BBC News itself is impartial and does not offer opinions
How then can they have an article which is entitled Prime Minister’s Questions: The verdict, featuring videos of BBC presenters giving their opinions verdicts?
"It was a time for forensic questioning" says @afneil on #pmqs but Mr Corbyn gave "a series of rather short speeches, a couple of which did not ended in any kind of question at all" #bbcdp pic.twitter.com/ZXj9kbBNJo
— BBC Daily Politics and Sunday Politics (@daily_politics) December 6, 2017
"More heat than light from both of them, it was not either of their finest hours" @bbclaurak on Brexit issues at #pmqs pic.twitter.com/zq9m4zpnoY
— BBC Daily Politics and Sunday Politics (@daily_politics) December 6, 2017
Perhaps Oxford need to update their thesaurus, because it wrongly claims that ‘verdict’ is a synonym of ‘opinion’.
Problem with subjectivity
I watched it – corbyn had an open goal and blew it. The sounds and body language from his backbench spoke for itself. He should have shredded the PM. Don’t get he wrong- I dispose corbyn and all his views, always have – I remember him sucking the parts of pira .
But I also believe in good government and at the moment we haven’t got that. I actually think al Beeb – Brillo was perfectly fair and the shredding of the Tory and labour mouthpieces before PMQ s was painful.
Lord Lawson got caught up in the moronic BBC confusion between facts and opinion, what the BBC called a “false balance” between fact and opinion. But if Lord Lawson’s opinion is that all ten or more year old computer models, using the Arrhenius formula, with ten year predictions, have been proved wrong. Then that opinion is a fact censored by the BBC.
Then there is Look North with its repeated news stories. Day after day, all we get is a disabled person taking up athletics and cancer sufferers dying because the NHS wont pay greedy drug companies lots and lots of taxpayers money.
It’s not verdicts, it’s propaganda. Verdicts indicate judgement and correct assessment. This is not judgement nor correct assessment – it is a propaganda corruption which leads to the BBC deciding in the favour of the causes they themselves are pushing.
Ps: Hi VX – I thank you for all the articles you post here. In general I wholeheartedly agree with what you say and find you are bringing things to my attention and to a detail I wasn’t aware of. I wish there was an upvote indicator for the articles posted here (and not just for the comments).
Note no efforts at any judgements or condemnations though when it comes to Muslim accused,
Three Mulims in the dock today for offences-but all the BBC say is
a) it is alleged that
b) it is claimed that
c) it was said in court that.
Passive, neutral tones for efforts to kill the PM, to get Prince George abducted or killed, or to fund trips to Syria as usual.
Why do we NEVER get this degree of circumspection from the BBC News bunch when Tories, Trump, May or Brexit are “in the dock”? Do these causes ever get spoken of as dispassionate and carefully? Or is it one set of words for Muslims, one set of vitriolic cliches for the law-abiding?