf6h Describing the 9/11 attacks as terrorist attacks. Isis as a terror group. Does that count?

No. Next?

“In which case, not just Hamas, but all other terrorist perpetrators should be exempt from being referred to as “terrorists” — including, rather remarkably, ISIS and Al-Qaeda. At least then the BBC would be able to claim consistency across the entire terrorist spectrum with a credible defence against the charge, implicit in the intervention by ministers, that the Corporation’s coverage of the conflict is not duly impartial. Alternatively, align the reporting of Hamas with how the BBC has reported other terrorist organisations and events. Consistency matters. As it stands, the BBC’s defence of due impartiality in this instance is sufficiently flawed as to be unconvincing.” Bias shown?? From earlier article linked above. Being impartial should be a given….. unless the said organisation is a proscribed terrorist group by our own government.

I’ll take that as a compliment thanks. Maybe the BBC can take your lead and call Hamas a “niche terrorist organisation”.

Can you clarify what question you want answered? Such aggression for a Friday…at least save it for 4.53pm ish tomorrow I said in an earlier post that if you want balanced news you need other news outlets. They are all skewed of course, but the point is you read/watch/listen to them all and form your own opinions. At no point have I said there’s a more balanced option. In my opinion, if our government says Hamas is a terrorist group then so should the state broadcaster. I don’t think it’s a particularly controversial take on things.

It’s in the article yes. By definition possibly, but the BBC won’t refer to them as a terrorist group. That’s the issue. This is quite an interesting read on it. https://www.thearticle.com/the-bbc-and-hamas-the-perils-of-impartiality

I know,. you're right....was thinking this earlier on. I'm assuming it can be moved?!

Have a seat, and let's start again shall we? A variety of sources is any number of news outlets that one might read to form an opinion. BBC, Sky, ITV, C4 or the written media. Now that i've written the names of other news sources, does that help you a bit?

I’m assuming you can’t read properly. The countries mentioned here believe that Hamas is a terrorist organisation. The BBC haven’t. Their definition was at the top of the article - Hamas is a Palestinian armed group and political movement in the Gaza Strip

Jesus wept indeed. It’s ok to be wrong. You do understand that balance comes from a variety of sources? I don’t listen to any one source and regard that as the truth. I know, my standards really are very high. Unthinkable to want a state broadcaster that we pay for, to call a terrorist group….a terrorist group.

I'm not sure why you'd think a forum discussion about the BBC would break my heart. Well the evidence suggests they didn't refer to Hamas as a terrorist organisation. To obtain a balance of opinions on anything you need to hear all sides. That's how you get a balanced view. I watch all news outlets to try and be informed, and come to my own conclusion. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67039975 That article is from 21st January. Opening paragraph..... Hamas is a Palestinian armed group and political movement in the Gaza Strip. On 7 October 2023 it attacked Israel, killing about 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages. Can't see the BBC describing them as a terrorist group.....can you?

Oh I don’t know….ones that call terrorists, terrorists. You?

We pay the licence fee for what should be impartial coverage, and we don't get it. This particular incident, along with their refusal to refer to Hamas as a terrorist organisation (as proscribed in the UK), does raise questions..... I've always been a big fan of the BBC, and still like a lot of the stuff they do but it's still being questionably run. If you want balanced news you need other news outlets.

Rovers

Didn’t stop it getting out in the first place….and was only pulled after others investigated and highlighted it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clydv5yngq4o.amp I must respectfully disagree.

The BBC are excellent at 2 things. Nature Documentaries Employing Paedophiles

Quite agree with this. Apparently these management traits make him a massive bellend to some people. Don’t get it.

I will, thanks.

Donates his salary to charity. Any forum members do that?

planet

Saints = Andy Dufresne Liverpool = The Sisters Hope the coach has cooled as well as heated seats for the trip home.

Is this really where our fan base is going?