The BBC really are a preposterous news organisation. On their website there are currently six stories about the killing of one man in Minneapolis. But not a single item about the massacres in Iran. This is biased and disproportionate beyond belief.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil Liberties
Commentary
EconomicsPolitics |
Just when you thought you could not dislike the BBC more…January 26th, 2026 |
 16 comments to Just when you thought you could not dislike the BBC more…Leave a Reply |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
An armed terrorist attacks, and is killed during his attack – but none of the media organisations (at least none in Britain) frame the news that way.
It is not just the BBC – it is ALL of them (including GB News – at least in its news broadcasts and headlines).
They are all excrement – all of the news organisations.
And the Islamic Republic of Iran?
To oppose the regime is, according the religious legal scholars in Iran, to leave Islam – and to leave Islam is punishable by death.
So why would the BBC report this mass killing of apostates? The BBC, and so on, approve of what is being done – they do not wish the British public to become angry about it.
After all if the British public “misunderstood” Islam in the context of Iran, they might “misunderstand” Islam in Britain (the future of Britain?) as well – and as the entire establishment (from His Majesty on down) have made clear, this will not be tolerated.
Everyone must celebrate Islam – which teaches sound morality, and was founded by a morally good man – Mohammed. That is the official establishment line – not just in Britain, but also in most Western nations.
Dissent will be punished.
By the way – the Daily Telegraph is as bad as the rest of the media, its American coverage might as well be from the BBC or the New York Times.
It is quite illuminating to use this site’s excellent search function to search for Kyle Rittenhouse. Very illuminating indeed.
If the BBC haven’t covered the Iran protests, why did it take me 30 seconds to find this?
But I’ll admit British news coverage of America is excessive. I’d probably be happy if I didn’t hear about any more news from America for a decade.
BBC is a political organization. Journalism has been taken over by activists.
@Martin: if the IDF had just gone into Gaza and shot 30k innocent civilians inside a few days it wouldn’t take you 30 seconds to find the BBC’s reporting of it. It would be their headline news indefinitely.
As has been said on here before, no Jews, no news.
What does that have to do with the BBC coverage of Minneapolis?
Here’s another BBC story on Iran, on the frontpage of their website no less.
New Iran videos show bodies piled in hospital and snipers on roofs
Better late than never, Martin
As I write, the BBC news front page has its top two stories on Minneapolis and one story on Iran at the bottom of the ‘page’ as seen on my laptop. Scroll down a ‘page’ and there is a distinct section headlined “Minneapolis shooting” with four stories. There are no more stories about Iran.
Keep in mind, you are not really seeing stories about Minneapolis.
You are seeing stories salivating over Trump having problems.
Those will always take precedence in your media. 😉
luckylucky
Journalism has always been political and activist. The pit we are in today is due to lying claims about journalism being “objective” and “unbiased” and “apolitical.” The best we can hope for is a return to the days of multiple media organs, all biased, but biased in different directions and honest about being biased.
Pollo – Karl Ritterhouse also shot armed terrorists – leftist terrorists, who were burning down the town (using the excuse of the death of Mr Floyd – who died of the drugs he willingly consumed) and trying to murder Mr Ritterhouse, and one of the leftist terrorists was also a pedophile.
Thank you for reminding us.
Have a nice day.
Deep Lurker: 55 years ago, in a history textbook, I saw a facsimile of a newspaper front page from ~circa 1900 (it had some historic event). But I remember the masthead:
“The Chicago Times – Loyal to the Democratic Party in victory and defeat”
The “virtuous” progressives of the next 50 years decided such partisanship was improper: journalism should impartially pursue “the public good”. Which has led to initially reasonable consensus about “the public good” becoming a stifling orthodoxy, immune to correction even when it is blatantly wrong.
Rich Rostrom – it started with the “Schools of Journalism” which, as Alisa noted, if you look at their founders – had a “Social Reform” agenda from the start. More government spending, more taxes, more regulations.
As for the British press – on my msm feed a story from the Daily Telegraph is being pushed this morning – about American accents and how the television series “Fargo” pushed the “Minnesota accent” and “put Minnesota on the map” due to its Swedish origins and…..
Fargo is in NORTH DAKOTA – not Minnesota.
A few seconds fact checking? No that would be too-much-work.
These people, the writer of the article and the subeditors, are well paid – but they are lazy, that is why they (when writing political coverage) follow the American media – with all its extreme bias against “Trump” and so on.
Because just repeating what, say, the New York Times and the “News Agencies” (such as AP) say, is easy – checking stuff and getting the other point of view would require WORK.
It is the same with election fraud and everything else – the American media do not cover it because it does not fit their political agenda, and the British press do not cover because they are LAZY.
By the way…. the North Dakotan accent (for example how they say the word “yes”) is at least as much connected with Germany as Scandinavia.
The state capital is Bismarck.
The writer of the article boasts about how he knows all the State Capitols – but he can not even get the State (let alone the State Capitol) correct.
Paul, I never commented on this thread (not that I disagree with your point) 🙂
But seeing as I’m commenting now, lots of stuff here related to this topic.