The Biased Broadcasting Corporation

[VILLAMARV]

15 minutes ago, bickster said:

That was way before the Cameron appointments

Yeah, I tend to subscribe to the theory where the right wing nature of our society is a lot worse than people seem to recognise/care about. I don't see Trump as 'the evil one' I see him as a tool to continue the evil nature of our society. It's all very depressing

[maqroll]

Is there a multimedia news source in England besides the Guardian? Cuz the BBC ain't it.

[VILLAMARV]

1 hour ago, maqroll said:

Is there a multimedia news source in England besides the Guardian? Cuz the BBC ain't it.

Good Question basically

TV is basically BBC / Channel4 / and ITN. And then there's SKY (now owned by COMCAST).

The Guardian embraced the internet well I think, but they are in with all the print titles. Times and Telegraph hide behind paywalls i think - as does the FT. The Independent - is that still an actual paper?

After them you'd be scratching around the hate mongers at the Heil, The Express, The Sun. The remnants of whatever The Mirror is these days. The Star is just softcore really.

Aggregator sites like NewsNow are out there but tempered by recent law changes I think.

Radio was always dominated by the Beeb.

Reuters? Moscow Today?

It's the multi media bit really.

Probably forgotten something

[tonyh29]

8 hours ago, VILLAMARV said:

Good Question basically

TV is basically BBC / Channel4 / and ITN. And then there's SKY (now owned by COMCAST).

The Guardian embraced the internet well I think, but they are in with all the print titles. Times and Telegraph hide behind paywalls i think - as does the FT. The Independent - is that still an actual paper?

After them you'd be scratching around the hate mongers at the Heil, The Express, The Sun. The remnants of whatever The Mirror is these days. The Star is just softcore really.

Aggregator sites like NewsNow are out there but tempered by recent law changes I think.

Radio was always dominated by the Beeb.

Reuters? Moscow Today?

It's the multi media bit really.

Probably forgotten something

I use Flipboard that quite often gets around the Telegrpah pay wall and gives you the full article , ditto FT 

good thing with Flipboard is you can customise the sources (and your interests) so you tend to get a good selection of news and a sorta ying and yang version of stories of you customise it right  

 

think you mean Russia Today , not Moscow today ? Was in Beijing last year and RT was the main news source , it’s comical with its perspective of world views  seen through the eyes of all hail Putin

 

Edited March 31, 2019 by tonyh29
Ying not Yong ( autocorrect making words up)

[bickster]

6 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

I use Flipboard that quite often gets around the Telegrpah pay wall and gives you the full article , ditto FT 

good thing with Flipboard is you can customise the sources (and your interests) so you tend to get a good selection of news and a sorta yong and yang version of stories of you customise it right  

 

think you mean Russia Today , not Moscow today ? Was in Beijing last year and RT was the main news source , it’s comical with its perspective of world views  seen through the eyes of all hail Putin

 

As much as I hate to agree with Tony... Flipboard is good 

[tonyh29]

14 minutes ago, bickster said:

As much as I hate to agree with Tony... 

(Only works if you watch This Time ) 

[tonyh29]

3 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

(Only works if you watch This Time ) 

@bickster

shes a reoccurring character who disagrees with everything Partridge says because he once spilt a lager shandy on her at an awards party .. very well worked into the show 

[VILLAMARV]

Quote

Figure 2 shows that the BBC dominates viewing shares, with a 33.1% share of viewing going to BBC Channels. ITV is the largest commercial PSB broadcaster, with a 22% share of viewing, while Sky channels account for 8.2% of all viewing.Figure 2: Broadcast family shares in multichannel homes (Ofcom, 2014)

https://www.mediareform.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Who_owns_the_UK_media-report_plus_appendix1.pdf

There's some interesting stuff there about who owns what and how much 'share' they have and so on. It's a few years out of date but mostly still relevant.

Although they literally just updated their report a few weeks ago.

Quote

We produced our first comprehensive report on media ownership in the UK back in 2015 when we argued concentrated ownership was a significant problem for any modern democracy. Four years later, we have produced an updated version that suggests that, not only does concentrated ownership persist but that the problem may be getting worse.

This report shows that just three companies (News UK, Daily Mail Group and Reach) dominate 83% of the national newspaper market (up from 71% in 2015). When online readers are included, just five companies (News UK, Daily Mail Group, Reach, Guardian and Telegraph) dominate nearly 80% of the market, slightly up from our last report. In the area of local news, just five companies (Gannett, Johnston Press, Trinity Mirror, Tindle and Archant) account for 80% of titles (back in 2015, six companies had the same share). Two companies have 46% of all commercial local analogue radio stations and two-thirds of all commercial digital stations.

The digital landscape is hardly less concentrated. Google dominates search while popular apps like Instagram and WhatsApp are owned by Facebook, itself the most popular social media site. New, digital-only news sites have emerged as a significant force since our last report but these are overshadowed by the continuing grip of legacy news and, especially, national newspaper titles.

The BBC remains a powerful presence in online and broadcasting but its budget has been massively cut by the last two licence fee deals and its room for manoeuvre has been limited by commercial competition and political pressure to be mindful of its impact on the wider commercial market.

We believe that concentration in news and information markets in particular has reached endemic levels in the UK and that we urgently need effective remedies.

https://www.mediareform.org.uk/media-ownership/who-owns-the-uk-media

[peterms]

Another beeb person now works for the tories, I wasn't aware of this one.

Quote

Robbie Gibb May’s influential director of communications is a former head of the BBC’s political team at Westminster, who is guided by his deep knowledge of the broadcast media and connections across the Conservative party. He is viewed as a firm Brexiter.

 

[peterms]

More on Mr Gibb.

 

[peterms]

 

[VILLAMARV]

Quote

There are wide variations in how the press in different countries report on asylum and immigration.Sweden was the country whose press system was the most positive towards refugees and migrants. Despite significant representation for the far-right Swedish Democrats and a low proportion of NGO sources, it featured a preponderance of humanitarian themes, few examples where refugees and migrants were framed as a threat, and strong advocacy of a more liberal and humane EU asylum and immigration policy. In contrast, coverage in the United Kingdom was the most negative. Despite the presence of newspapers such as the Guardian and Daily Mirror, both of which were sympathetic to refugees, the right-wing press in the United Kingdom expressed a hostility towards refugees and migrants which was unique. Whilst newspapers in all countries featured anti-refugee and anti-migrant perspectives, what distinguished the right of centre press in the UK was the degree to which that section of the press campaigned aggressively against refugees and migrants. This could be seen in the preponderance of negative frames and the editorialising in favour of Fortress Europe approaches.

The use of labels (migrant, refugee, immigrant etc.) varied markedly by country. Both Germany (91.0%) and Sweden (75.3%) overwhelmingly used the terms refugee (flüchtling(e)/ flykting) or asylum seeker (asylsuchende(r)/asylsokande). In contrast migrant (migrante) was the most used term in Italy (35.8%) and especially the UK (54.2%). Refugee (profugo/ rifugiato) was used 15.7% of the time in Italy and 27.2% of the time in the UK. In Spain, the dominant term was immigrant (immigrante) which was used 67.1% of time whilst refugee (Refugiado) was used 12.5% of the time.

........it was the press in the UK which was again the clear outlier, in exhibiting by far the most polarised coverage.

Loads more here from when UNHCR commissioned a report from Cardiff School of Journalism - Press Coverage of the Refugee and Migrant Crisis in the EU: A Content Analysis of Five European Countries.

Subtle differences but all important imo.

 

[Dr_Pangloss]

Ash Sarkar keeps getting on Question Time and the like, whether it's on the left or the right, why is this broadcaster obsessed with giving idiots a platform.

[Dodgyknees]

31 minutes ago, Dr_Pangloss said:

Ash Sarkar keeps getting on Question Time and the like, whether it's on the left or the right, why is this broadcaster obsessed with giving idiots a platform.

She's hot. I don't mind.

[HanoiVillan]

Sounds informative

 

[blandy]

11 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

Sounds informative

 

Not sure of the point anyone is making, here HV.

If Hoey says Labour doesn't support a CU, then that leads to the inevitable (given they still say they are pro leave) conclusion that they must therefore support no deal, or at least the leader would seem to. Seems a fair question. 

[HanoiVillan]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

Not sure of the point anyone is making, here HV.

If Hoey says Labour doesn't support a CU, then that leads to the inevitable (given they still say they are pro leave) conclusion that they must therefore support no deal, or at least the leader would seem to. Seems a fair question. 

Well, the point is that a customs union is Labour party policy. So Hoey is just outright lying, pretending that her position is somehow the position of the rest of the party, a claim that can be easily disproved by looking at her voting record versus the rest of the party. It's the BBC's job to challenge her when she says something that isn't true, not just accept it as fact. 

[blandy]

3 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

Well, the point is that a customs union is Labour party policy. So Hoey is just outright lying, pretending that her position is somehow the position of the rest of the party, a claim that can be easily disproved by looking at her voting record versus the rest of the party. It's the BBC's job to challenge her when she says something that isn't true, not just accept it as fact. 

This is contradicted by

8 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

The changes that Labour are seeking are to the Political Declaration, not the Withdrawal Agreement. Labour's 'better deal', whether you agree with it or not, does not consist of a different Withdrawal Agreement, which is correctly understood on both front benches to be impossible to amend.

The WA has us outside the CU (or any other CU).

So Labour's position is a CU, but also their position is to be outside any CU. This adds to their aim not to be in the CU but to be in a sort of bespoke CU whilst still having a say over the real CU, which they won't be in. That's all very clear.

[HanoiVillan]

37 minutes ago, blandy said:

The WA has us outside the CU (or any other CU).

The Withdrawal Agreement sets up an arrangement called 'the backstop' which is literally a customs union, albeit theoretically a temporary one, so I don't follow. 

[blandy]

39 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

a temporary one

Temporary, then leave it (albeit theoretically).