There seems to be a clear pattern of negative posts about the BBC. Certain accounts are at it on a daily basis. I find myself wondering why.
Some motives for such behaviour I could think of are:
- The BBC wrote a story that hurt them
- Reporting did not reinforce their world view
- They expected the BBC to be perfect and inevitable failures to meet that standard lead to disappointment
- They found the style of reporting annoying
- Perhaps some reporters were annoying
I’m sure that list is nowhere near exhaustive as my imagination is rather limited.
A cynic might think that something deeper is going on, for example, a systematic campaign to erode trust in the BBC. Perhaps such a campaign is not just limited to feddit.uk communities, as mightily influential as they are, and could be happening across social media.
Such a cynical person might further wonder what groups, organisations, or perhaps even states with well resourced intelligence organisations might want to mount such a campaign.
I’m not a cynic, and as mentioned don’t have much of an imagination, so such thoughts don’t even cross my mind.
I’m simply wondering why some people hate the BBC so much. For me it, with all its failings, is one of the best public broadcasting organisations in the world.
You must log in or register to comment.
I think you have your answer. The bias towards Israel, and the transphobia are writ large in this thread.
These have been well documented, and on their own render opposition to BBC news reporting a perfectly reasonable position to hold.Why haven’t you directly responded to any of the Zionist or genocide comments?
I tend to engage with comments I deem worth engaging with. Yours probably is not worth engaging with either, but hey, for the lols.
Regrding claims about BBC being Zionist, brushing genocide under the carpet, etc I say this. I have seen several reports on the BBC covering IDF killing Palestinians, using food shortages as a weapon of war, and committing other war crimes. That observation does not align with many such bias claims.
I’m not a cynic, and as mentioned don’t have much of an imagination, so such thoughts don’t even cross my mind.
If such thoughts as you have detailed don’t even cross your mind then it would not be possible for you to detail them in a Lemmy post. Evidently such thoughts do cross your mind.
Should have added /s. I thought it was obvious, but clearly not. Apologies for the omission.
the bbc is openly transphobic and zionist
I’m personally not a fan of them for lying repeatedly about trans people and platforming hate against us regularly. They also are completely pro-genocide, which is utterly unexcusable.
It might have something to do with the BBC turning into a propaganda machine for Israel
The BBC’s coverage on certain issues (asylum seekers, trans, disability, etc) has been inexcusably bad and has been for a while. I think it’s perfectly fair to hold the public broadcaster to a high standard. The Tories were able to stuff the BBC with their people and the quality of their journalism has plummeted since, the whole thing needs serious reform and Labour don’t seem interested in doing it.
I’m not a cynic, and as mentioned don’t have much of an imagination, so such thoughts don’t even cross my mind.
You wrote them out, so the thoughts clearly did cross your mind? I don’t even know why you’re trying to deflect this, it’s not unreasonable to think foreign intelligence would try to undermine trust in the BBC, they’d be dumb not to.
But again, those doing the most to undermine trust in the BBC are the people the Tories put in charge of it.
The BBC’s coverage on certain issues (asylum seekers, trans, disability, etc) has been inexcusably bad and has been for a while.
When I compare the BBC and for example The Guardian reporting on such topics to, say, The Telegraph and any of the trash tabloids I see a big difference. The latter quite often push an agenda or try to engineer rage engagement, whereas the former don’t.
I think a much bigger problem and the root cause for how BBC reporting comes across in the kinds of topics you mention is the abysmal quality of political discourse in the UK. Too many bigots have gained too many supporters, which has given them too loud a megaphone.
I don’t think it is the BBC’s or any other journalistic organisation’s job to take that megaphone away. Their job is to report facts and ensure countering perspectives are being aired on all important topics.
I think it’s perfectly fair to hold the public broadcaster to a high standard.
I agree. For me the standard I expect is reporting facts and different perspectives so that I gain information and can make up my own mind.
… quality of their journalism has plummeted since, the whole thing needs serious reform …
Here I disagree with you, although perhaps only on the seriousness of the situation. Any big organisation will have aspects that need reform, including the BBC. I don’t agree that their journalism would have plummeted substantially. It is the political discourse that has gone to the gutters.
You wrote them out, so the thoughts clearly did cross your mind? I don’t even know why you’re trying to deflect this, it’s not unreasonable to think foreign intelligence would try to undermine trust in the BBC, they’d be dumb not to.
I can see that I should have added /s to that and couple of other points in my post.
Because the BBC is fucking shit? It’s government propaganda disguised as an independent impartial broadcaster.
Yes it makes some good content with some good talent that may make you laugh but institutionally it’s anti Scottish, pro Palestinian genocide, downplays climate change to almost denial, and uses false balance to push the Overton window rightward.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC#History
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC#Controversies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_BBC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_controversies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_independence
You need read any one of those Wikipedia articles to find a list of reasons for disliking the BBC. I recommend starting at the beginning though and going with History first of all.
The BBC wrote a story that hurt them
The BBC’s editorial line is that humans are worthless, and that genocide is forgivable.
Reporting did not reinforce their world view
Any decent human should share the world view that genocide is a pressing matter.
They expected the BBC to be perfect and inevitable failures to meet that standard lead to disappointment
No one expects it to be perfect, but failure to meet expected standards means it’s unworthy of existing.
They found the style of reporting annoying
It’s laughable that you can use words like “annoying” when defending an organisation championing for genocide. Their reporting isn’t annoying, it’s psychopathic and sickening.
Perhaps some reporters were annoying
Criminals. Enemies of mankind. Monsters. Some of their reporters are monsters.
A cynic might think that something deeper is going on, for example, a systematic campaign to erode trust in the BBC.
Perhaps this is a natural and uncoordinated response to the BBCs systematic campaign to make people value some human lives over others?
For me it, with all its failings, is one of the best public broadcasting organisations in the world.
I take it you regularly come across reporting from the others and find them wanting?
I take it you regularly come across reporting from the others and find them wanting?
I do.
Apologies for failing to add /s to a number of places in my post. Clearly that would have been needed.
maybe someone has grown up and realized that the BBC is just as much a propaganda machine as the rest. who knows what their reasons are.
People are expressing distaste for the state media for a state that supports an active genocide? that’s so crazy, there’s no other explanation than a coordinated conspiracy to discredit its unimpeachable reputation
Consistent Pro-Israel bias. When people see a livestreamed genocide against the Palestinian people by an apartheid state they tend to get pretty frustrated by outlets sweeping it under the rug
I’m negative about the BBC because of persistent bias in their reporting caused as a result of the Tories replacing the majority of board and senior positions with their cronies.
Academic studies have shown they have a clear bias in their political reporting. They deflect the criticism by having left leaning comedians which is not exactly a counterweight.
It’s structurally rotten and I refuse to pay the TV licence while it is so.
Academic studies have shown they have a clear bias in their political reporting.
Interesting. Would you be able to point me to any?
It would appear we have different definitions for academic studies.
It would appear you’d rather disregard sources that detail the BBC’s complicity in Genocide rather than engage with the evidence
but here’s a couple more for good measure
Witnessing undone: silence, noise and the enabling of genocide in Gaza
their biased reporting on the Israeli genocide of Palestine is enough to question the accuracy of any news they report. You don’t need to report too many lies before you lose all credibility.
Whitewashing a genocide is enough of a reason for me to never trust another thing they ever say, ever again.
