|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 15, 2023 15:53:55 GMT
On the contrary, Wooton does pretend to be unbiased. Its the first thing he says at the start of his show. I presume he'll be on again tonight. Watch it and see.
no idea what you are talking about re "unproven". Can you give me an example.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 15, 2023 16:06:31 GMT
Dan Wooten regularly gives what is obviously an opinion. However, the BBC camouflage its opinions into methods of presentation.
For instance, consistently using the word unproven for a claim it disagrees with, while reporting a claim it agrees with plainly.
Lying by structure is also common with BBC.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 15, 2023 16:09:48 GMT
As I said he claims to be unbiased. I presume you agree he is lying.
I have asked for an example of the "unproven" claim re the BBC. Still waiting. Repeating the same claim is pretty pointless.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 15, 2023 16:21:03 GMT
As I said he claims to be unbiased. I presume you agree he is lying. The BBC claims to be unbiased, presumably you agree they are lying? Or is this itself an opinion? THE BBC also makes the claim it is unbiased, not casually in conversation, but in the strictures that make it legal for it to take money off people for a public service. Dan Wooton can have any opinion he wishes and any opinion about his impartiality he wishes. he isn't a public employee pretending to offer the public service of impartiality. Dan Wooton often offers what are obviously opinions. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 15, 2023 17:01:39 GMT
Are you seriously trying to run an argument that when Wooten says he his impartial and then in the next breath offers his opinion, he doesn’t realise that means he is not impartial. Are you suggesting he is completely thick? He is lying - why deny the obvious,
I asked for an example of when the BBC has used “unproven” to be biased - several times now. Still waiting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 15, 2023 17:19:08 GMT
Cant see what the issue is, David Lammy has done a show on LBC for a while and back in the 80's Ken Livingstone was a presenter on LWT. Was there any great problem with those? Lammy does not have a 'news' show. He comments on the political issues of the day - much like several of the presenters at GB News. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Aug 15, 2023 17:56:57 GMT
Are you seriously trying to run an argument that when Wooten says he his impartial and then in the next breath offers his opinion, he doesn’t realise that means he is not impartial. Are you suggesting he is completely thick? He is lying - why deny the obvious, To use a BBC semantic technique, that's an 'unproven claim', Dappy. My view is that Dan's claims of impartiality are probably somewhat light-hearted - ie nothing at like the BBC's solemn and broken claim to impartiality, which is legally binding and is supposed to mean something. Btw - someone can be both impartial and offer an opinion. However, the BBC dresses and disguises significant bias and presents it as impartiality. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 15, 2023 18:17:37 GMT
Oh the latest claim is that Wooten is joking when he proudly announces he is impartial. Slightly less credible than even the last excuse.
Still waiting for that example - five times now….
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 18:24:56 GMT
It' a GBNews poll and they have politicians presenting the 'news', bit of a conflict there methinks.🤣 As to the 'leftys' they are there to be ridiculed but it never really works. No sense no feeling, huh? It's odd that some people on here attack those who actually have a slightly different narrative to the establishment NWO fascists. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 15, 2023 18:25:11 GMT
On the contrary, Wooton does pretend to be unbiased. Its the first thing he says at the start of his show. I presume he'll be on again tonight. Watch it and see. no idea what you are talking about re "unproven". Can you give me an example. Dappy you said and I quote: " Do you not find it really odd for the presenter to read out the news and then start inserting his own opinions into it". I say again, news readers do not comment or give their opinions, they just read the news. Dan Wootton does not read the news, he is not a news reader he is a presenter. None of the presenters read the news, all news bulletins are read by 'news readers'. There will be news bulletins during Dan Wootton's programme tonight 9pm to 11pm, if you watch it you will see he does not read the news. Just the same as any other channel, news readers read the news. Presenters, like Dan Wootton, present programmes. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Aug 15, 2023 18:29:52 GMT
Are you seriously trying to run an argument that when Wooten says he his impartial and then in the next breath offers his opinion, he doesn’t realise that means he is not impartial. Are you suggesting he is completely thick? He is lying - why deny the obvious, I asked for an example of when the BBC has used “unproven” to be biased - several times now. Still waiting. BBC bias. In Their Own Words... The BBC is “a publicly-funded urban organisation with an abnormally large proportion of younger people, of people in ethnic minorities and almost certainly of gay people, compared with the population at large”. All this “creates an innate liberal bias inside the BBC”. Andrew Marr. Many more examples here - link |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Aug 15, 2023 18:35:49 GMT
Quite right Red. Instead of read the news I should have said read out a news story. Then randomly he inserts his opinion having just before claimed impartiality. Orac has claimed 1) he doesn’t claim impartiality 2) oops yes he does but he doesn’t realise what the word means and 3) he was only joking. I say 4) he is lying. Which of the four do you think is most credible…..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2023 18:36:46 GMT
Quite right Red. Instead of read the news I should have said read out a news story. Then randomly he inserts his opinion having just before claimed impartiality. Orac has claimed 1) he doesn’t claim impartiality 2) oops yes he does but he doesn’t realise what the word means and 3) he was only joking. I say 4) he is lying. Which of the four do you think is most credible….. What do you think? |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Aug 16, 2023 4:55:12 GMT
Cant see what the issue is, David Lammy has done a show on LBC for a while and back in the 80's Ken Livingstone was a presenter on LWT. Was there any great problem with those? i think the ‘issue’ is the left are outraged that politicians of a viewpoint contrary to theirs are allowed airtime to express it. The official line is that while Flabbot and Mr Rail Journey Freeloader were welcome to mouth off on that show with Andrew ‘I’m going to star in a new news channel oh wait, no i’m not’ Neill, that was an opinion programme, not a NEWS one. And having political bias on NEWS broadcasts is not on. Which is utter tripe as anyone tolerating the sickening BBC website or five minutes of Laura will soon find out. The other thing to point out is GB News very, very clearly has a person separate from the show presenter whose job it is to present the on the hour news summary. And every single one of the show hosts uses the same ‘but first, over to xyz for a summary of today’s news’ wording to transfer to a separate individual for that ourpose. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Aug 16, 2023 7:05:43 GMT
On a wider point are these rules about impartiality on TV really relevant in the 21st Century?. It kinda mirrors the arguments about the TV licence, yes it was a great system in the last century when you only had 4 TV channels that everyone watched and people got most of their news from them - but time has moved on.
In an age where much of the youth get their news from Social Media that actively delivers specific content based on the political likes of the viewer, has the idea of a real impartial channel had its day?.
The Brexit debate showed that the BBC was no longer even attempting to be impartial in political debate program's like question time so is this idea that any station can be impartial actually workable - especially as much of the headline news output of the main BBC, ITV, Ch4 channels is not reporting the news but the pundit explaining the news (and thus putting their own spin on it)
|
|
