Political bias at BBC - something has to be done surely
Discussion
zarjaz1991 said:
It’s mentioned nine times in the article.
If you prefer, call it “environmentalist propaganda”. Either way, its appearance as the top story ahead of the deaths of 41 people in a plane crash is rather baffling.
What is actually happening is a concerted attempt by the left leaning media to push the idea that there is a literal “environmental emergency”, and giving stories like this greater prominence than actual emergencies and disasters is a big part of the brainwashing process.
It does seem a strange choice of headline when you consider the other stories that are available.If you prefer, call it “environmentalist propaganda”. Either way, its appearance as the top story ahead of the deaths of 41 people in a plane crash is rather baffling.
What is actually happening is a concerted attempt by the left leaning media to push the idea that there is a literal “environmental emergency”, and giving stories like this greater prominence than actual emergencies and disasters is a big part of the brainwashing process.
zarjaz1991 said:
41 dead in a plane crash?
Never mind about that....BBC News is leading with yet another climate change propaganda story.
Never mind about that....BBC News is leading with yet another climate change propaganda story.
The Article said:
What's behind this crisis?
The report's authors say there are a number of direct drivers of which land use change is the primary one.
This essentially means the replacement of grassland with intensive crops, or replacing ancient woodland with a plantation forest, or the clearing of forests to grow crops. This is happening in many parts of the world, especially in the tropics.
Since 1980, more than half of the increase in agriculture has been at the expense of intact forests.
It's a similar story at sea.
Climate change only gets one tiny little mention at the end of a long article in “other factors” along with invasive species and hunting. The report's authors say there are a number of direct drivers of which land use change is the primary one.
This essentially means the replacement of grassland with intensive crops, or replacing ancient woodland with a plantation forest, or the clearing of forests to grow crops. This is happening in many parts of the world, especially in the tropics.
Since 1980, more than half of the increase in agriculture has been at the expense of intact forests.
It's a similar story at sea.
You can see though that leaving it to the end and not mentioning it much is an example of disgusting bias as it’s the last thing the reader sees!
I think it’s clear that this story (through subtle suggestion and depiction) of these bees is a metaphor to promote a centrist pro Blair neoliberalism agenda. The bee’s habits being replaced by palm oil plantations is nothing more than the BBC expressing (sneering) sorrow at the failure of anti brexit blairite politics and the onset of Corbynism.
It’s a stark warning to May to rush into a deal with labour and a sign that the brexit party will do well in the upcoming EU elections.
Something has to be done! Surely.
zarjaz1991 said:
What is actually happening is a concerted attempt by the left leaning media to push the idea that there is a literal “environmental emergency”, and giving stories like this greater prominence than actual emergencies and disasters is a big part of the brainwashing process.
Good spot! Yes, that’s exactly what’s actually happening. Brainwashing. A concerted Lefty brainwashing process!
It’s concerted and definitely a process, like the attempts to stamp out capitalism of the cultural revolution under Mao or the socioeconomic purges of Stalin.
Obviously on the surface it looks like an interesting article about bees habitats but it’s obviously brainwashing.
zarjaz1991 said:
It’s mentioned nine times in the article.
If you prefer, call it “environmentalist propaganda”. Either way, its appearance as the top story ahead of the deaths of 41 people in a plane crash is rather baffling.
What is actually happening is a concerted attempt by the left leaning media to push the idea that there is a literal “environmental emergency”, and giving stories like this greater prominence than actual emergencies and disasters is a big part of the brainwashing process.
It's mentioned once, at the end. If you're going to lie it's best if you don't provide the evidence.If you prefer, call it “environmentalist propaganda”. Either way, its appearance as the top story ahead of the deaths of 41 people in a plane crash is rather baffling.
What is actually happening is a concerted attempt by the left leaning media to push the idea that there is a literal “environmental emergency”, and giving stories like this greater prominence than actual emergencies and disasters is a big part of the brainwashing process.
TTwiggy said:
It's mentioned once, at the end. If you're going to lie it's best if you don't provide the evidence.
Search for the word ‘climate’ on the page. Nine mentions, and all relating to the fact the climate has changed. It doesn’t need to be the exact phrase, unless we are splitting hairs.Androgynous said:
It does seem a strange choice of headline when you consider the other stories that are available.
Exactly. It’s not the presence of the article I have a problem with, it’s the fact that until the Royal Sproggery started in earnest a couple of hours ago it was today’s main headline, over and above a story about 41 people dying in a plane crash.Halb said:
Click on the bbc website, main news is some royal kid
click on the sky news site, main story is some royal kid
OMG, so biased!!!! Won't anyone think of the children!!!!
The royal baby is a concerted attempt at brainwashing too. It’s all about mixed race babies and uniting the country over brexit. Even now they’re interviewing some Asian looking (British) people and asking them their opinions while pushing this cynical sneering metropolitan elite multiculturalist agenda.click on the sky news site, main story is some royal kid
OMG, so biased!!!! Won't anyone think of the children!!!!
It’s basically treason. Why do they hate the UK so much?
El stovey said:
Good spot!
Yes, that’s exactly what’s actually happening. Brainwashing. A concerted Lefty brainwashing process!
It’s concerted and definitely a process, like the attempts to stamp out capitalism of the cultural revolution under Mao or the socioeconomic purges of Stalin.
Obviously on the surface it looks like an interesting article about bees habitats but it’s obviously brainwashing.
You forgot to mention 'the illiberal left'.Yes, that’s exactly what’s actually happening. Brainwashing. A concerted Lefty brainwashing process!
It’s concerted and definitely a process, like the attempts to stamp out capitalism of the cultural revolution under Mao or the socioeconomic purges of Stalin.
Obviously on the surface it looks like an interesting article about bees habitats but it’s obviously brainwashing.
Apart from that, bang on.
zarjaz1991 said:
TTwiggy said:
It's mentioned once, at the end. If you're going to lie it's best if you don't provide the evidence.
Search for the word ‘climate’ on the page. Nine mentions, and all relating to the fact the climate has changed. It doesn’t need to be the exact phrase, unless we are splitting hairs.Diderot said:
It was full on doomsday with these spurious stories yesterday and much of today; typical BBC making hay while the sun shines. Fact is we do not know how many species there are (BBC arsetickle cites estimates ranging between 2 million and 1 trillion). So any suggestion that biodiversity/nature is in an emergency scenario is utter unfounded tripe. They simply hope that people only read the headlines and don’t delve any deeper. Still, on a positive note, it can’t be that much of an emergency if the birth of a ‘royal’ baby turns that tap off.
Surely if even one species is in danger of man made extinction then that's something to be concerned about?I read nothing it that article to make me think about climate change, it's more about how we are basically wrecking the planet with our continuing expansion and subsequent consumption of scant resources.
I can't see how anyone wouldn't be concerned tbh. It's certainly not 'lefty propaganda'.
BigMon said:
Diderot said:
It was full on doomsday with these spurious stories yesterday and much of today; typical BBC making hay while the sun shines. Fact is we do not know how many species there are (BBC arsetickle cites estimates ranging between 2 million and 1 trillion). So any suggestion that biodiversity/nature is in an emergency scenario is utter unfounded tripe. They simply hope that people only read the headlines and don’t delve any deeper. Still, on a positive note, it can’t be that much of an emergency if the birth of a ‘royal’ baby turns that tap off.
Surely if even one species is in danger of man made extinction then that's something to be concerned about?I read nothing it that article to make me think about climate change, it's more about how we are basically wrecking the planet with our continuing expansion and subsequent consumption of scant resources.
I can't see how anyone wouldn't be concerned tbh. It's certainly not 'lefty propaganda'.
Diderot said:
BigMon said:
Diderot said:
It was full on doomsday with these spurious stories yesterday and much of today; typical BBC making hay while the sun shines. Fact is we do not know how many species there are (BBC arsetickle cites estimates ranging between 2 million and 1 trillion). So any suggestion that biodiversity/nature is in an emergency scenario is utter unfounded tripe. They simply hope that people only read the headlines and don’t delve any deeper. Still, on a positive note, it can’t be that much of an emergency if the birth of a ‘royal’ baby turns that tap off.
Surely if even one species is in danger of man made extinction then that's something to be concerned about?I read nothing it that article to make me think about climate change, it's more about how we are basically wrecking the planet with our continuing expansion and subsequent consumption of scant resources.
I can't see how anyone wouldn't be concerned tbh. It's certainly not 'lefty propaganda'.
Did you honestly read that entire article and just dismiss it as climate propaganda?
Edited by BigMon on Monday 6th May 19:20
BigMon said:
Diderot said:
BigMon said:
Diderot said:
It was full on doomsday with these spurious stories yesterday and much of today; typical BBC making hay while the sun shines. Fact is we do not know how many species there are (BBC arsetickle cites estimates ranging between 2 million and 1 trillion). So any suggestion that biodiversity/nature is in an emergency scenario is utter unfounded tripe. They simply hope that people only read the headlines and don’t delve any deeper. Still, on a positive note, it can’t be that much of an emergency if the birth of a ‘royal’ baby turns that tap off.
Surely if even one species is in danger of man made extinction then that's something to be concerned about?I read nothing it that article to make me think about climate change, it's more about how we are basically wrecking the planet with our continuing expansion and subsequent consumption of scant resources.
I can't see how anyone wouldn't be concerned tbh. It's certainly not 'lefty propaganda'.
Did you honestly read that entire article and just dismiss it as climate propaganda?
BigMon said:
Diderot said:
BigMon said:
Diderot said:
It was full on doomsday with these spurious stories yesterday and much of today; typical BBC making hay while the sun shines. Fact is we do not know how many species there are (BBC arsetickle cites estimates ranging between 2 million and 1 trillion). So any suggestion that biodiversity/nature is in an emergency scenario is utter unfounded tripe. They simply hope that people only read the headlines and don’t delve any deeper. Still, on a positive note, it can’t be that much of an emergency if the birth of a ‘royal’ baby turns that tap off.
Surely if even one species is in danger of man made extinction then that's something to be concerned about?I read nothing it that article to make me think about climate change, it's more about how we are basically wrecking the planet with our continuing expansion and subsequent consumption of scant resources.
I can't see how anyone wouldn't be concerned tbh. It's certainly not 'lefty propaganda'.
Did you honestly read that entire article and just dismiss it as climate propaganda?
Edited by BigMon on Monday 6th May 19:20
Let's put it another way: if you accept their (spurious) hypothesis, (and ignore the enormous, nay brobdingnagian, epistemological holes in it) then what is the answer? What is the 'cure'?
The reality is that we cannot ever know how many species inhabit the earth, be it 2 million, 11 million or 1 trillion, so to claim that there's an emergency because x very small number from an unknowable total number might become extinct is always already false. Shame on them, but true to form. The gullible have been affected.
Diderot said:
Yes of course I read the entire article; I always read entire articles assiduously which is precisely why I posed the question directly to you, as the subject of Climate Change *was* inevitably mentioned (quelle surprise). It's part and parcel of their grand narrative (that which they (the BBC) have signed up to promote).
Let's put it another way: if you accept their (spurious) hypothesis, (and ignore the enormous, nay brobdingnagian, epistemological holes in it) then what is the answer? What is the 'cure'?
The reality is that we cannot ever know how many species inhabit the earth, be it 2 million, 11 million or 1 trillion, so to claim that there's an emergency because x very small number from an unknowable total number might become extinct is always already false. Shame on them, but true to form. The gullible have been affected.
There is no single magic cure all, but even if you strip away all the bits of that article that you object to (so anything mentioning climate change I'm guessing) it still presents a very alarming picture does it not?Let's put it another way: if you accept their (spurious) hypothesis, (and ignore the enormous, nay brobdingnagian, epistemological holes in it) then what is the answer? What is the 'cure'?
The reality is that we cannot ever know how many species inhabit the earth, be it 2 million, 11 million or 1 trillion, so to claim that there's an emergency because x very small number from an unknowable total number might become extinct is always already false. Shame on them, but true to form. The gullible have been affected.
There are basically too many humans on the earth, consuming too many resources at too fast a rate for it to not be an issue.
As to what we do about it, I don't know but I think we (as in everyone) need to do something rather than nothing.
BigMon said:
There is no single magic cure all, but even if you strip away all the bits of that article that you object to (so anything mentioning climate change I'm guessing) it still presents a very alarming picture does it not?
There are basically too many humans on the earth, consuming too many resources at too fast a rate for it to not be an issue.
As to what we do about it, I don't know but I think we (as in everyone) need to do something rather than nothing.
Whoa, BigMon...you can’t go saying there are too many people...if you say that, as I often do, you are compulsorily shot down in flames for suggesting everyone isn’t entitled to have as many children as they want.There are basically too many humans on the earth, consuming too many resources at too fast a rate for it to not be an issue.
As to what we do about it, I don't know but I think we (as in everyone) need to do something rather than nothing.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff