Let’s talk about BBC

[secretsqirrel]

Even in the latest 'live update', which gives more weight to the video evidence, the MAGA framing of it comes in the first paragraph, and the second paragraph says blandly "no evidence to support the claim" before the evidence that MAGA is actively lying. They've obviously had the memo that all reporting must start with the Trump administrations claims, a habit that ignores all the evidence that every time they 'claim' something, it almost always turns out to be a complete lie. The habit is damaging, as the way people consume news is that once you've put something out there, it's then up to the rest of the piece to rebut it, by which time people's interest has waned.

View attachment 12570

“violently resisted” = ‘fighting for his life’.

Its almost as if the BBC is being watched.

 

[briantrumpet]

Bloody hell, this is a mess. It's almost as if facts are just opinions, the way this is all framed. There's no sense at all that this is intended to clarify.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn0ke0pkn3wo

 

[Rusty Nails]

It’s a scandal the way the BBC doesn’t phrase its articles in the same way as a partisan contributor to an online political forum would.

 

[Pblakeney]

Bloody hell, this is a mess. It's almost as if facts are just opinions, the way this is all framed. There's no sense at all that this is intended to clarify.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn0ke0pkn3wo

They could have cut it short simply by saying "video evidence proves that the administration is lying".

 

[CXRAndy]

violently resisted” = ‘fighting for his life’.

Why was he fighting after being pepper sprayed, I thought it was all peaceful protests.

Oh what's with carry an automatic handgun, and confronting federal agents?

 

[briantrumpet]

They could have cut it short simply by saying "video evidence proves that the administration is lying".

Exactly so. It *feels* like the excess verbiage and circumlocutions are there to obfuscate (oh, sorry, I've got a serious attack of longworditis*) rather than to clarify, and that it's deliberate.

*I'll keep taking the pills

 

[Blazing Saddles]

Even in the latest 'live update', which gives more weight to the video evidence, the MAGA framing of it comes in the first paragraph, and the second paragraph says blandly "no evidence to support the claim" before the evidence that MAGA is actively lying. They've obviously had the memo that all reporting must start with the Trump administrations claims, a habit that ignores all the evidence that every time they 'claim' something, it almost always turns out to be a complete lie. The habit is damaging, as the way people consume news is that once you've put something out there, it's then up to the rest of the piece to rebut it, by which time people's interest has waned.

View attachment 12570

The latest live update say that the BBC verify have studied 7 videos of the shooting and their conclusion, a blow by blow account so to speak, leaves little doubt: Pretti was behaving like you would hope and expect a nurse would do, while the armed thugs were behaving like armed thugs.

 

[briantrumpet]

The latest live update say that the BBC verify have studied 7 videos of the shooting and their conclusion, a blow by blow account so to speak, leaves little doubt: Pretti was behaving like you would hope and expect a nurse would do, while the armed thugs were behaving like armed thugs.

Glad they've got involved. Let's hope that general BBC reporting picks up on that... it ought to be required of any BBC reporters to consult and reflect Verify's analysis, but I fear that it's overridden by the Don't-Upset-Trump memo.

 

[briantrumpet]

This is still the top of the live feed summary. It's just not good enough for any organisation purporting to provide news, let alone the BBC.

 

[briantrumpet]

Where's John Craven when you need him eh?

 

[Blazing Saddles]

Here’s what I read. They have omitted that he was then pistol whipped before being executed.

 

[CXRAndy]

The latest live update say that the BBC verify have studied 7 videos of the shooting and their conclusion, a blow by blow account so to speak, leaves little doubt: Pretti was behaving like you would hope and expect a nurse would do, while the armed thugs were behaving like armed thugs.

I've never heard of a nurse carrying an automatic gun with a confrontational manner

 

[briantrumpet]

It gets worse. They reported Pretti's parents' statement, but actively omitted part of it.

 

[briantrumpet]

Here’s what I read. They have omitted that he was then pistol whipped before being executed.

View attachment 12576

And there it ends. Nothing about the c.10 shots that killed him. And still nothing on the main Verify page. It all feels very reluctant, at best.

 

[Pross]

A very good point, I think: "How would we report this were it happening now?" And that's without the benefit of virtually live phone footage of current events.

View attachment 12569

I'm surprised that BBC Verify hasn't yet looked at yesterday's shooting, given the contentiousness and the push-back about Willis's 'reportage'. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/bbcverify

As I said last week, the lawsuit has done its job and cowed them from saying anything Trump might decide is biased against him or his regime.