Probably easier to list where it isn’t happening. Wonder how long until one of them gets a stealth catamaran to start wars like in Tomorrow Never Dieshttps://m.imdb.com/title/tt0120347/
They’re certainly better in certain regards but still imperfect. As the post says, it’s rare that the BBC, which strives for a misguided notion of “total” neutrality, to make such a specific headline in regards to the conflict. In the past, it would’ve been something like 'Boy killed in West Back/Gaza Strip." I remember saying this on another post sometime ago but the BBC tries to be neutral in such a way that their reporting lacks any substance and ends up, de facto, supporting the status quo in the end. It goes something like this: Thing Happened > Here’s what known about thing that happened > People are calling thing that happened a tragedy > On to next thing.
BBC does not use “neutral” language. In general they only use that for Israel. When Russia or Hamas does something BBC digs up all the adjectives. This post is a rare exception.
Strangely enough, they’re not very popular with the pro-Zionist criminals crowd. When news broke out that Hamas’s then leader, Yahya Sinwar, was killed, I saw tons of comments under the comment sections of the BBC’s (and other mainstream outlets) Youtube videos saying something along lines of “I’m sorry to hear about your loss, BBC.” Thinking about now, it was mostly likely a Zionist bot network.
Those are bots. Zionist tactic #1 is call everything slightly critical of Israel “Hamas”. This way the enlightened centrists will say that both sides are not happy and therefore BBC is “neutral”.
A great example of BBC censorship is the BBC censoring "free Palestine’ from a speech at the Bafta’s recently. While leaving in someone saying the n-word.
People complain about the BBC but I would still take them over any US billionaire owned propaganda.
In general I don’t notice a large difference between US billionaire rags and the BBC.
Headlines like there are once in a blue moon. Rags like NYT will also occasionally do actual journalism such as with the flour massacre.
Sadly torries and labour both working to change BBC to be more like other media news networks
Similar situation for the CBC in Canada.
Probably easier to list where it isn’t happening. Wonder how long until one of them gets a stealth catamaran to start wars like in Tomorrow Never Dies https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0120347/
Why is that the only alternative when we have phenomenal independent journalism at Democracy Now, Drop Site News, ect
They’re certainly better in certain regards but still imperfect. As the post says, it’s rare that the BBC, which strives for a misguided notion of “total” neutrality, to make such a specific headline in regards to the conflict. In the past, it would’ve been something like 'Boy killed in West Back/Gaza Strip." I remember saying this on another post sometime ago but the BBC tries to be neutral in such a way that their reporting lacks any substance and ends up, de facto, supporting the status quo in the end. It goes something like this: Thing Happened > Here’s what known about thing that happened > People are calling thing that happened a tragedy > On to next thing.
BBC does not use “neutral” language. In general they only use that for Israel. When Russia or Hamas does something BBC digs up all the adjectives. This post is a rare exception.
Strangely enough, they’re not very popular with the pro-Zionist
criminalscrowd. When news broke out that Hamas’s then leader, Yahya Sinwar, was killed, I saw tons of comments under the comment sections of the BBC’s (and other mainstream outlets) Youtube videos saying something along lines of “I’m sorry to hear about your loss, BBC.” Thinking about now, it was mostly likely a Zionist bot network.Those are bots. Zionist tactic #1 is call everything slightly critical of Israel “Hamas”. This way the enlightened centrists will say that both sides are not happy and therefore BBC is “neutral”.
A great example of BBC censorship is the BBC censoring "free Palestine’ from a speech at the Bafta’s recently. While leaving in someone saying the n-word.