Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nickbat]

ffs - i give up - who's next?


'kin Mail quotes now 

I repeat: prove to me that any of the quotes in the article are fabrications if you can.

[Lizzie_Zoom]

It appears that some people genuinely want a News Channel to only reflect one, shared viewpoint - can you imagine what that would be like?(rupert can) I watch BBC output to be challenged, to be educated, to be informed - I want it to be informative and challenging and educational - it seems some of us have learned all there is to learn and now devote far too much energy to shutting out any differing opinion, which is sad.
I watch FOX news, I watch SKY news, I watch BBC, Channel 4, ITV, i listen to talksport and 5live among other stuff, i read the Indy, the Guardian, the times, telegraph, mail, star, FT all for various reasons and with varying degrees of credulity - i don't agree 100% on every view with any of the above outlets but surely thats the point of diversity? everyone has different opinions but you look who the overwhelming majority of people turn to for major news stories - most people, from whatever background or allegiance choose the BBC to inform them with good reason  8-)

Indeed BJ, and across the globe they do.  I would also add that last night's BBC News clearly stated that there is not only the Ashcroft story for the Tories, but Labour and the Lib Dems have had, or got their controversial donors, with Tony Blair even having had the police interview him over the "cash for honours" scandal involving his personal friend Lord Levy.

Sorry Nick, I saw no bias there only good faithful balanced reporting

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

It appears that some people genuinely want a News Channel to only reflect one, shared viewpoint - can you imagine what that would be like?(rupert can) I watch BBC output to be challenged, to be educated, to be informed - I want it to be informative and challenging and educational - it seems some of us have learned all there is to learn and now devote far too much energy to shutting out any differing opinion, which is sad.
I watch FOX news, I watch SKY news, I watch BBC, Channel 4, ITV, i listen to talksport and 5live among other stuff, i read the Indy, the Guardian, the times, telegraph, mail, star, FT all for various reasons and with varying degrees of credulity - i don't agree 100% on every view with any of the above outlets but surely thats the point of diversity? everyone has different opinions but you look who the overwhelming majority of people turn to for major news stories - most people, from whatever background or allegiance choose the BBC to inform them with good reason  8-)

Indeed BJ, and across the globe they do.  I would also add that last night's BBC News clearly stated that there is not only the Ashcroft story for the Tories, but Labour and the Lib Dems have had, or got their controversial donors, with Tony Blair even having had the police interview him over the "cash for honours" scandal involving his personal friend Lord Levy.

Sorry Nick, I saw no bias there only good faithful balanced reporting

.....yep....... I concur with Lizzie and BJ... .

[albitz]

I also watch a wide variety of news channels and read a variety of newspapers etc. I am completely convinced that the Beeb is very strongly biased towards the left. It has been a standing joke for years within the media in general that it is run by sandal wearing/ tree hugging/  ex hippies and champagne socialists., its not a new discovery and outside of this forum I dont remember anyone seriously trying to deny it.
As Nickbat says, the other channels are commercial and can choose their bias if they wish, but the Beeb is actually legally bound to provide an unbiased neutral service - that,ll be the day.

[Lizzie_Zoom]

I also watch a wide variety of news channels and read a variety of newspapers etc. I am completely convinced that the Beeb is very strongly biased towards the left. It has been a standing joke for years within the media in general that it is run by sandal wearing/ tree hugging/  ex hippies and champagne socialists., its not a new discovery and outside of this forum I dont remember anyone seriously trying to deny it.
As Nickbat says, the other channels are commercial and can choose their bias if they wish, but the Beeb is actually legally bound to provide an unbiased neutral service - that,ll be the day. ::)

Sorry Albs but how do you arrive at that conclusion?

I have just watched the 1800 BBC News where they outlined in some detail how British Airways and Rail Track are about to be crippled by trade union action (no doubt taken by lefties and socialists!!) and this is going to do no good to the companies concerned, nor the Labour Government in the run up to the General Election.

All very balanced reporting as far as I am concerned, but if biased at all it was not to the benefit of the lefties, but actually the Conservative right!

[albitz]

Havent watched the news tonight LZ so cant comment. But have formed the opinion over many years of watching and listening. Ever listened to radio 4 ? its unbelievable at times.
As I said I didnt watch the news but are you sure they werent trying to do a bit of deflection/ damage limitation on behalf of Gordon ? :-/

[Lizzie_Zoom]

Havent watched the news tonight LZ so cant comment. But have formed the opinion over many years of watching and listening. Ever listened to radio 4 ? its unbelievable at times.
As I said I didnt watch the news but are you sure they werent trying to do a bit of deflection/ damage limitation on behalf of Gordon ? :-/

No, not at all in my opinion.  Quite the reverse.

As for Radio 4; no in all honesty Albs never listen to it

[albitz]

I think this strike, from Gordons point of view could end up being a big problem. There is a school of thought that the members are being used as pawns in the game of who controls the Labour party after the election.
Although the union is called Unite, it has 2 leaders who cant stand each other and wont even appear in the samr TV studio as each other, they both want to get into a position of major power and influence to steer the labour movement / party in the very near future. There is a lot of political skullduggery going on behind the scenes, much of it tied up in the huge donations/ Unite delagates standing (in numbers) as candidates/ Harpersons husband being a link to the top of the party etc. And the powerbroker in the union is a certain Mr. Charlie Whelan - former chief spin doctor for Gordon. It could easily end up as a summer of discontent in 2010.
Imo Gordon doesnt care that much if they go on strike or not, but he would desperately like to see it delayed until after the election.
Perhaps the faction within Unite which isnt on his wing of the party are pushing things in a certain direction to try to damage him ? hard to say, but its certainly a very dirty game being played by people with big ego,s and ambitions.

[Banjax]

I think this strike, from Gordons point of view could end up being a big problem. There is a school of thought that the members are being used as pawns in the game of who controls the Labour party after the election.
Although the union is called Unite, it has 2 leaders who cant stand each other and wont even appear in the samr TV studio as each other, they both want to get into a position of major power and influence to steer the labour movement / party in the very near future. There is a lot of political skullduggery going on behind the scenes, much of it tied up in the huge donations/ Unite delagates standing (in numbers) as candidates/ Harpersons husband being a link to the top of the party etc. And the powerbroker in the union is a certain Mr. Charlie Whelan - former chief spin doctor for Gordon. It could easily end up as a summer of discontent in 2010.
Imo Gordon doesnt care that much if they go on strike or not, but he would desperately like to see it delayed until after the election.
Perhaps the faction within Unite which isnt on his wing of the party are pushing things in a certain direction to try to damage him ? hard to say, but its certainly a very dirty game being played by people with big ego,s and ambitions.

jeesus h christ - i agree with almost everything Albs just said, although i don't think Mr Harperson (i forget his name) has any influence on either the labour party or the unions.

i do feel sorry for the workers being manouvered into strike action, that said BA senior management have acted without honour, used bullying tactics and brinkmanship to force the unions hand, by all accounts its a  nasty, dirty bitter dispute - neither side has any particular dibs on the moral high ground

[Lizzie_Zoom]

I think this strike, from Gordons point of view could end up being a big problem. There is a school of thought that the members are being used as pawns in the game of who controls the Labour party after the election.
Although the union is called Unite, it has 2 leaders who cant stand each other and wont even appear in the samr TV studio as each other, they both want to get into a position of major power and influence to steer the labour movement / party in the very near future. There is a lot of political skullduggery going on behind the scenes, much of it tied up in the huge donations/ Unite delagates standing (in numbers) as candidates/ Harpersons husband being a link to the top of the party etc. And the powerbroker in the union is a certain Mr. Charlie Whelan - former chief spin doctor for Gordon. It could easily end up as a summer of discontent in 2010.
Imo Gordon doesnt care that much if they go on strike or not, but he would desperately like to see it delayed until after the election.
Perhaps the faction within Unite which isnt on his wing of the party are pushing things in a certain direction to try to damage him ? hard to say, but its certainly a very dirty game being played by people with big ego,s and ambitions.

Indeed Albs, and with the signal staff union, the RMT with a 50+% agreement for members now to strike and bring the whole of the National network to a standstill, for the first time in 16 years, things are not  looking good for Gordon Brown 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)  The RMT are not even members of the Labour Party having been expelled a few years back! 8-) 8-)

[STMO999]

NAHT and NUT are balloting about refusing to administer the SATS tests right now. Sats begin on May 3rd, general election scheduled for 6th.

[Martin_1962]

NAHT and NUT are balloting about refusing to administer the SATS tests right now. Sats begin on May 3rd, general election scheduled for 6th.

We used to take the piss out of teachers in NUT.

Used to say they were nuts.

As to BBC - I would say slight left wing bias but left wing people accuse them of right wing bias :-/ :-/

[albitz]

I think this strike, from Gordons point of view could end up being a big problem. There is a school of thought that the members are being used as pawns in the game of who controls the Labour party after the election.
Although the union is called Unite, it has 2 leaders who cant stand each other and wont even appear in the samr TV studio as each other, they both want to get into a position of major power and influence to steer the labour movement / party in the very near future. There is a lot of political skullduggery going on behind the scenes, much of it tied up in the huge donations/ Unite delagates standing (in numbers) as candidates/ Harpersons husband being a link to the top of the party etc. And the powerbroker in the union is a certain Mr. Charlie Whelan - former chief spin doctor for Gordon. It could easily end up as a summer of discontent in 2010.
Imo Gordon doesnt care that much if they go on strike or not, but he would desperately like to see it delayed until after the election.
Perhaps the faction within Unite which isnt on his wing of the party are pushing things in a certain direction to try to damage him ? hard to say, but its certainly a very dirty game being played by people with big ego,s and ambitions.

jeesus h christ - i agree with almost everything Albs just said, although i don't think Mr Harperson (i forget his name) has any influence on either the labour party or the unions.

i do feel sorry for the workers being manouvered into strike action, that said BA senior management have acted without honour, used bullying tactics and brinkmanship to force the unions hand, by all accounts its a  nasty, dirty bitter dispute - neither side has any particular dibs on the moral high ground

I take it all back. .........Mr Harperson might not be that influential, that point is debatable imo, but his wife has ambitions to lead the party and if she succeeded I would imagine he would be potentially hugely influential.

[albitz]

Anyways, my opinion - short version - Gordon needs this strike ( and the other which are looming) like a hole in the head this close to an election, so he is condemning his paymasters in the strongest terms that dare use and the Beeb are toeing his line.. When they tried to go on strike over christmas we didnt hear a word from him because he didnt care then. In fact his party recieved a very substantial cheque from the Unite union on the very day that BA were in the high court getting the strike declared illegal.
The unions are maybe trying to get what they can while they can as there may be a Tory gov.  very soon and they would then be back in the wilderness for years.
Unite are playing a bit of a different game - who in the Labour movement calls the shots in the medium term.
Tried to make it a short version but I am a natural born gobsh1te.

[Nickbat]

BBC:

BA strike blame 'lies with those at the top'
A member of British Airways' cabin crew, who has worked for the airline for more than 30 years, explains the reasons for the walkouts at the airline.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8576930.stm

Hmm..

Seen elsewhere:

"One of the main themes on this and previous threads is that BA crew are paid better that competitors and have better conditions."

"Just been speaking to a friend wrapped up in this unfortunate mess. She mentioned that she has just received an email with the final proposal from the company this evening and that her mind is now made up having read it. She will be reporting for duty. Good luck to all concerned."

"I see an offer that, if asked by my reps, I would be happy to accept."

All comments taken from the Professional Pilots Rumour Network (3400 posts on this subject, mostly by crew).

http://www.pprune.org/cabin-crew/404353-british-airways-cc-industrial-relations-mk-vi-172.html

So why couldn't the Beeb have found a balanced non-strike viewpoint from BA staff?

It's bias by omission, IMHO.