Chinese observers said the BBC has turned into "a rumor mill" that deliberately throws mud at China, and the decision to suspend its broadcast sends a clear message that China doesn't accept fake news.
:xi-lib-tears:
Basically the fuckin Boric Broadcast Company now, ABBCAB
Could have been the CBC too, Corbyn Broadcast Cooperative :'(
NOOOOOOO, WHO'S GOING TO SHOW THEM PICTURES OF CORBYN'S FACE PHOTOSHOPED ON SATAN'S BODY NOW!?!?!?!?!??!1!!!!1!11
Wasn't BBC basically threatened with funding cuts if they didn't give more favorable coverage to the Boris admin?
Apparently:
Downing Street is threatening the future of the BBC by insisting it is seriously considering decriminalising non-payment of the licence fee
[...]
No 10 pointed to Andrew Neil’s on-air monologue in which he lambasted Johnson for his refusal to be interviewed, and the BBC’s “extensive coverage” of a four-year-old boy with suspected pneumonia forced to sleep on a hospital floor – as supposed evidence of anti-Tory, pro-remain bias at the corporation.
articleoi ave u got a loicense for that telly?
imagine having to pay tax for the privledge of being subjected to the bbc🤢
Andrew Neil
Not being a Brit myself the only thing I really know about Andrew Neil is that he's reactionary scum who deserves to be drowned in a barrel of cum, but this marks the second good thing I know of that he's done. The first being, of course, the public humiliation of Ben Shapiro.
Yes. And the new director general is a Tory stooge.
It's GENUINELY become a corrupt fake news source.
MI5 but yeah. From the 1930s all the way to the late 80s/early 90s assuming they ever actually stopped.
They also marked dangerous subversives like children's poet Michael Rosen's staff files with a Christmas tree stamp for monitoring and more.
It seems that at least China has some real grievances over the BBCs reporting, while IIRC CGTN has been banned because the regulator suspects ties to the Chinese government or something like that?
Terf Island, where the BBC has not ties to the British government at all.
I remember watching a horizon episode on “the worlds most dangerous drugs”. Weed was listed at number 3 or something lol
weed leads to high levels of junk food consumption everyone knows that. it's science
BBC has basically always been trash. I used to read them years ago and while they covered a wide scope of issues, they've always been garbage.
"We can't tell you what's true because that would be taking a position, so here's the opinions of a bunch of Twitter randos."
I'm all for freeze peach, but we need to purge the journalism industry.
Lol when people say “lol fuck the bbc” they mean the bbc as it currently stands not the concept of a state owned broadcast company in the abstract.
Honestly this is a really unironically cringe take to make on a leftist site. Bourgeois state owned mouth piece == proletarian state/anarchist organization owned media? In what world?
Also the whole “if you don’t have a solution youre the same as a chud” is some serious blue check Twitter lib “how’s that revolution coming” “oh you don’t have a 10 step plan to revolution, well your ideas are invalid” thought terminating cliche shit.
The answer is use the state owned media in the context of a proletarian government for their own ends, is that easier said that done, obviously. Doesn’t make it any less true that the bbc will forever be a bourgeois media for bourgeois interest until the Uk govt is dismantled.
And saying that criticizing that fact is tantamount to thinking that literal communists are hating the concept of state owned media is such a laughable leap of logic I can’t even understand how you wind up there other than being reactionarily salty some people shit on your countries media corp lol
Never thought I'd see someone scolding people for shitting on the BBC and getting upvoted here
Lol again, what is this essentialising valid criticisms made from materialist/class perspectives into it’s completely worthless? If anyone’s all or nothing-ing this discussion it’s you. Imagine getting your panties in a twist cuz someone said something bad about the Uk and jumping to defend their bourgie institutions lmao :UK-cool:
You can criticize somethings bad parts and recognize it does some good but ultimately can be improved
Edit: also maybe not readily attainable in the settler colonial shitholes you and I are from but there have been and are plenty of state run media’s that don’t work to normalize imperialist apologia.
But criticisms of BBC have nothing to do with public media. I think we all agree here that public media is better than privatized media. Does that mean we have to "critically support" the BBC even if we disagree with them? No, because that means literally nothing. It has nothing to do with the "ideological void" we live in.
exactly. also, like why does the fact that they have done a handful of decent things like hiring poc reporters absolve them of their hand in imperialist propaganda?
I'm happy they're proud of the bbc, i'm happy they've had a good experience with it, no one wants to take that away. but let's be adults and recognize that our countries and their institutions have some blood on their hands that we should hold them accountable for.
Yeah 100%. Honestly I like the BBC, it has decent reporting sometimes, despite its propaganda and horrific official anti-trans stance. Obviously I'm comparing it to other msm here.
Everyone here who rightly and correctly laughs at the BBC knows that "The executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie." and that a public broadcaster will only serve the people under a revolutionary proletarian state.
i agree with you over op, but i can't help but have a little sympathy for the CBC over here across the pond. their print journalism sucks but their radio content is extensive and thoughtful and i'd be real sad to see it privatized.
disclaimer: obviously fuck any big media org when it comes to foreign policy
:100-com: I'd take any public broadcaster over any private org. Just know where the conflict is.
This. A public broadcaster is still better than a private broadcaster, even if it's a bad public broadcaster. But state media can be either overtly (calling for pogroms against redheads) or covertly (pushing soft anti-redhead liberalism) trash.
What is this take? You think a public broadcaster in a bourgeois dominated state will spread the revolutionary spirit? Or be of any help at all to leftists?
BTW I’m not opposed to them, I quite enjoy some nature and science documentaries they make. I just don’t see them as being an aid in the cause.
What are you on mate? BBC news has literally never been good. It has always been pure propaganda. Anyone that believes otherwise has never looked at how they stoked war with Iraq, Afghanistan, how they reported on Libya and they've certainly never looked at how they reported throughout the conflict with Ireland. It has always been a propaganda wing of the british state.
State owned media under a bourgeoise democracy will always be just a propaganda wing for the capitalists. Attacking such media isn't an attack on state owned media itself.
Exactly.
Back in 1926 when there were calls for a General Strike Lord Reith actually wanted to broadcast the Labour and union response after the prime minister went on the BBC to give a wildly anti-union interview and statement. The Tory government pressured the BBC not to allow the other side of the argument to be heard, directly conflicting with the BBC's mission statement. The BBC caved, as well as cancelling future programmes they thought might give Churchill an excuse to take it over / shut it down. And from then on it only got worse.
From the 1930s right through until after the end of the cold war a literal MI5 officer vetted editorial applications, staff hiring and more. Any suspected communists or 'subversives' including folk singers and artists, never mind politicians, we're blacklisted from the BBC. And even in its modern history people hired, even in completely non-political capacities, who were even vaguely left wing had their staff files marked with a Christmas tree stamp to single them out for monitoring and more. These people including dangerous subversives like beloved children's poet Michael Rosen.
In 1953 the BBC inserted a codeword into the broadcast of the midnight time check to inform the Shah of Iran that the British government supported him and to initiate a coup. It was called Operation Ajax.
In the 60s the BBC set up what was essentially a money laundering operation so that the British government could secretly fund supposedly neutral news organisations like Reuters to set up offices and broadcast in places like the Middle East in order to turn them into covert propaganda organisations.
In the 1980s the BBC reversed the order of footage to claim that family members of mine attacked the police unprovoked, despite the fact that it was police officers and military fash given uniforms to brutalise beat striking miners. It was known as the Battle of Orgreave and the BBC continued to manufacture consent that lead to the state beating, killing, and starving of miners and their families in order to break the unions.
As well as their usual appalling coverage of Israel-Palestine they refused to air a Gaza charity appeal in 2009, even when other channels later showed it and the late great Tony Benn talked over interviewers to read out the phone number anyway. Some at the BBC resigned in disgust, but it was also reported that BBC bosses had threatened their journalists with dismissal when they complained privately about the issue.
And that's just off the top of my head and not including the countless examples of racism, sexism warmongering, blatant propaganda, and paedophilia over the years. The BBC - especially it's news/political output - has always been objectively shit and often downright evil.
being jokerified is fun and all, but if you don’t have any alternatives you’re no better than some chud who wants to watch the world burn
Lol, I mean I think most people here have a ton of alternative suggestions...but don't actually have any sort of real power or ability to implement them cause the system is functioning as intended.
BBC World Service changed from the old jingle and the new one sucks, so good riddance!
I kind of agree. BBC used to be pretty useful. Never perfect but it's sad to see the BBC now. It used to be the Al'Jazeera of the West.
BBC asking for it with their deliberate misrepresentations on Xinjiang
https://twitter.com/RodericDay/status/1287411708374454273
https://twitter.com/RodericDay/status/1287412737509924864
Virgin American "anti-fake news" campaign vs chad Chinese anti-fake news campaign
China is oppresing the :freeze-peach: of the Billionaire Broadcast Corporation :ukkk:
now the BBC will remain in the west, where it will drill more :freeze-peach:
