BBC expected to apologise for doctoring Trump videos

The faux outrage element is of those who are pretending that the BBC is unique in the way it reports. It’s about proportionality, of which there is precious little employed at times, including on Gransnet.

Currently I can see Nick Robinson discussing it, Peter hitchins discussing it, etc.

It is not fake outrage it is comments from an independent advisor to bbcs standards committee, it covers a range of issues including Trump, gender, the middle east and race. It is being discussed everywhere.

My goodness we could even start a Gransnet monitoring Thread, would that be allowed do you think, to identify any 'fake news' we come across.
Just a new thought, so not clear how that would work.
Plenty of energy about this issue, on this and the precious Thread.

Yes, GG hold all media to account, including newspapers.

Maremia

Cut out the cancer, and make the patient, the BBC, better.
It's not difficult.
You identify the production team.
That's not difficult either.
Do the same with other media who tell lies.
Or is it only the BBC?

Spot on. Every media outlet should be subject to the same journalistic standards and sanctions.
In the meantime, I’ll continue to laugh at the faux outrage when the BBC puts a foot wrong, when we all know that other media outlets are far greater offenders.

Maremia all media should be held accountable for the information they broadcast.

If people stop having belief of the national broadcaster and other mainstream news outlets they will look to the internet and that can be a rabbit warren of fake news

Absolute nonsense,
Would you defund the whole of the NHS, just because one unit was flawed?

Cut out the cancer, and make the patient, the BBC, better.
It's not difficult.
You identify the production team.
That's not difficult either.
Do the same with other media who tell lies.
Or is it only the BBC?

A downright lie classed as ‘misleading’. Hmm. That’s a new one BBC. An even bigger issue now is that many people who fund the BBC no longer have any trust in it.

Time to scrap the licence fee, let the BBC try and survive in the marketplace and find out if people are willing to pay to be lied to again.

POTUS Trump has made some appalling comments to women and men, I am in no way applauding his behaviour.

Being dismayed with the BBC does not exclude my opinion of the current POTUS or any other political figure.

GrannyGravy13

I am against doctoring a speech as relevant and important as POTUS Trump’s.

Anything doctored is obviously not what the orator delivered at the time.

For historical accuracy the speech in its entirety should have been aired.

The BBC was negligent in the accuracy of the programme.

All inaccuracies should be called out, whether one agrees with the political stance or not.

The footage of Trump was spliced to leave out the word ‘peaceful’.

Shameless, BBC.

they not them!

MayBee70 I am not a POTUS Trump supporter.

I am a firm believer in transparency, particularly in politics, in this case the BBC was not transparent.

I would feel the same if them doctored a speech of POTUS Obama or POTUS Biden’s, or any other that was made at a critical moment in politics, or any other time.

MayBee70

Wonder if the OP has ever posted about some of the things Trump has done eg making fun of a disabled person, eluding to a woman reporter being on her period? And yet we’re expected to be horrified that the précis of a speech made by him ( I use the word speech lightly as most of what he says is incoherent ramblings) might give the wrong impression. Which imo it didn’t given that he released the people responsible from prison as soon as he could. Where’s the sympathy for the people that died that day? Only sympathy for the orange one it seems .

Absolutely Maybee. Have you seen his behaviour towards female reporters?

Darn, I can't do the applause thing.

Wonder if the OP has ever posted about some of the things Trump has done eg making fun of a disabled person, eluding to a woman reporter being on her period? And yet we’re expected to be horrified that the précis of a speech made by him ( I use the word speech lightly as most of what he says is incoherent ramblings) might give the wrong impression. Which imo it didn’t given that he released the people responsible from prison as soon as he could. Where’s the sympathy for the people that died that day? Only sympathy for the orange one it seems .

If every media source was cancelled for telling lies, which broadcasters would be left?

When a body has cancer, you cut it out. You don't euthanise the whole person,

Now there’s no excuse to believe, as gospel truth, any news bulletin. We have been warned. The BBC should be congratulated.

Luckygirl3

All programmes that contain speeches like this are edited - the BBC cannot fill a programme with one speech that had already been broadcast at the time.

All media outlets do this all the time.

There should be an announcement that any edited speech in its entirety can be heard/seen on the broadcasters website, with a link

This should prevent any controversy as to biased editing.

All programmes that contain speeches like this are edited - the BBC cannot fill a programme with one speech that had already been broadcast at the time.

All media outlets do this all the time.

I am against doctoring a speech as relevant and important as POTUS Trump’s.

Anything doctored is obviously not what the orator delivered at the time.

For historical accuracy the speech in its entirety should have been aired.

The BBC was negligent in the accuracy of the programme.

All inaccuracies should be called out, whether one agrees with the political stance or not.

The Trump supporters clearly don’t agree

The messenger died some time ago, so no one pays much attention to the message.