FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > The Trump Show: Downfall
The Trump Show: Downfall
Jump to: Newest in thread
Wow
Worth a watch - BBC2, on now. Will be available on catch-up .. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Thanks for turning me on to this... just watching the whole lot now "  | |||
| |||
| |||
"How much Farage do we have to endure? I'm 2 minutes in and wondering do I want to continue." Where he was on stage with him? Have you seen the bit where trump has the evangelicist in with them? | |||
"How much Farage do we have to endure? I'm 2 minutes in and wondering do I want to continue. Where he was on stage with him? Have you seen the bit where trump has the evangelicist in with them?" I powered through Farage's commentary. The one who dispatched angels to assist in his court battles to overturn the election result? Amazing. | |||
| |||
"Now that I’ve watched it all I thought the first 3 programs were really well done.... but the last show felt really rushed.. especially since it took in what happened on January 6th with the capitol riots " I have only watched the final show, and also felt it was rushed. Could easily have made it a 2 parter | |||
"How much Farage do we have to endure? I'm 2 minutes in and wondering do I want to continue. Where he was on stage with him? Have you seen the bit where trump has the evangelicist in with them? I powered through Farage's commentary. The one who dispatched angels to assist in his court battles to overturn the election result? Amazing." I thought the woman who ran the church where they all got battoned outside was great. And where he was ripping into the fella from the bbc. BBC really do some cracking documentaries. | |||
| |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low." What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him." I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. " Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them?" Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. " Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. " No... did you watch all 4 programmes in the series..... | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low." The BBC are a totally biased masonic controlled organisation pushing the globalists narrative. Hence why they've spent four years attacking trump and Jeremy Corbyn, despite these two being right and left wing. Of course the BBC are loving quid pro joe. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid." I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this." It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though." Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues." Did we know the vaccine thing was going to happen? | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues." Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. " Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? " Right. So the BBC should represent opinion over fact? | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? " They had farage on qt every other week | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? Right. So the BBC should represent opinion over fact? " So I say something and you twist it to mean something else. Do you work for the BBC? | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? They had farage on qt every other week" I watched it every week don’t recall that Lionel | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? Right. So the BBC should represent opinion over fact? So I say something and you twist it to mean something else. Do you work for the BBC?" I'm just trying to understand why you think the BBC is telling you what to think. So far you've not offered anything solid apart from representing opinions of brexiteers as if they were equal to the facts or brexit and the EU. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? They had farage on qt every other weekI watched it every week don’t recall that Lionel " Farage has been on 35 times. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? They had farage on qt every other weekI watched it every week don’t recall that Lionel " Did you miss 35 weeks? | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? They had farage on qt every other weekI watched it every week don’t recall that Lionel Farage has been on 35 times. " fuck me really I am totally shocked over how many yrs | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? They had farage on qt every other weekI watched it every week don’t recall that Lionel Farage has been on 35 times. fuck me really I am totally shocked over how many yrs " No idea. But the BBC love him. He wasn't even an MP. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? They had farage on qt every other weekI watched it every week don’t recall that Lionel Did you miss 35 weeks?" the most anyone as been on is Clair short labour 38 paddy ashdown 36 libdems garage joint 3rd up until 92 as conservative | |||
| |||
| |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? Right. So the BBC should represent opinion over fact? So I say something and you twist it to mean something else. Do you work for the BBC? I'm just trying to understand why you think the BBC is telling you what to think. So far you've not offered anything solid apart from representing opinions of brexiteers as if they were equal to the facts or brexit and the EU. I feel like we are going round in circles. Could you just scroll up to save me going through it all again?  "I read what you said. None of it indicated anything solid. You seem to think that the BBC should show "both sides" even if one is rooted in fact and information and the other is speculative opinion. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? They had farage on qt every other weekI watched it every week don’t recall that Lionel Did you miss 35 weeks?the most anyone as been on is Clair short labour 38 paddy ashdown 36 libdems garage joint 3rd up until 92 as conservative " As said not bad going considering he isnt even an mp | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? Right. So the BBC should represent opinion over fact? So I say something and you twist it to mean something else. Do you work for the BBC? I'm just trying to understand why you think the BBC is telling you what to think. So far you've not offered anything solid apart from representing opinions of brexiteers as if they were equal to the facts or brexit and the EU. I feel like we are going round in circles. Could you just scroll up to save me going through it all again?
I read what you said. None of it indicated anything solid.
You seem to think that the BBC should show "both sides" even if one is rooted in fact and information and the other is speculative opinion
"And that my friend is your ‘speculative opinion’. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? Right. So the BBC should represent opinion over fact? So I say something and you twist it to mean something else. Do you work for the BBC? I'm just trying to understand why you think the BBC is telling you what to think. So far you've not offered anything solid apart from representing opinions of brexiteers as if they were equal to the facts or brexit and the EU. I feel like we are going round in circles. Could you just scroll up to save me going through it all again?
I read what you said. None of it indicated anything solid.
You seem to think that the BBC should show "both sides" even if one is rooted in fact and information and the other is speculative opinion
And that my friend is your ‘speculative opinion’."It's not though. Facts are facts. Information is information. Using your example, I don't understand why you think the BBC should fabricate a pro brexit argument would somehow mean that they're not telling you what to think. | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? Right. So the BBC should represent opinion over fact? So I say something and you twist it to mean something else. Do you work for the BBC? I'm just trying to understand why you think the BBC is telling you what to think. So far you've not offered anything solid apart from representing opinions of brexiteers as if they were equal to the facts or brexit and the EU. I feel like we are going round in circles. Could you just scroll up to save me going through it all again?
I read what you said. None of it indicated anything solid.
You seem to think that the BBC should show "both sides" even if one is rooted in fact and information and the other is speculative opinion
And that my friend is your ‘speculative opinion’.
It's not though. Facts are facts. Information is information.
Using your example, I don't understand why you think the BBC should fabricate a pro brexit argument would somehow mean that they're not telling you what to think. "Yes. Facts are facts. Information is information. Very good. I don’t want them to fabricate anything, I just want a balanced view. Just because you (and the BBC) think there are no positives to Brexit that doesn’t actually mean there are no positives to Brexit. It’s not about what you or the BBC THINK. That’s my point! Maybe it’s being lost in text or whatever... | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? Right. So the BBC should represent opinion over fact? So I say something and you twist it to mean something else. Do you work for the BBC? I'm just trying to understand why you think the BBC is telling you what to think. So far you've not offered anything solid apart from representing opinions of brexiteers as if they were equal to the facts or brexit and the EU. I feel like we are going round in circles. Could you just scroll up to save me going through it all again?
I read what you said. None of it indicated anything solid.
You seem to think that the BBC should show "both sides" even if one is rooted in fact and information and the other is speculative opinion
And that my friend is your ‘speculative opinion’.
It's not though. Facts are facts. Information is information.
Using your example, I don't understand why you think the BBC should fabricate a pro brexit argument would somehow mean that they're not telling you what to think.
Yes. Facts are facts. Information is information. Very good.
I don’t want them to fabricate anything, I just want a balanced view. Just because you (and the BBC) think there are no positives to Brexit that doesn’t actually mean there are no positives to Brexit. It’s not about what you or the BBC THINK. That’s my point! Maybe it’s being lost in text or whatever...
"Okay. But seeing as there is no real benefit to brexit. Except maybe a few insignificant bits and pieces. So this is a bad example. Back to the Trump thing. How could they have given more positives? | |||
"Isn’t the BBC supposed to be unbiased? I thought they were there to provide a balanced view. Whilst I’m not a Trump supporter he does seem to get a lot of negative press from the BBC. Whilst Biden on the other hand is painted as our saviour? Biden is a war criminal. Donald Trump is many things, but he’s not one of them and In my eyes, War Criminals are the lowest of the low. What are the positives of Trump that they missed? I agree on Biden. Putting the US back into the Paris Climate agreement, and the WHO aside. Being not-Trump is too low a bar. They should be critical of him. I just think they are paid a license fee to provide an unbalanced view for the viewer to make its own mind up. This, like many of the things on the BBC, is completely one sided, its basically propaganda and I for one don’t pay my licence fee to be told what to think. Did you watch the series? It was unbiased, it had prominent Trump supporters, like Farage on. There was no "side". If you think, in general, that the BBC missed some of the positives from the Trump campaign, maybe you could highlight them? Yes I watched it and in my opinion it was one sided. The whole slant on the ‘documentary’ was anti Trump. Nigel Farage gets enough bad press himself, so using him as his ‘supporter’ highlights my point. I’m not a Trump supporter but the man didn’t start any wars did he? And that’s a positive in my eyes. I can’t remember the last US president before him to do that. He also did wonders for the American economy and brought lots of buisneses back to America by introducing Tariffs on trade. My argument is not about how great Trump is, he has many faults, my argument is about the BBC and the fact that it now sees fit to tell us what to think. Okay, but having people on, who are Trump supporters is an example of not making it anti-Trump. That Farage is a massive twat is neither here nor there. Okay, so he didn't start any new wars, despite trying with Iran. At what point should they have broadcast that news, on the last day of his presidency? Or maybe as part of a report on how he dramatically increased the number of bombs he dropped on Afghanistan? The US economy, so you want to give him credit for the recovery that started under the previous administration, or removing some of the safeguards that were put in to help prevent a similar collapse in 2008 that started with Lehman Brothers? Would seem like a strange thing for the BBC to report on. His trade wars with China which impacted a lot of normal Americans, this was in the news quite a lot. You must have missed this one. I'm not defending the BBC, but if they manufactured fake stories making Trump look good for balance, then they would be no better than Fox. Maybe you could give an example of the BBC telling you what to think? Because nothing you've mentioned so far seems valid. I’m not here to debate about whether Trump did a good job, you asked what I thought he had done well and I told you, you have then come back with your own slant on It, supposedly debunking me but I don’t agree. We could go on forever like this because it’s all totally subjective. With regards to the BBC, my complaint is that they are not neutral, they provide a biased slant on the news. The have been blatantly anti Trump and were totally anti Brexit. The reporting on Covid has been scandalous, nothing more than a propaganda tool for the government. I think, for a national broadcaster that we have no choice but to pay for, they shouldn’t have any biased towards anything. They should give both sides of every argument and let the viewer make their own mind up. I don’t think they do this. It's not subjective or slants if it's fact. With Brexit. There aren't any positives. So again, where they supposed to invent some? With covid, that could be a different story, they certainly did not hold the Tories to account for say the Cummings thing, or the PPE scandal handing billions to their friends. They did report it, but the failed their duty to properly hold these people to account. I don't see this as an example of telling you what to think though. Well that’s where we differ isn’t it? Your ‘facts’ may be different from my ‘facts’, we can both pick the ‘facts’ we like and use them in the argument. But what we aren’t going to do is change each other’s on what we THINK Trump did well. Brexit - I think you have actually watched far too much BBC news, it’s pickled your brain. No positives to leaving the EU? Can’t even find one? How about the vaccine debacle they are having now?? Whether you voted leave or remain there are pros and cons on both sides... which ties in nicely to my argument. I don’t think the BBC show both the pros and the cons on certain issues. Facts are facts. I don't understand your point here at all. So you're now saying that the BBC should have predicted the pandemic, then reported on what would happen with a vaccine? Again. They didn't report on the positives of brexit. Because there weren't any. If you think they should have made stuff up for balance or to "show both sides". Then fair enough. Yes facts are facts we can agree on that. No I didn’t say the BBC should have predicted anything. I suggest you scroll up and re read to save me having to repeat myself. You say there are no positives to Brexit yet the 17,410,742 people that voted to leave clearly do. The BBC should realise this and cater to them as well. You’ll note I said ‘them as well’, not just one way, both sides, get it? Right. So the BBC should represent opinion over fact? So I say something and you twist it to mean something else. Do you work for the BBC? I'm just trying to understand why you think the BBC is telling you what to think. So far you've not offered anything solid apart from representing opinions of brexiteers as if they were equal to the facts or brexit and the EU. I feel like we are going round in circles. Could you just scroll up to save me going through it all again?
I read what you said. None of it indicated anything solid.
You seem to think that the BBC should show "both sides" even if one is rooted in fact and information and the other is speculative opinion
And that my friend is your ‘speculative opinion’.
It's not though. Facts are facts. Information is information.
Using your example, I don't understand why you think the BBC should fabricate a pro brexit argument would somehow mean that they're not telling you what to think.
Yes. Facts are facts. Information is information. Very good.
I don’t want them to fabricate anything, I just want a balanced view. Just because you (and the BBC) think there are no positives to Brexit that doesn’t actually mean there are no positives to Brexit. It’s not about what you or the BBC THINK. That’s my point! Maybe it’s being lost in text or whatever...
Okay. But seeing as there is no real benefit to brexit. Except maybe a few insignificant bits and pieces.
So this is a bad example.
Back to the Trump thing. How could they have given more positives?"Insignificant to you perhaps but clearly not to the 17,410,742 people that voted for it. Google ‘BBC News Donald Trump’, read a few of the articles, you might understand what I’m talking about. If not I’m afraid there isn’t much point in me trying. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Well my original point was about the BBC being biased, I don’t think they should be biased. In the examples I have given I think the BBC have shown biased, you don’t agree. That’s fair enough. It’s good to debate, not much else to do and it’s also great to remain civil. Well done us." | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
