Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

BBC Censors FAUX!!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Worst Username Ever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 12:45 PM
Original message
BBC Censors FAUX!!
Fox News censured for rant at BBC

Fox News, the US news network owned by Rupert Murdoch, has been found in breach of British broadcasting rules for an on-air tirade that accused the BBC of "frothing-at-the-mouth anti-Americanism".


http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1239094,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Guy_Montag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. Sorry had to highlight this part:
--snip--

It is unlikely, however, that the Fox rant would get past even a more relaxed regime in Britain, because of its lack of basis in fact.

--snip--
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kellanved Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I liked this one even better
Edited on Thu Jun-17-04 12:54 PM by Kellanved
--snip
Ofcom said Fox had breached the programme code in three areas: failing to honour the "respect for truth" rule; failing to give the BBC an opportunity to respond; and failing to apply the rule that says, in a personal view section, "opinions expressed must not rest upon false evidence".


--snap


Edit:

The Thread title is misleading. Not the BBC censured - it can't - but Ofcom .
Anf course no censorship took place, as the censure was spoken out post-broadcast.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PROGRESSIVE1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 12:48 PM
Response to Original message
2. God Bless You BBC!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FizzFuzz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 12:50 PM
Response to Original message
4. how can WE get a media with some ethics like BBC?
sigh. I am very sad about what we've got here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guy_Montag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Do you not have PBS news? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FizzFuzz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. oh, yes actually
now I have to admit I never watch TV, so I forgot about that. I listen to NPR and get my info from here mostly.

But I wish PBS had the same large influence here that BBC has in England. That would be great. OK, I admit now that it is my PERCEPTION that BBC has a much much larger audience(and therefore a larger influence) there than PBS has here. And by BBC and its influence, I'm thinking in terms of influencing and reflecting something about honesty and ethics which I feel is missing in the US. Or getting bulldozed by a large RW conspiracy.

OK and now, I admit I'm rambling a bit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guy_Montag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. I suppose the BBC is the main broadcaster in the UK,
much to Rupert's annoyance. :D

It employs 27,000 people you know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthspeaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. You mean the Pentagon Broadcasting Service?
PBS is a pale shadow of the ethics and professionalism of the BBC.

And the BBC has been pretty tame since Lord Hutton ruled it was "irresponsible" of them to run a story that turned out to be true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldmund Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
5. That's censUres
Edited on Thu Jun-17-04 12:56 PM by slavkomae
It's not a simple typo. The two words have completely different meanings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. I second that important correction
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arbusto_baboso Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-17-04 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
11. Funny. BBC is where I go for accurate reporting now.
Methinks Faux protests too much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 07:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC