f0x n3ws on the bbc (allegedly)

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
http://blugg.com/stuff/foxs_view_of_the_bbc_player.htm

!!!!!!1!!!

Is this for real???

The mind boggles if so.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 5 February 2004 16:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah, it is. We were talking about it on the Hutton report thread.

Ricardo (RickyT), Thursday, 5 February 2004 16:36 (twenty-two years ago)

Gah, 0wn3d again.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 5 February 2004 16:38 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd not seen it either dude! I'm gastered!

Sarah (starry), Thursday, 5 February 2004 16:46 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't have sound on my PC at work. Can someone please supply a summary?

hmmm, Thursday, 5 February 2004 16:48 (twenty-two years ago)

There's a link to a transcript on the Hutton report thread.

N. (nickdastoor), Thursday, 5 February 2004 16:53 (twenty-two years ago)

Cool. Cheers

hmmm, Thursday, 5 February 2004 16:57 (twenty-two years ago)

it's a little like the Rodney King tape that way, in that you feel ill and really don't want to believe it

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 5 February 2004 17:37 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm actually interested in the motive for the opinion report. It was only transmitted in the States right? where the BBC have an extremely marginal presence with their America channel on cable...so what do the fascist scum at Fox News have to gain from criticising the BBC's handling of the Kelly incident, given that most of their audience either wouldn't care about the BBC cos it's not American or it incites hatred from both right-wing American patriots who fail to accept their government can ever be at fault or at least can but never as much as other governments and BBC supporters. Fox News is not competing with the BBC in the USA is it? Maybe with the news websites but still are FOx News viewers going to look at other news sources anyway (they can only tell them what they don't want to hear). i don't mean this to sound naive. i know it's part of a corporation like Fox's instinct to make their rivals look bad generally but on this occasion it seems completely illogical and ham-fisted.

stevem (blueski), Thursday, 5 February 2004 18:03 (twenty-two years ago)

A week ago I'd have said you were being hard on Fox viewers, but everytime I watch that footage I get closer to "they deserve what they get".

Anyway, your answer is in the last flag-on-lapel bit: BBC World apparently gained viewers in the US during the war, this is a five-minute-hate by Fox to ensure that more people don't stray.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 5 February 2004 18:17 (twenty-two years ago)

april 24, 2003: "We are still surprised when we see Fox News with such a committed political position. For the health of our democracy, it's vital we don't follow the path of many American networks." - Greg Dyke

no love lost, then. Andrew i think BBC World viewership did go up, but so did viewership for Fox News, CNN, and all the rest. i haven't seen any reliable figures and i'm not sure they exist.

Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Thursday, 5 February 2004 18:25 (twenty-two years ago)

I saw that fuckwad's face and I clicked it off, I can't watch him.

Mark Ames' description of Chuck Klosterman actually applies to that guy.

Gear! (Gear!), Thursday, 5 February 2004 18:29 (twenty-two years ago)

I must admit I thought it was Chris Morris pisstake at first, then the reality sunk in. Ironic thing is he's using blatant lies to attack the BBC for their 'blatant lying'. Gilligan's journalistic reputation may be at an all time low, but he never stated that Iraqi troops were heroically repulsing the US attack.

Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Thursday, 5 February 2004 18:46 (twenty-two years ago)

I was just making a glib reference before, but seriously, this is an actual five-minute-hate (in 60 seconds). I need to start drinking.

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 5 February 2004 20:13 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't think they're attacking the BBC to tear down their credibility, they're doing it because it plays to their audience's believe that the USA is best in everything. In other words, it's xenophobic rather than dirty business tricks. But it's also dirty business tricks--that's the beauty part.

teeny (teeny), Thursday, 5 February 2004 20:24 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah, gibson did this when he was at msnbc for a few years, and then once he jumped ship to fox he attacked his former network with the same vile "wit".

Yanc3y (ystrickler), Thursday, 5 February 2004 20:26 (twenty-two years ago)

"what do the fascist scum at Fox News hope to gain?"

The BBC presumably. Remember who owns Fox News and who owns Sky TV.

Marcello Carlin, Friday, 6 February 2004 09:50 (twenty-two years ago)

oh dear, words fail...

even the currant bun wouldn't run an opinion like that...

what's all that crap about the iraqi troops? i didn't know gilligan was out there...

CarsmileSteve (CarsmileSteve), Friday, 6 February 2004 10:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Americans have yet to discover the long arm of the proprietor the way the British public kind of expect it in their media barons; up until the rise of people like Murdoch there really hasn't been that kind of really obvious motivation for bias in US broadcasting that the print media are well used to. More British people could probably tell you who owns Fox than Americans could.

I hope people in mainstream America can learn to take owner's opinions into account. In broadcasting, where it's easy to get sucked into seeing is believing, I don't think most of us really process that (anecdotally I meet people who made me put these concerns).

suzy (suzy), Friday, 6 February 2004 11:04 (twenty-two years ago)

Some 60+ years after Citizen Kane ("You'll think what I pay you to think!") I'm surprised that American audiences haven't worked it out yet vis-a-vis the long arm of the post-Hearst proprietors.

(oh hang on: the American mainstream have never seen Citizen Kane, so fair enough)

Marcello Carlin, Friday, 6 February 2004 11:08 (twenty-two years ago)

the treatment of Fox on The Simpsons (America's most popular TV show of the last 15 years?) has always been extraordinary in this case - unless the people who watch FOx News DON'T watch The Simpsons or just don't get the incessant (originally super-sharp but now just contrived since Rupert Murdoch appeared in the show himself, not sure if that was really his voice tho) digs at the hand that feedeth.

stevem (blueski), Friday, 6 February 2004 11:29 (twenty-two years ago)

murdoch has confirmed that it was his voice in the simpsons. i suppose it's the same story as michael moore - the token house radical to prove that he's not solely a right-wing opportunist (even though he is).

Marcello Carlin, Friday, 6 February 2004 11:38 (twenty-two years ago)

by the "he" of course i mean murdoch, not moore (though having read the manifesto for "reasonable republicans" in dude where's my country, i'm not entirely sure).

Marcello Carlin, Friday, 6 February 2004 11:39 (twenty-two years ago)

the problem i had with Murdoch's cameo was it felt too much like 'yes i know i am a cunt, isn't it hilarious?'

stevem (blueski), Friday, 6 February 2004 12:10 (twenty-two years ago)

but fox news was suing the simpsons at one point (about the fox-esque ticker that said things like "98% of democrats are gay" etc), despite them effectively being part of the same company...

we get fox on our sky digital, it's scary dude...

CarsmileSteve (CarsmileSteve), Friday, 6 February 2004 12:11 (twenty-two years ago)

apparently the right hand didn't know what the left hand was doing (seriously: the 22 22-year-olds who initiated the suit didn't realise that the simpsons was murdoch-owned)

Marcello Carlin, Friday, 6 February 2004 12:18 (twenty-two years ago)

22 22-year-olds

You can spot who listens to Baker in the mornings, can't you? It's like the Sinisterines with their inverted badges.

Michael Jones (MichaelJ), Friday, 6 February 2004 13:42 (twenty-two years ago)

TAKE COVER MICHAEL

omg, Friday, 6 February 2004 13:43 (twenty-two years ago)

not all of fox news is bad, though: britt hume might be the best tv journo on u.s. cable tv.

must-see alert: pres. bush is on meet the press on sunday. russert will destroy him.

Yanc3y (ystrickler), Friday, 6 February 2004 14:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Some reckon otherwise

Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 6 February 2004 14:34 (twenty-two years ago)

is Russert the American Paxman? I hope so

stevem (blueski), Friday, 6 February 2004 14:36 (twenty-two years ago)

four months pass...
US channel's BBC remarks censured

UK media watchdog Ofcom has criticised US cable channel Fox News over views a presenter expressed about the BBC.
Ofcom said Fox News breached guidelines when commentator John Gibson claimed the BBC had displayed "a frothing-at-the-mouth" anti-American bias.

Gibson made the comments on the day the Hutton Report, which found a BBC report on Iraq was "unfounded", was published.


Gibson's comments were broadcast on The Big Story: My Word - a personal comment section at the end of an hour-long news programme - on 28 January.

The strength and number of allegations... meant that Fox News should have offered the BBC an opportunity to respond

Ofcom report
The Hutton Report into the death of weapons inspector Dr David Kelly contained criticism of BBC reporter Andrew Gilligan and the corporation's "defective" editorial processes.

In his show, Gibson said the BBC displayed anti-Americanism that was "obsessive, irrational and dishonest".

He also said the corporation "felt entitled to lie and, when caught lying, felt entitled to defend its lying reporters and executives".

A total of 24 viewers complained to Ofcom that the piece was "misleading" and "misrepresented the truth".

Fox News said the basis for Gibson's piece was the fact the BBC had appointed an executive, Malcolm Balen, to act as a consultant on its Middle Eastern coverage.

'Bashing'

The network also said searching for the phrase "BBC anti-American" into the Google internet search engine resulted in 47,200 hits.

They added that the BBC "continually bashed" American policy.

And although Fox accepted Gilligan had not actually used the phrase attributed to him, it maintained Gibson had paraphrased the BBC reporter.

But Ofcom did not accept the argument that BBC's decision to monitor for "pro-Arab" bias backed up Fox's assertion that it proved an "obsessive, irrational and dishonest" anti-Americanism.

'Bashed'

The network also failed to provide evidence that the BBC "bashed" US policy or ridiculed the US president without any analysis, the watchdog said.

Ofcom also said it did not accept that the Hutton Inquiry supported the statement that the "BBC felt entitled to lie".

The regulator said: "Even taking into account that this was a 'personal view' item, the strength and number of allegations that John Gibson made against the BBC meant that Fox News should have offered the BBC an opportunity to respond."

A BBC spokesman said: "We have noted Ofcom's findings."

Newshound, Monday, 14 June 2004 18:29 (twenty-one years ago)

i love that a google search result forms the basis of their defense

Yanc3y (ystrickler), Monday, 14 June 2004 18:43 (twenty-one years ago)

That's "fair and balanced" for you.

El Diablo Robotico (Nicole), Monday, 14 June 2004 18:44 (twenty-one years ago)

Results 1 - 10 of about 53,000 for fox anti-american. (0.46 seconds)

Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 14 June 2004 18:49 (twenty-one years ago)

I should slap a compliance recorder on fox at work. They mustdo so much shit that is against UK broadcasting rules, only hardly anyone watches it so there's noone to complain.

Ed (dali), Tuesday, 15 June 2004 05:54 (twenty-one years ago)

I hope I live to see the day when any view that doesn't toe the Bush let's-take-over-the-world line isn't labelled 'anti-American' by rednecks.

New No New Age Advanced Ambient Motor Music Almanac (Autumn Almanac), Tuesday, 15 June 2004 05:58 (twenty-one years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.