BBC expected to apologise for doctoring Trump videos

Well enough on here are absolving the BBC of any wrongdoing at all Casdon. Post after post saying "well that's what Trump meant so it didn't change anything" And those of us who want honesty, integrity and transparency from the BBC (as well as all the other media outlets) in all areas, not just this transgression are accused of sympathising with Trump not the people who died or were injured in the rioting. An especially low (and inaccurate) blow.

^ 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.^

But it sort of isnt.

Because often, the first part is never acknowledged.
Not just by you, but some others as well.

I have got now that I just guess the first part, in things like this, to be true.

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.

The whataboutery on this thread is just unbelievable.
Of course most people would endorse all media outlets being held to account for the accuracy and transparency of their news output. That people feel some outlets haven't been held to account does not excuse the BBC from its responsibilities, especially as it alone amongst UK media outlets is publicly funded by compulsory licence.

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?

Wonder what the golden goodbyes are? Pensions?

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

Reacting to the resignations of Tim Davie and Deborah Turness, the Board of Deputies of British Jews said:

“Tim Davie’s and Deborah Turness’s resignations must be seen as the beginning, rather than the end, of a process of renewal. Deep cultural change will be necessary to once again restore trust in one of our nation’s most cherished institutions.”

Crikey.

The corporation's CEO of News, Deborah Turness, has also resigned!

I do not think the meaning of what he was saying was altered at all. That was clear at the time and is clear now.

Really?

I dont tend to listen all the way through long speeches.

But I do expect them to have all the words in the right places and right order.
Perhaps such things dont happen any more??

^Making a fuss about an edit which in no way alters the truth of what happened at the Capitol is opportunist political point scoring.6

Did it not?

Whitewavemark2

I re- watched the BBC edited speech by Trump.

I watched the whole of January 6th live, at the time, and the message I took from Trumps speech on the day, was exactly the same as the edited BBC piece, as did the murderous mob who caused mayhem and insurrection as Trumps behest.

All media from tv, radio to all newspapers edit. It’s what they do. At the time it was not questioned although people would be aware of the edit.

It was the message that was important in this instant which was “fight like hell”

It was shocking at the time and continues to be so, however much push back from the Trump supporters. History cannot easily be re-written, when it is so shocking as Jan 6th

An "edit" quite like this one?

Really?

MayBee70

But nobody resigns over it. Sometimes a couple of sentences on a back page apologising but that’s it. By which time the lies are believed by everyone.

Some things are a matter of interpretation.
And viewpoint.

But I take your point.

I think this one is surprising[and i feel actually shocked], is because,[if you are able to see the before original part of the speech, and what it was changed to, I would], because it was so changed. By the BBC.

But nobody resigns over it. Sometimes a couple of sentences on a back page apologising but that’s it. By which time the lies are believed by everyone.

Two wrongs or ten, dont make any of it right.

MayBee70

So why is it still ok for newspapers to print blatant lies on their front pages?

It’s not, they should be held to account for any lies printed.

MayBee70

So why is it still ok for newspapers to print blatant lies on their front pages?

It isnt!

varian

It doesn't matter how it was edited. Either Trump encourage

Trump was encouraging an insurresction. which was utterly shocking - then and now.

Did he?

Prob did.

But when the BBC[who I still see as the go to news station when it really matters up to today]. completely[to all intents] doctors and changes the meaning of a speech[an important one], where does that leave the BBC?

So why is it still ok for newspapers to print blatant lies on their front pages?

Crumbs.

I have just seen the before and after clips.

Gosh! Very doctored to say the least.

Awful behaviour by the BBC.
They made a deliberate, big lie.
Deliberate bad misleading.

TIM DAVIE'S RESIGNED!!

It doesn't matter how it was edited. Either Trump encourage

Trump was encouraging an insurresction. which was utterly shocking - then and now.

I agree with Casdon too. I would also like the BBC TV Licence to be scrapped. They have had it too good for too long.

Casdon

I wonder if the government have a say in the appointment of the director general of the BBC? Tim Davies was a Tory, so it will be interesting to see what happens next.

What I’d like to see in future is a similar standard of scrutiny over documentary and news programmes applied to all media outlets, which would sort the wheat from the chaff very quickly.

Totally agree 👍🏻