That is dumb. People should just ride to work.
I want a double skinned one which has goldfishes swimming around it.
What can you say that hasn’t already been said about Tory MPs?
How could anyone vote against this?
They vote against it because it was just a “this House expresses thanks…” debate. Had it passed nothing would have happened other than it being promoted as a Labour victory, so everyone votes on party lines. It is pure politics, loyalty matters more than stupidity, and it the vote is all a waste of everyone’s time.
Slightly more interesting is that on Tuesday Johnson’ government lost his first vote with his big majority. And one of the rebels was Theresa May.
(If an independent panel needs M.P.s to vote on sanctions in bullying and harassment cases that involve anyone working at Westminster, Ress Mogg wanted to turn the cases into a parliamentary debate.)
Looks like we have handled the crisis almost worse than anyone. Thanks Boris/Gove/Hancock/Hunt/Cummings you retarded selfish self centred imbeciles.
but the bbc are full of shit Kevsta.
Really? Who would you trust as a news source? The Sun? Daily Mail?
The BBC is one of the most respected news organisations in the world. They have a mandate to be unbiased. The article is conjunction with Oxford University’s Institute for New Economic Thinking and their original research.
Want another article on how the government failed on almost every level:
This is only.among the G7 but I’m sure the FT and economist excess death analyses showed a similar thing…
What I love about the BBC is that people.on the right call it a left channel, people.on the left call it a right channel promoting the status quo. It may be a bit limp.but that is because it doesn’t have a firm agenda. it is more impartial than most (if not all). Perfect it is not but it is at least factual. Even if it wil often rely on packaged press releases rather than in depth investigative work.
All broadcasters in the U.K. have a legal requirement to be unbiased, that includes ITN (for ITV, Channel 4, and Channel 5), Sky News, Al Jazeera, LBC, and all those based outside the U.K.
People making BBC News out to be an outlier of truth are being just as biased as those who see as it as just broadcasting fake news.
Come on Michael that’s a very naive statement, that a legal requirement can prevent them from having a position. Just comparing ITV and Ch4 there are oceans between them politically… From the stories they cover to the angles they choose.
And you think the BBC is somehow manages to determine which stories to cover and how without basing it on editorial guidelines they drew up?
If any broadcaster is biased they will be heavily fined, it is an issue taken very seriously. And there are plenty of people, including politicians, regularly complaining that nothing will get missed even though only one complaint is required to trigger an investigation. And the legal requirement to be unbiased includes only selecting stories that, though presented in an impartial way, would favour particular positions that give an unbalanced view overall.
That you prefer the position of the BBC to any other broadcaster makes it a matter of your preference to their presentation, not bias.
News is a matter of preference. I don’t have a preference per se for the BBC, I read about 7 or so different news sites from the two different countries and occasionally watch the headlines on TV. My comment was very much observational having seen how the left commented on BBC’s coverage of Corbyn, accusing the BBC of being to the right of the agenda. Since Brexit it’s also been accused of being leftist. One has to only read the commentary in stories allowed and it’s a fascinating read.
Yes there are legal requirements but it is very easy to skew a story in favour of one way or another and still be legally unbiased. The same can be said in the way you interview people, you can choose who you ask easy questions to. News sites/ broadcasters can’t cover all stories so the stories they pick also heavily influences this. Every company, council, police force etc has a PR team to try and get its news the way it wants into the news. Stories are sold into the news, they have to fit a broadcasters point of view. Likewise, politicians will choose whom they send to what news, to interview for what paper.
Things are better from the era of manufacturing consent but it would be naive to believe that the owners of news sites and broadcasters, the political climate etc don’t influence how news is portrayed and by whom.
Legal requirements can only go so far, it cannot control how news is presented and be expected to be clear in all cases where tone of voice, questioning and story selection and airtime given all affect how a channel chooses to come across.
Finally, broadcasters aren’t without links to press publications which again are anything but impartial…
Yes. When a million pro-Remain protestors marched peacefully through London, the biggest demonstration since the anti-war demonstrations before Iraq, it was hardly mentioned by the Beeb.
They make editorial decisions like this all the time.
Finally some GREAT NEWS!!!