BBC expected to apologise for doctoring Trump videos

People have every right to moan about GB News.
How does AI Google rank them, as 'truth' tellers?
Yes, Oreo, we do have a part to play in monitoring MSM, by reporting bias, homophobic, racist comments.
How else does Ofcom know?

This is a shame really as I grew up thinking you could trust BBC news.
Clearly not.
And people moan about GB news.

And exactly who is the unfortunate editor or team of editors involved in the splicing of the Trump film? Were they freelance? On whose authority, if any was the alteration agreed? How often does this happen one wonders?

Well, Tim Davie has done the decent thing and resigned. The BBC has completely lost all credibility. Now we are going to take everything they state with a pinch of salt. Let us hope he is replaced by someone with higher standards......and perhaps they will get everyone back into suits and ties. I hate the current 'casual' look as though people have been dragged in on their free time.

COOK COUNTY, Illinois, Nov. 9, 2025 (Gephardt Daily) — A former January 6th defendant wanted by Utah law enforcement officials for alleged kidnapping and eight counts of aggravated sexual assault has been taken into custody by a fugitive task force in Cook County, Illinois.

John Emanuel Banuelos, 40, is wanted for the nine first-degree felonies, alleged to have been committed in 2018.

According to a probable cause statement filed in the arrest warrant, issued by the Salt Lake County District Attorney’s Office, the female victim told a Unified Police detective she was approached at a TRAX station by “Jacob,” later to be identified as Banuelos, on June 8, 2018.

Banuelos invited the woman to his house for a party, and when she arrived, “there was no furniture and no party. (She) said Banuelos began touching her legs, and she told him to stop,” the court document says.

The woman told investigators that Banuelos made her smoke something, and afterward, she could not move her body.

The woman said Banuelos left briefly, then returned and sexually assaulted her multiple times. She said “Banuelos then grabbed her by the shirt and dropped her on the floor, causing her to hit her head. (She) recalled feeling like Banuelos was going to kill her.”

The woman was examined at a hospital the day after the incident, and evidence swabs were taken. On Aug. 5 of this year, CODIS identified Jose Banuelos as a DNA contributor. “Jose” Banuelos is a known alias of John Banuelos, the probable cause statement says.

“The defendant has an extensive violent criminal history in Illinois dating back to 2001,” the Utah warrant says. “The defendant has been arrested at least 20 times for weapons offenses, domestic violence, assault and battery, property damage, resisting arrest, trespassing, obstruction, eluding, and protective order violations.

“The defendant has also been arrested five times in Utah and is currently charged in the Provo Justice Court,” where he failed to appear for hearings in cases related to domestic violence, interfering with an officer and disorderly conduct.

He also has an unresolved case in Salt Lake County based on a domestic violence assault allegation. Warrants also were issued in those cases, the warrant says.

The FBI identified John E. Banuelos as the person pictured in this photo, taken at the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. See additional photos and evidence collected by the FBI here.

Banuelos was formerly accused of firing a gun during the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol during the electoral vote count. At that time, he was listed in FBI documents as a resident of Summit, Illinois.

“Just after taking office in January, the president issued pardons for nearly 1,500 individuals who were charged in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol,” an NBC News article noted.

“Banuelos correctly predicted in court in May 2024 that Trump would be elected and pardon Jan. 6 rioters,” the article says.

“President Trump’s going to be in office six months from now, so I’m not worried about it,” Banuelos said, according to a court transcript.

As of Sunday, Banuelos remains listed among those in custody at the Cook County jail in connection with the Utah warrant.

Trump pardoned this man. And now everyone’s grovelling to him. And let’s not forget it all happened because Trump refused to believe he had lost the election.

True. Only 86% of the license fee goes to the BBC.

Oreo

The BBC hasn’t helped itself in recent years and may well lose its place, the licence fee is very expensive and many people don’t watch it or use the radio either.
It’s a great shame because at least up to recent times it’s been a national treasure.It really must get its house in order now.

It has been explained several times on this thread that the Television licence is not a licence specific to the BBC.

It is a licence for the device which receives television broadcasts. Broadcasts from any of the available channels. The clue is in the name. It is a television licence, not a BBC licence.

The government website tells one exactly that.

www.gov.uk/find-licences/tv-licence

I’m finding it faintly amusing that all these rigid defenders of the need for absolute truth are refusing to recognise the truth about the licence fee.

I don’t want to lose the BBC, but this
they brought in all sorts of extraneous information to add to their argument to bring it down, which is a witch-hunt
Seems to be the modus operandi for several threads recently. Is it only me who is unsurprised that this thread has followed suit?

And how much do people pay for Sky, Netflix, Amazon etc?

The BBC hasn’t helped itself in recent years and may well lose its place, the licence fee is very expensive and many people don’t watch it or use the radio either.
It’s a great shame because at least up to recent times it’s been a national treasure.It really must get its house in order now.

Oreo

But you did say ‘inane comments’ and a witch hunt.
It isn’t a witch hunt is it?

Yes, I did Oreo, because if you read all the posts, it’s clear that there are posters on this thread who want to see the BBC lose its role as the national broadcaster, and they brought in all sorts of extraneous information to add to their argument to bring it down, which is a witch-hunt. There are also inane comments, I’m sure you can spot them too.

I have no time for the BBC. What's happened is shocking.

MSM is losing its grip.

Am glad you feel the BBC must be accountable as not everyone on this thread would agree on that it seems.

But you did say ‘inane comments’ and a witch hunt.
It isn’t a witch hunt is it?

Oreo

Casdon

The whataboutery is no less relevant than either the inane comments or the witch-hunt Rosie51. Has anybody suggested that the BBC is not accountable for what happened? Some of us see beyond the BBC and apply the same level of scrutiny to other media outlets, that is all.

Am very surprised at your attitude Casdon when this is a really important matter of ethics and principles.We expect better of the BBC.
Yes it would be great if all news outlets were 100% reliable too but this thread is about a leaked letter that Tim Davie and other head honchos had known about but did nothing until it came to public attention.It’s no witch hunt it’s about the buck stops here when you head up any organisation.

Quoting one post does not give the full picture of what I was saying Oreo. At no point did I say that the BBC were not accountable.

Maremia

Which newscaster should we check out next?

It’s not a matter of ‘we’ doing anything as we have no knowledge of any wrongdoing until it’s brought to light as in this case with the BBC.

Casdon

The whataboutery is no less relevant than either the inane comments or the witch-hunt Rosie51. Has anybody suggested that the BBC is not accountable for what happened? Some of us see beyond the BBC and apply the same level of scrutiny to other media outlets, that is all.

Am very surprised at your attitude Casdon when this is a really important matter of ethics and principles.We expect better of the BBC.
Yes it would be great if all news outlets were 100% reliable too but this thread is about a leaked letter that Tim Davie and other head honchos had known about but did nothing until it came to public attention.It’s no witch hunt it’s about the buck stops here when you head up any organisation.

They have recently confirmed that they do not routinely do so, see this recent FOI response FriedGreenTomatoes2, which I had in mind.
www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets/resources/documents/about-ofcom/foi/2025/october/monitoring-of-gb-news-and-disinformation.pdf?v=406289
Ofcom will not be able to perform this function unless they are significantly better resourced in future, they are currently reliant on complaints and other media sources rather than their direct investigation resources. One consequence of that is that high profile media outlets with large audience figures are investigated far more frequently than more niche outlets.

Well I complained to the Press council about a totally fictional headline in a major newspaper that said an action had been taken when actually the exact opposite had taken place.
The answer was that the fiction (deliberate lie) was corrected further on in the article so it was not inaccurate as a whole and merited no retraction.

When I took it further to protest that social media comments showed that most people had only read the headline and now believed that was the truth, my complaint was rejected again.

So yes all media should be held to account. And I’m pleased that there has been some action to deal with the BBCs manipulation of facts.

Casdon

FriedGreenTomatoes2

And to think the BBC had the brass neck to hold themselves up as the adjudicator of truth with their Verify section!

Do you want to see all media outlets held responsible for the accuracy of their documentaries and news output FriedGreenTomatoes2?

Of course. Otherwise I’d be biased.

the same level of scrutiny

Surely that’s what Ofcom are for Casdon?
So far not a peep about others.

Which newscaster should we check out next?

Yes, agree that all media should be held to the same amount of scrutiny.

Do you need it spelt out, fancythat?

Definitely.

Do you need it spelt out, fancythat? I think saying that I think all media outlets should have the same level of scrutiny as the BBC makes it clear that I think the BBC should be scrutinised. I object to the level of Gransnet debate about it and other news topics being pitched at a tabloid headline level, and people objecting about when others want to discuss the issues in more detail, or more broadly, that’s all.