Mata ([info]matazone) wrote,
@ 2004-03-12 00:07:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
I do you know
Click here to find out why.

I know, it's not a new thing on my site, but if you trust the BBC more than you trust your politicians then I think a show of solidarity is worthwhile. If you agree then please follow the link and get the code to add this to your own journal.

(5 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Done
[info]maxomai
2004-03-11 04:18 pm UTC (link)
Added. And thanks for all the cool culture.

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Done
[info]matazone
2004-03-12 06:31 am UTC (link)
No problem, thanks for passing this on.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]ohnefuehlen
2004-03-12 09:45 am UTC (link)
Ah, put that in my sig yesterday =) Got it from Barry, hurrah for him.

(Reply to this)


[info]xaositecte
2004-03-12 01:43 pm UTC (link)
http://app1.chinadaily.com.cn/star/2004/0205/vo2-x.html

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]matazone
2004-03-12 05:07 pm UTC (link)
Interesting link. It just goes to show that, for every person who is glad that there is at least one media institution that doesn't have to worry about profit margins there will always be someone else who is happy to argue that market-forces are the way forward. If the approval of the policies of Margaret Thatcher wasn't enough, the mention of Rupert Murdoch at the end was enough to make me understand entirely where that writer was coming from.

I like the fact that we have one media outlet that is not afraid to criticise the government when it makes mistakes. the writer there states that the BBC is always producing media for people who are educated and then broadcasting it to the masses (the term s/he uses is 'patronising'). What's wrong with assuming that your audience is intelligent?

It's people like Murdoch, who seem to believe that everyone in the world is a gibbering idiot with an IQ comparable to a very small piece of wood, that produce four-letter-or-less world news, telling the audience what they are supposed to think without pausing to give any time to counter arguments. The BBC isn't prefect, but they do give airtime to all sides of the debate which is a lot more than Murdoch allows. Taking the recent war as an example, I watched many news programs on the BBC where there were people arguing the case for and against it. Sure, if you want to believe Murdoch and similar outlets (the Fox news network springs to mind) without questioning one iota of what you are told to believe then you're welcome to. I just choose to trust more an outlet that doesn't have to worry about it's advertising budget being withdrawn if they say something that is common sense but unpopular, such as 'look, the emporor's wearing no clothes'.

If the BBC being 'patronising' means that they credit me with the intelligence to make my own mind up about things then I'd rather be patronised any day than force-fed regurgitated crap from Murdoch's intestines.

Apparently I'm classified as a 'Liberal' for wanting to be able to make up my own mind about things and occasionally question the wisdom of people who run the county. So be it. I'm not bothered about political affiliations, but I am concerned when big business can influence the reporting of world events to me. The BBC is currently one of the few outlets that I trust to give me a relatively unbiased opinion of world affairs. They tend to apply common sense to their reporting, the Hutton report has been widely received as a whitewash over the true nature of events and blaming the BBC unfairly. That's what happens when you have politicians influencing affairs, and it's exactly why I'd rather have an independent broadcasting network that doesn't have to answer to business interests than anything else.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(5 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…