BBC Director General Tim Davie and News CEO Deborah Turness Resign
bbc.comthey resigned over a bunch of different things that appeared in report including some racial stuff, gaza war and gender/sex issues .
Telegraph published entire report https://archive.is/mJIsB
That report looked credible until the apparently serious claim "Elsewhere, he raises concerns that a unit of rogue LGBT+ reporters is censoring coverage of the trans debate".
Which was such a deranged claim to go without any substantiation, evidence or further sources, that I loved again at the publisher and remembered why nobody takes Telegraph stories seriously.
what you wrote, can be equally applied to BBC with reports that reference "gaza health ministry" as source of truth without any substantiation, evidence or further sources
BBC director general Tim Davie and News CEO Deborah Turness resign over Trump documentary edit
This is odd to me because I always saw him as on the right wing himself.
If Fox News would enforce a similar set of ethics, we could deprogram 100 million boomers
We're all getting programmed is the problem. But I agree ethics is maybe a good starting point.
The BBC made a mistake and their response shows that they strive to present information accurately and will not tolerate attempts at programming. That is a stark contrast to a network where misrepresentation of facts is the norm. I think it’s important to point out that distinction in the context of the “both sides are equally bad” narrative
Why are we comparing Fox News (aka "Crazy like Fox News" ;) ) with the BBC though? Compare CNN with Fox. I have to admit I'm not up to date on the latest in US media but at least CNN used to be non-stop bashing and misrepresentation just like Fox. Agenda has come before facts for US media for a long time and it's definitely not been one sided.
I agree with you. I watch both channels and see it from both sides. I have noticed CNN getting a bit better lately. They are actually challenging both sides with tough questions.
Where is it any different? Some are more obvious than others.
At least with Fox you know where they stand and you know you need to verify your source all the time. It's way better like that.
Other media companies are very subtle, so much that you almost never feel the need to verify. And when you actually take the time to verify it, you are like WTF.
I will never ever forget how the 2015 "refugees crisis" was being sold in Germany in the "very neutral" and "our job is to share facts, not to tell you how to think" media. But I have other countless examples. The most recent examples are about how "bad Trump" is.
I don't see any solution to this, except for "always take the time to verify/compare it on your own". Don't let others do that job for you.
Fox does not get public funding, the BBC does. With Fox people have the option of not giving them your money, with the BBC anyone who watches TV channels has to pay them.
It was not just one mistake, it was systematic bias over many, many different issues over time.