+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Auditions for Panorama?
Never had you down as being a conspiracy theorist Ian? The BBC never lie or make things up!
I always love it when you bring that up because nobody calls you a conspiracy nut job.
Has anything happened with the inquiry? I was following the page on fb but I haven't looked for a while.
For those who don't know the story
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...-miners-strike
No it's not BBC footage but we have all talked about it before so they are bound to come up, it wont let me put the link to the thread in for some reason so I have quoted myself so you understand what my comment was about.
Last I heard was the government rejected the call for an enquiry, the OTJC is still active though. The whole weight of the establishment and everything they control was used to crush the miners during that twelve months.
The papers were just as bad, they played their part in it too. I'll never forget the picture in the express of a wpc with her right arm in a plaster cast, allegedly broken by a striking miner, in another paper her LEFT arm was in the cast. When taxi driver David Wilkie was killed driving a strike breaker into work it was front page news in every paper yet when striking miner David Jones was killed in Nottingham by a scabs supporter it barely made a few paragraphs on page seven. Same when striking miner Joe Green was killed by a lorry driving through a picket line.
I googled for the broken arm picture but cant find it. Maybe they did go to the effort of faking a cast, removing it and then putting it back on wrongly for another occasion. It also seems plausible that one of the papers just reversed the image because it looked better on the page.
sickening Gibbo it really is mate
the Government
the gutter press
media
the impartial "cough cough" bbc
the old bill
they really did shaft the miners and their families and their communities too
and used the age old tool of propaganda and intimidation
I find that everything that comes from these bodies
is 99% is bull shite and not to be trusted
Everything is 99% shite eh?
Crikey .. who knew ...
Back to '84 - perhaps we could consider that much of the then Media were a willing pawn of the then Tory establishment, and some of the others were not so willing but went along with it.
The BBC are no better or worse then, nor now, than than many other news outlets, yet people single them out.
Obvious target perhaps. Big, popular, ubiquitous - The McDonalds of Mainstream news - and they have been caught out as being f*****g liars fairly regularly - no doubt.
Again like so many others. As Ian G also said.
FWIW ;) I tried to make a point earlier but got a swift brush off.
FWIW, I'll say it again.
The original post does indeed appear to illustrate ridiculous fakery.
But there is no suggestion that it has anything to do with the BBC (unless I am missing a point, or something else comes to light).
Within one post people are talking about the BBC.
By the next post and further within a handful of posts, the inference is that it is about the BBC - and people continue to drone on about the BBC.
And we are supposedly talking about distortion of truths?!
Feck the BBC, but 'sorry', but this is hypocrisy again.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-e...listic-context
"I once worked for a newspaper where the graphic designer flipped a photo of a golfer to look into the page as opposed to outside the page. Artistically, that makes sense. You don't want the people in the photos to be looking outside the page. The problem is, the flip made the golfer left handed, which he surely wasn't. An astute sports editor caught it before going to print."
Surely we use common sense on a case-by-case basis, and not blindly believe either might be correct?
"refuses" ? dear me - That's a loaded term - no bias here eh?!
How do we know that the BBC has 'refused' to report something?
BBC might have a number of reasons for not reporting something that FOX has run with.
BBC being deniers due to an apparent agenda being one possibility.
FOX crusading with an apparent agenda might be another.
If person#1 has a FOX-friendly, anti BBC stance, person#1 might view it as 'refused'
Conversely, if person#2 has an anti-FOX, BBC-friendly stance, person#2 might view it as BBC being more 'discerning' with what they report.
Likely neither are allowing themselves the best viewpoint.