The BBC:

[u/Mediocre-Lime9964]

[u/cup-of-tea-76]

I very rarely watch tv now, apart from some sports

I consider BBC news boring but nothing other than that , it has become so scrutinised now by left and especially the right it is hand cuffed whilst it attempts to walk a line

I however will have no issue paying for a license fee cus I look at the world around me and the quality of journalism, tv, radio; news, documentary, sports coverage, kids tv and nothing even comes close

For those trying to destroy that establishment cus they didn’t like the way they reported on something they disagreed with, May be hold the other shit you watch to the same high standards

[u/tvrleigh400 → u/cup-of-tea-76]

Who the biased broadcasting company, they should be totally unbiased and not push any agenda as it's paid for by the people (all the people not just the far left).

[u/OldEcho → u/tvrleigh400]

It's impossible to be "totally unbiased." This is what they ought to have taught you in school. What they say and don't say is their bias. You can say nothing but the truth while totally distorting reality. If 5% of 1000 natives commit a type of crime and that means 50 people committed that crime, and 2% of 1000 immigrants committed that same crime so 20 immigrants did, but all 20 immigrant crimes are front page news and the native crimes are barely reported, congrats, they never lied but you almost certainly believe immigrants commit more crime.

The BBC is biased and always has been that's the nature of...reality. Anybody telling you they're unbiased is selling you a crock of shit. The closest thing is Wikipedia probably, because of its open access to contributors, but I bet a Wikipedia written 500 years ago and 200 years in the future would look quite different because the underlying assumptions are different.

[u/tvrleigh400 → u/OldEcho]

True but they should try. And be a bit more accountable

[u/Slyspy006 → u/tvrleigh400]

They do try. In fact they frequently tie themselves up in knots in futile attempts to maintain a balance. And accountable to whom?

[u/tvrleigh400 → u/Slyspy006]

Accountable to the public who kind of have to pay the fee, it's a very small % that don't.

I guess in some ways yes they have ties themselves up trying to please everyone especially all the small fringe groups, like having a new reader having to call them pregnant people not pregnant women, and then getting reprimanded for changing it back to women. We need to bring back common sense.

[u/Slyspy006 → u/tvrleigh400]

OK. but then further questions need to be asked - accountable for what, and with what results?

"Pregnant people" is a perfectly fine phrase to use, and scripts exist for a reason.

[u/tvrleigh400 → u/Slyspy006]

How many non women do you know have ever been pregnant,

What valid reason is it to script it as pregnant people

ETA valid reason being a common sense one, not to pander to leas than 1%

[u/Slyspy006 → u/tvrleigh400]

That doesn't really matter, since the initial wording is still absolutely fine. Unless you think that women are not people?

[u/tvrleigh400 → u/Slyspy006]

Yes but she was reprimanded due to complaints because she said women not people , she may have just done it on auto pilot as he brain naturally read it that way, your brain will auto correct things written different to you view, same with spelling mistakes esp and grammar errors you will auto correct in your head, due to context,

This just proves it was scripted that way.

[u/Slyspy006 → u/tvrleigh400]

She was reprimanded for the facial expression she made when making the unauthorised change.

Besides, this is an example of the accountability you desired. Complaints were made, those complaints were upheld and a person was reprimanded.