Re: TB Refuseniks
- From: "Huw" <hedydd[nospam]@tiscali.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 00:07:16 -0000
Peter Duncanson wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 21:11:21 -0000, " Jill"
> <newsNOSPAM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>
>> And the BBC thinks that ANYONE should take notice of a single word
>> they print these days.
>> They can get neither the basic details nor the structure of the story
>> accurately pinned. There is no backround and no understanding of
>> anything they report so the gross inaccuracies are no longer spotted
>> Shame on them
>
> I wonder how many of their viewers/listeners/readers actually care
> about accuracy? I've a depressing feeling that it might be rather
> small.
That is not the point though. They have a duty to be accurately informative
and unbiased. I may be old fashioned but I don't think the news reader
should even express an opinion if it can be in any way controversial, just
report the news and leave 'opinion' to current affairs shows. Otherwise we
might as well just watch the Simpsons and have Homer give us all the latest
gen'.
Huw
.
- References:
- TB Refuseniks
- From: Pat Gardiner
- Re: TB Refuseniks
- From: Jim Webster
- Re: TB Refuseniks
- From: Jill
- Re: TB Refuseniks
- From: Peter Duncanson
- Re: TB Refuseniks
- From: Jill
- Re: TB Refuseniks
- From: Peter Duncanson
- TB Refuseniks
- Prev by Date: Re: TB Refuseniks
- Next by Date: Re: Annual sheep & goat census
- Previous by thread: Re: TB Refuseniks
- Next by thread: Re: TB Refuseniks
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|