silly question, but...what is the BBC's agenda???

Seems like all they do is bash Americans, then they do little articles with Aholes like Tom Tancredo as their focus. So they hate us, but they love republicans?

I just find it odd because Britain is in general so much more liberal than the US. Do they have their own Neocons running the BBC?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/

My frrling is that they're very fair, and work hard to get at the truth.

Can you point to anything in particular that's a problem?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4989248.stm

also, I was a regular follower of the daily Have Your Say, and it is so filled with US bashing that I finally gave up even reading it

...Alot of Brits don't like bush, so that makes them anti-US? I'm not making the connection here...??

Have Your Say are not from the UK on the US Illigal Immigration thread, the majority of the posters are
American or Canadian. Maybe Americans feel free to express themselves on the BBC with insults from Bush supporters threatening them.

I learned from John Pilger that one of their founding moves was to go after labor unions.

any Venezuela news always has a very obvious anti-Chavez bent.

it seems like no one likes us. Can you blame them?:hurts:

I'm not seeing an anti-US bent....

If the VIEWERS are giving their input, how, exactly, does that show that the BBC has an anti-US bent?

:shrug:

DEBATE STATUS
Total comments:95Published comments:65Rejected comments:25Moderation queue:5

and usually, if the topic is more heated, about half of the comments are rejected. If you think there is no agenda then I respect your opinion, since as a Brit you would know the situation better than me. It just seems like much of the time there is a lot of US bashing when it should be Bush bashing.

AGAIN (!) in '04....

I would also suggest that the rejected comments probably had more than their fair share of racist overtones to them....

??

..one of the papers in the UK ran a headline that said "How can 54 million people be so dumb" and had a picture of * after he'd been "re-elected"...

a lot of countries have reactionary xenophibic candidates (eg, LePen) and the press loves to cover them. Makes a good story.

the British press doesn't work like the American opinion media. They'll interview people with extreme positions, if those positions are relevant to world issues, but it's not an endorsement and they don't function as a PA system for talking points. There's no value judgement. Tancredo is a right-wing nut, but he's considered a viable candidate in the United States. That's worth reporting on.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4156/is_20030727/ai_n12583802

Dyke: I'll quit rather than bow to No 10; Government deal: sack

Sunday Herald, The, Jul 27, 2003 by James Cusick

GREG Dyke, the director-general of the BBC, has told senior executives at the corporation that he will resign rather than see its independence compromised by the government's "revenge" for the BBC's questioning of its line on Iraq.

Dyke's hardline stance, understood to have the full backing of BBC chairman Gavyn Davies, comes after the culture secretary, Tessa Jowell, stated last week that the outcome of the Hutton inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly could influence the government's review of the BBC's charter, due to begin in September.

The Sunday Herald has also learned that Number 10 told the corporation that if it sacked Andrew Gilligan (the reporter who claimed the threat from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction was deliberately exaggerated) it would cease its attacks. The BBC refused.

The Sunday Herald has also been told that a deal to call off the war between Number 10 and the BBC was agreed earlier this month during David Frost's annual summer party in Chelsea, attended by both BBC senior executives and government ministers. Both sides are said to have agreed "enough was enough".



I used to use BBC as a source all the time. They are now worthless as Newsmax and NYT.

Don

I prefer the Guardian.

As for "Have Your Say", it attracts every miserable, bitter hater with internet access - you may notice they never offer anything positive, they just bash Americans, regardless of the topic.

Actually, I have found that pretty true of many Brits in general and I socialize with a lot of Europeans. The English are always the most vocal about their US-Bashing. The thing is, half the time I usually agree in principal with what they say, but it's the nasty, accusing, whiny way in which they say it that's most annoying. But then again, they seem to whine about pretty much everything.

I seem to be able to have rational discussions about what's wrong with the US - mostly the government, sometimes the culture and people - with people from other countries that aren't nearly as offensive. They are more balanced and not nearly as hateful.

It's kind of like someone criticizing your family, even though you might not get along with your family and you complain about them yourself, there's a point at which someone else's trashing of them crosses a line and you get to a point where you just want them to SHUT IT already!

will result in a flood of US bashers from all over the world. After a while its almost amusing to read. I used to post and say "Hey! We didn't even elect the twit!" But they never posted what I said, and I gave up....

Not at all like the Grauniad's Comment is Free boards then eh? :eyes:

Folks, not everyone has an "agenda". Not everything is either good or bad.

:P

LOL not at all, you should see Newsnight with Jeremy Paxman...
The BBC has been fairly anti-American since Bush was elected, they are not Neocons,
the Conservatives dislike the BBC because they see it as too left-learning.
Nobody in the BBC was saying that Gordon Brown's meeting with Dubya was easy or
too friendly.

:think:

One example:

http://auntypatience.blogspot.com/2006/11/rewriting-history-courtesy-of-bbc.html


I take everything I hear & read on the BBC with several grains of salt.

While government controlled, it's not government regulated...and the BBC has prided itself on being both quirky and independent. It can offer several different opinions depending on the presenter and the focus of the program. Generally, their news has been "straight up"...especially with the World Service. I enjoy having BBC News available on both TV and radio here...and very refreshing in both content and presentation than the American corporate media.

The horror, etc.

As for wacky candidates like Tancredo et. al., of course they get news coverage. They're loud, bugfuck-insane, interesting candidates starting international incidents all over the place. BBC being a news organization which, unlike American ones, recognizes that the world extends beyond the United States and Iraq, I can't see why they wouldn't find things like that worth mentioning. I know I would probably do an article or two on some guy who's already holding elected office who's openly promised to kill three million people for starters if elected.

(And if merely writing about someone means you love them, that must mean that you love the BBC. So what's the point of your post?)

Perhaps the sheer number of anti-bush comments coming in so outweighs the pro-bush comments that they have to show them.

..simply not the case...

The the BBC is little more then a vast left-wing/NuLabour conspiracy.

The truth however is very different, the BBC is actually quite neutral, and the real reason why Conservatives hate it is because the BBC is funded by the state and they want it privatized. The likes of Rupert Murdoch would love to get their mitts on the BBC but they can't so they throw muck at it instead.

BBC puts BBC Resources up for sale

The BBC is putting its commercial arm, BBC Resources up for sale this week in a bid to fulfil the findings of its commercial review. BBC Resources consists of three divisions - BBC Outside Broadcasts, BBC Studios and BBC Post Production. It includes 15 production units, which cover music festivals and big sporting events, 18 television studios at London and Elstree, which host productions such as Children in Need as well as Eastenders, plus 200 post-production suites. Bidders are invited to make offers for the whole of BBC Resources, or each of its divisions, with a deadline for initial bids set for Sep 7 and a sale hoping to be completed by Mar next year.

The sale comes as a result of the BBC's commercial review, which concluded that the corporation should only own businesses that "exported or exploited" the BBC brand or content. As part of the new strategy, the BBC has already sold BBC Broadcast and BBC Technology.

BBC Resources was incorporated as a separate subsidiary in 1998 and was the first of the corporation's commercial B2B divisions to be established. Last year BBC Resources, which is run on a profit-making basis, earned profit of GBP5m (USD10m) on sales of GBP126m (USD252m). Australian bank, Macquarie could be a potential bidder after buying the BBC's programme transmission operation for GBP166m (USD332m). Other bidders could include Carlyle and Thomson.