BBC expected to apologise for doctoring Trump videos

I think Trump is bothered by fake news. The expression is a bit unfortunate but the message is clear. Really we need to stop pretending and wise up.

I don’t think he’s bothered about the money as long as he gets the apology.

Well as long as there are those here who really think A Terrible Sin was committed:

And now there are two of you on GN, whose standards of what you think is acceptable behaviour in life, is very low.

He isn't whining he winding people up, it is very effective.

Trump’s whining away has been necessary to keep the BBC in check. Trump has truly helped this country have some semblance of researched, accurate and impartial news. So this is what it takes for the UK to regulate itself? We should be ashamed.

Indeed. what a toddler he is, whining away.

I think he’ll be satisfied with an apology in the end, which he’s entitled to.
Wyllow3 You’re trying ever so hard to brush things under the carpet, you’re not Mrs Davie by any chance?🤔
It wasn’t trivial and it wasn’t a mistake and there are other issues of bias.
Yes it’s good that the top twosome have resigned as they have overall responsibility for the corporation but the new Heads have to make sure there are changes.

I would be surprised if he meant any of it to be honest, I imagine it is one of those things he says to get a reaction, it always works beautifully.

I am a great advocate of that saying… it’s not over until the fat lady sings … or something like that.
Of course Trump would have known he was out of time for the UK. It’s called planning.

Well as long as there are those here who really think A Terrible Sin was committed:

When it happens all the time in the. media, and I would be very surprised if Trump's publicity machine hasn't done it multiple times to the Democrats

...we'll have to put up with the cries of the anti BBC lot here on what is really trivial - and has been dealt with for goodness sake with a resignation at the very top of the Beeb

- we'll have to put up with the sorry banging of the worn out tin drum.

Apologies, AGAA4, I hadn’t read your post thoroughly, you’d already explained that point.

Though, as it has been made several times already over the course of two threads on this topic, but still doesn’t seem to have sunk in I suppose a bit of repetition can’t go amiss…

ronib

Trump might think a US judge would be more sympathetic to his case than an English court? It certainly looks as though Trump wanted it to be heard in the USA.

It has to be heard in the US, as has been explained several times, because it is time expired in the UK, which only allows one year from the date of the alleged libel in which to bring a case. In Florida two years are allowed.

As Trump has an extremely weak case it’s doubtful that anything will happen.

The speech doctored by the BBC was aired in the UK. We have no influence on politics in the US so being defamed here cannot harm Trump. It would be difficult to defame him further as he has already been accused of incitement to riot in the US.
If he tries to go to Florida, as he is out of time here, it will be difficult to prove that anyone in the US saw the speech. It wasn't shown there.
I, too, think we should definitely not pay.

Trump might think a US judge would be more sympathetic to his case than an English court? It certainly looks as though Trump wanted it to be heard in the USA.

It was on the radio very late last night:

In the UK, its too late for Trump to claim compensation, time has run out:

In the USA, its not.

No way should we pay up. Fair enough, an apology. but it happened in the UK, under our law

It is influenced by ideologies that is the problem. It is just influenced by different ideologies.

Not sure of the details, sorry in advance GNs, but there was discussion on Facebook about Trump's complaint being 'day's late' to avoid a statute of limitation disqualification.
Has it just been blustering, distracting hot air?

Interesting article I have been reading which looks at the current set of new broadcasters like GBNews , Breitbart and others.

This

“The BBC is imperfect. It suffers from institutional caution, uneven performance and a reluctance at times to confront its own errors. Yet it remains one of the few media organisations in the world still committed to verification rather than performance.

Its public service mandate, however strained, is one of the last structural defences against the current media culture: one dominated by outrage merchants and ideological broadcasters whose business model is provocation rather than truth.

Once a public sphere is shaped primarily by rumour and outrage, it becomes almost impossible to restore a shared sense of reality. The alternative is visible already in GB News, Fox and Breitbart, where conflict and grievance have displaced evidence.”
Conversation

That for me describes exactly what unfortunately we are seeing in GBNews and the like, where conflict and grievance has replaced evidence.

In Trumps mind the media are all against him so he is hitting back in any way he can, the BBC made itself a target. He has got his apology and I hope that is the end of it. He could still seek compensation, he is very unpredictable it depends which side of the bed he gets out of who he confronts today.

Maremia

Do you like the flavoured tonic, Allira?

Just the ordinary one which goes Shhw please. I might need more than one. You might need a knitting needle to keep prodding me. 😴

Do you like the flavoured tonic, Allira?

Had a member of the public complained (but no-one did) the most that would have happened would have been an apology and a correction. It was not a hanging offence.

I think expecting a member of the public to have watched the whole original speech and remembered it to the extent of knowing that precise sentence was never said when it was portrayed in the panorama program is a bit of a stretch.

Given how generally reluctant to ever admit blame or misjudgement the BBC is I'm not sure any apology would have been forthcoming. I can appreciate your doubts about Prescott's motives, but that still doesn't excuse the BBC from a deliberate act. I've said so many times that Trump did not need his words distorted, he gave a ton of ammunition for honest criticism. Prescott didn't only raise the Trump issue though did he? He raised concerns about bias and control in other areas.

^ The editing of the documentary has been blown up out of all proportion.^

I think you may be the only GN poster who thinks that.

No matter that it seems Prescott did some splicing does that make the accusation against the BBC incorrect or untrue? One wrong does not excuse another wrong, isn't that something that is oft posted on GN?

I think it weakens Prescott's case considerably. The editing of the documentary has been blown up out of all proportion. It in no way misrepresented the truth of what happened that day as a result of Trump's incitement. Had a member of the public complained (but no-one did) the most that would have happened would have been an apology and a correction. It was not a hanging offence.

For Prescott to also splice the speech in a way which does make it look rather more uninflammatory than it really was does not seem to be the action of the disinterested complainant he claims to be. I feel it was extremely dishonest to complain about a spliced speech with a similarly spliced speech extract supposedly showing 'the truth'.

I have my doubts about his motives...

Thank you Rosie , yes it was sliced or not sliced, if not why resignations ?