Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

more lies from the media -- BBC

Options
124»

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Malpaisian wrote: »
    ...........

    You seem to be very hung up on "evidence"...........

    You'll find its a quality thats appreciated. Theres a religous forum for those adverse to that kind of thing and preferring the faith based approach.
    Malpaisian wrote: »
    ...........
    Why is it that none of you people can ever engage with points made and the examples given other than to vaguely refer to them as being "opinion" or "not evidence". Perhaps you are cowards. After all it does take a coward to live in this world and bury your heads in the sand the way you people do.

    Why don't you state clearly what your stance is on all of this and we will see if it is "opinion" or not. This whole forum is "opinion". Everything you think is "opinion". Granted, in your case, it's not likely to be opinion that you have arrived at by yourself through independent and critical thinking, but it's opinion none the less.

    This tactic of responding with the "that's just opinion" line to lengthy posts with rational argument backed up by examples is not going to cut it. All it does is highlight your lack of conviction, arguments, inteligence and testicular fortitude. Keep up the good work!

    Amusing, for a number of reasons.

    Still no evidence of deception on the part of the Beeb, I see.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    guitarzero wrote: »
    What I found odd was the presenters just waffling a long to the shot of the people as though its taking place in Lybia, instead of just saying " Oh, we got the wrong pictures, we'll leave that for now, and in other news etc" which is pretty much protocol if you've ever seen the countless amount of times an error in communication takes place on live news, Bill O' Reilly may come to mind.

    I wouldn't have thought it that dodgy. The newscaster would be focusing on the autocue, not the footage. The people backstage who put on the wrong footage wouldn't necessarilly be paying attention to the content, just the run-time of it so that they can cut back to the studio or to ads or to the next segment etc.

    If they didn't notice it straight away then there wouldn't be a reason to apologise for it later. Then again, maybe they did. Did anyone watch the channel non-stop for the next few days?


  • Registered Users Posts: 136 ✭✭Malpaisian


    Nodin wrote: »
    You'll find its a quality thats appreciated. Theres a religous forum for those adverse to that kind of thing and preferring the faith based approach.

    Amusing, for a number of reasons.

    Still no evidence of deception on the part of the Beeb, I see.

    I have no interest in religion or religious forums. I've given far more evidence than you've given to the contrary. You are still doing your cowardly little drive-by postings without actually saying anything yourself.

    Why don't you have the guts to do the following things for me:

    1) Tell me exactly what you think about the BBC (and the mainstream news-media in general), It's real purpose and the veracity or otherwise of its reportage.

    I have already asked you to do this, but you seem unwilling for some reason.

    2)Define what you mean by "evidence"

    3)Define what you mean by "opinion"

    4)Make an effort to actually engage, in detail ,with the points I've made and the examples I've given to back them up.

    5) Tell me exactly what you find amusing and why. (pathetic little comments like: "Amusing, for a number of reasons"
    are a poor replacement for real arguments)

    6) Tell me what is your interest in this conversation. Do you work for the media? Have you some agenda?

    If you cannot do these simple things, then you are either incapable and/or cowardly.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Malpaisian wrote: »
    I have no interest in religion or religious forums. I've given far more evidence than you've given to the contrary.
    .

    You've given none.
    Malpaisian wrote: »
    2)Define what you mean by "evidence"
    .

    A catalogued and investigated incident where the BBC "engaged in deception" - saying they something they knew to be untrue at the time they said it, for purposes of some agenda, in relation to a news/political story.


  • Registered Users Posts: 136 ✭✭Malpaisian


    Nodin wrote: »
    You've given none.



    A catalogued and investigated incident where the BBC "engaged in deception" - saying they something they knew to be untrue at the time they said it, for purposes of some agenda, in relation to a news/political story.


    So you are a incapable/and or a coward. I suppose it goes with the territory eh.

    By the way:

    Here is a link to the BBC reporting the collapse of Building 7 on Sept 11 2001 well before the building "collapsed".

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Malpaisian wrote: »
    So you are a incapable/and or a coward. I suppose it goes with the territory eh.

    By the way:

    Here is a link to the BBC reporting the collapse of Building 7 on Sept 11 2001 well before the building "collapsed".

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s

    And that, I think, is quite enough of this thread, which has descended into repetitive and unprovable CT rubbish. Malpaisan, there's a forum for that - save it for there.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement