news.bbc.co.uk - Does anyone look at this site for news?
Discussion
Blue62 said:
Caulkhead said:
Why?
It could indicate that it is (relatively) impartial and not at the beck and call of the Govt of the day, although it could also be that Rupert is driving the anti BBC agenda and we're all a little clearer on how far his influence extends these days.
Murdoch really seems to be pushing the anti-BBC stance. The Sun was full of praise for the terrible ITV coverage of Euro 2012 whilst lambasting the BBC coverage which was as usual excellent.
Despite this month long campaign, when both channels showed the final, 6 times as many people watched it on the BBC.
Despite this month long campaign, when both channels showed the final, 6 times as many people watched it on the BBC.
obob said:
Murdoch really seems to be pushing the anti-BBC stance. The Sun was full of praise for the terrible ITV coverage of Euro 2012 whilst lambasting the BBC coverage which was as usual excellent.
Despite this month long campaign, when both channels showed the final, 6 times as many people watched it on the BBC.
Seriously?Despite this month long campaign, when both channels showed the final, 6 times as many people watched it on the BBC.
No one with an ounce of honesty could claim that ITV's coverage of Euro 2012 was better than the BBC's. It just wasn't.
obob said:
Murdoch really seems to be pushing the anti-BBC stance. The Sun was full of praise for the terrible ITV coverage of Euro 2012 whilst lambasting the BBC coverage which was as usual excellent.
Despite this month long campaign, when both channels showed the final, 6 times as many people watched it on the BBC.
It's all rather predictable, the constant bDespite this month long campaign, when both channels showed the final, 6 times as many people watched it on the BBC.
hing in the Murdoch press about the licence fee when Sky charges the thick end of £700 pa for live sport and not a whole lot else. He's desperate to ged rid of News 24 on the BBC and is using his not inconsiderable influence to push for it. Frightening stuff, especially when you see how many people on here would happily do away with the BBC, just hope this place is not representative of the general public's view.The BBC news website is fine - just the basic news and that's all, very little analysis or comment about how and why events happen. This is fair enough as it should not crowd other news sources from the market:
I also look at the following:
1) PH NP&E forum (of course
)
2) Telegraph.co.uk - the bread and butter Torygraph. Reading the comments is usually pretty pointless as it turns into a Tory vs Labour slagging match really quickly with little debate.
3) Guardian Online Like the politics or not, in my view The Guardian has by far the best newspaper website on the web in terms of volume of content, layout and the comments system.
Regarding the comments below the article, some are excellent. However, you have to filter all the meaningless "Tory scum" "evil bankers" posts out - you soon learn which phrases should send you onto reading the next comment.
The moderation is actually very fair, and it's amusing to go through and pull out a lot of the off topic comments you disagree with and 'report' them for moderation!
4) Guido Fawkes always worth running your eye over the stories but bear in mind Guido loves to make trouble for the sake of it. Comments are a waste of time though and a demonstration of why some degree of moderation is a good thing.
5) The Spectator Blogs
6) labourlist.org Claims to be independent centre-left thought, but in reality is very close to the Labour party. There are some interesting articles that are critical of the party, and posters will engage in debate if you are polite. Worth a read from time to time to get the youngish centre-left view.
7) Google News If I have a particular story I will search further (and foreign news sources) in Google news. A very useful service indeed.
We're very lucky to live in an age where we can access a real range of news sources. I try not to fall into the trap of relying on a particular source though, and if I find myself agreeing with what I read with too much I know it's time to seek out another website or viewpoint I disagree with
I also look at the following:
1) PH NP&E forum (of course
)2) Telegraph.co.uk - the bread and butter Torygraph. Reading the comments is usually pretty pointless as it turns into a Tory vs Labour slagging match really quickly with little debate.
3) Guardian Online Like the politics or not, in my view The Guardian has by far the best newspaper website on the web in terms of volume of content, layout and the comments system.
Regarding the comments below the article, some are excellent. However, you have to filter all the meaningless "Tory scum" "evil bankers" posts out - you soon learn which phrases should send you onto reading the next comment.
The moderation is actually very fair, and it's amusing to go through and pull out a lot of the off topic comments you disagree with and 'report' them for moderation!
4) Guido Fawkes always worth running your eye over the stories but bear in mind Guido loves to make trouble for the sake of it. Comments are a waste of time though and a demonstration of why some degree of moderation is a good thing.
5) The Spectator Blogs
6) labourlist.org Claims to be independent centre-left thought, but in reality is very close to the Labour party. There are some interesting articles that are critical of the party, and posters will engage in debate if you are polite. Worth a read from time to time to get the youngish centre-left view.
7) Google News If I have a particular story I will search further (and foreign news sources) in Google news. A very useful service indeed.
We're very lucky to live in an age where we can access a real range of news sources. I try not to fall into the trap of relying on a particular source though, and if I find myself agreeing with what I read with too much I know it's time to seek out another website or viewpoint I disagree with
Blue62 said:
obob said:
Murdoch really seems to be pushing the anti-BBC stance. The Sun was full of praise for the terrible ITV coverage of Euro 2012 whilst lambasting the BBC coverage which was as usual excellent.
Despite this month long campaign, when both channels showed the final, 6 times as many people watched it on the BBC.
It's all rather predictable, the constant bDespite this month long campaign, when both channels showed the final, 6 times as many people watched it on the BBC.
hing in the Murdoch press about the licence fee when Sky charges the thick end of £700 pa for live sport and not a whole lot else. He's desperate to ged rid of News 24 on the BBC and is using his not inconsiderable influence to push for it. Frightening stuff, especially when you see how many people on here would happily do away with the BBC, just hope this place is not representative of the general public's view.All Murdoch has to do is publish criteria and if any politician wants to be supported by his papers all they have to do is say the same things. It worked for Johnson.
We have a political appointee for DG. How long before the BBC newsroom has swingeing cuts? We all know it will happen. Eventually we will end up with news being filtered by those with enough money to own newspapers. Almost all our news is controlled by the establishment, which includes the Scott Trust. It now looks like happening to the BBC. No one seems willing to rock the boat, apart from The Eye of course and it won't be long before Hislop gets banged up.
Derek Smith said:
Blue62 said:
obob said:
Murdoch really seems to be pushing the anti-BBC stance. The Sun was full of praise for the terrible ITV coverage of Euro 2012 whilst lambasting the BBC coverage which was as usual excellent.
Despite this month long campaign, when both channels showed the final, 6 times as many people watched it on the BBC.
It's all rather predictable, the constant bDespite this month long campaign, when both channels showed the final, 6 times as many people watched it on the BBC.
hing in the Murdoch press about the licence fee when Sky charges the thick end of £700 pa for live sport and not a whole lot else. He's desperate to ged rid of News 24 on the BBC and is using his not inconsiderable influence to push for it. Frightening stuff, especially when you see how many people on here would happily do away with the BBC, just hope this place is not representative of the general public's view.Derek Smith said:
All Murdoch has to do is publish criteria and if any politician wants to be supported by his papers all they have to do is say the same things. It worked for Johnson.
Did it make any difference? I think there is an overestimation of the importance of Murdoch in today's day and age.Ken lost the Mayoral race - even the comments on Guardian.co.uk were put off by his behaviour and dubious policy promises, and were irritated by the repeated pro-Ken columns in that newspaper.
Perhaps I am crediting people with an ability to think for themselves and use multiple news sources...
0a said:
Derek Smith said:
All Murdoch has to do is publish criteria and if any politician wants to be supported by his papers all they have to do is say the same things. It worked for Johnson.
Did it make any difference? I think there is an overestimation of the importance of Murdoch in today's day and age.Ken lost the Mayoral race - even the comments on Guardian.co.uk were put off by his behaviour and dubious policy promises, and were irritated by the repeated pro-Ken columns in that newspaper.
Perhaps I am crediting people with an ability to think for themselves and use multiple news sources...
As to whether there is an overestimation of the importance of Murdoch's support in election campaigns, the vital point is whether there is an overestimation in the opinion of the person seeking election. Little Jimmy Murdochs Mactaggart lecture was a considered list of criteria that would be considered when deciding on whom to support. Johnson has spouted the Mactaggart creed when attacking Cameron. The Murdoch papers have chosen a hero.
Whether you or I are influenced by the Murdoch propaganda is neither here nor there. We are not the ones who Murdoch seeks to influence. What is clear is that Johnson, Cameron, Blair and even the sainted Thatcher viewed the support of Murdoch has something of an essential. Therefore his influence is persuasive.
Derek Smith said:
it is an unfortunate fact of life, one that has been proved, that we are all influenced by media. If this wasn't so there would be no point in advertising.
As to whether there is an overestimation of the importance of Murdoch's support in election campaigns, the vital point is whether there is an overestimation in the opinion of the person seeking election. Little Jimmy Murdochs Mactaggart lecture was a considered list of criteria that would be considered when deciding on whom to support. Johnson has spouted the Mactaggart creed when attacking Cameron. The Murdoch papers have chosen a hero.
Whether you or I are influenced by the Murdoch propaganda is neither here nor there. We are not the ones who Murdoch seeks to influence. What is clear is that Johnson, Cameron, Blair and even the sainted Thatcher viewed the support of Murdoch has something of an essential. Therefore his influence is persuasive.
Some excellent points there, in particular "As to whether there is an overestimation of the importance of Murdoch's support in election campaigns, the vital point is whether there is an overestimation in the opinion of the person seeking election" is quite true of course. As to whether there is an overestimation of the importance of Murdoch's support in election campaigns, the vital point is whether there is an overestimation in the opinion of the person seeking election. Little Jimmy Murdochs Mactaggart lecture was a considered list of criteria that would be considered when deciding on whom to support. Johnson has spouted the Mactaggart creed when attacking Cameron. The Murdoch papers have chosen a hero.
Whether you or I are influenced by the Murdoch propaganda is neither here nor there. We are not the ones who Murdoch seeks to influence. What is clear is that Johnson, Cameron, Blair and even the sainted Thatcher viewed the support of Murdoch has something of an essential. Therefore his influence is persuasive.
To some extent this is self reinforcing - the more power people think he has, the more they seek his support, so the more powerful he seems...
I suspect that this cycle will be broken by the whole phone hacking thing though.
0a said:
I suspect that this cycle will be broken by the whole phone hacking thing though.
Sky tv is seemingly on an inexorable rise, however. That many households prepared to pay thirty, fifty, ninety pounds a month to receive editorial and adverts along with their sky1 makes NI very powerful - and wealthy. I hope skynews remains relatively impartial and doesn't descend any further low brow. While new media provides some alternatives it appears to me the BBC is the single most significant counter to sky's remarkable growth. Let's see if the BBC is given the ability to "compete" and provide plurality when the charter and budget come up for renewal.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff