Are there any honest news outlets anymore?

Are there any honest news outlets anymore?

Is BBC acceptable?

Other urls found in this thread:

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7139797.stm
youtube.com/watch?v=xoBQAW9sWSc
youtube.com/watch?v=XOTAzk5JZzk
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

It is in Sweden.

Kek for you.

No
No

Lol heck no

They are a biased leftist mouthpiece who spin everything to include a muzzie perspective. They are also in the process of replacing staff with lesbians, sjws, foreigners, muzzies. They are open about this too, saying they need to redress the balance after being a mouthpiece for white males for all of their existance

BBC are honest and sincere, but they're an echo chamber of politically correct globalists, their bias is implicit and subconscious, they just can't wrap their head around the non-establishment side of things to cover them fairly.

t. son of BBC reporter

this has to be the worst question you could possibly ask Sup Forums

BBC is acceptable so long as it doesn't have anything to do with politics or technology. Technology is iffy because the guy who writes that shit is an applefag.

>BBC
>honest

>they're unbiased, but they're biased
make up your mind, Ahmed

Based Korea

Big Black Cock is owned by Jews now.

Nothing in the media is safe.

>BBC

no

AP is good

Sup Forums is the best news source.

No, we live in a post-truth time.

>Is BBC acceptable

BBC are the worst, what the fuck?

They're biased but not deliberately or maliciously. They genuinely take their commitment to neutrality very seriously, they just have no understanding of how to fairly represent non-establishment views.

what the fuck
how delusional are you brits

>Is BBC acceptable?

I feel bad that you would even ask this question. The BBC are the most dangerous of all thanks to the meme of them being "impartial" - which only allows their relentless shilling to accepted to a greater extent.

are u mentally ill? big black cock??????

>AP
unfortunately they aren't. AP was one of the best for conflict news but now it is leftist propaganda. They genuinely had some great journalists in the 90's.

>Is BBC acceptable?
Yup, just as impartial as the CBC

They're basically just as bluepilled as everyone else. They don't report to the government, they don't answer to any private interests, they're not being paid off (certainly not the rank and file at least), they're just bluepilled people as fully immersed in the establishment echo chamber as can be.

That's my guess as well

>Honest
>new outlet
Pick one
It doesn't take a genious to consider there might be a conflict of interest given the influence of the media.
Of course there is pressure to capitalize on and control the media.

The BBC is lame as fuck. They spout right wing ideology, give platforms to moronic right wingers like Nigel Farrage etc.

Their idea of balance is having two panelists, a scientist with a doctorate in climate change research and some nutjob trust fund think tank climate change "truther".

They are savagely pro war and refuse to cover anti war and anti capitalist protests. Any activism, whether done by Anonymous or any other group is condemned or totally ignored UNLESS it's the EDL or some other fascists, like UKIP etc. at which point they start falling over themselves to "understand" and give air time to right wing views.

They are by and large, economically illiterate, in that they roundly believe that money is "created" by big business and that markets are created by the as well.

They do interview serious experts but treat them with incredulity when they point out some fairly basic, contemporary theory on the economy and politics.

Literally, 100% fuck BBC for anything news or politics related.

Pol is the only news I trust at this point. But even here you can't take anything at face value with all the CTR. Still, the only place I go for news is pol. Pretty satisfied with it, truth can't be found in forums where anything unpopular is shot down to oblivion. You should have to defeat an argument, not just downvote it, that's retarded imo. Long live pol, if this place shuts down freedom of speech will take an enormous fucking hit.

>Are there any honest news outlets anymore?

Not if you won't believe what you see and hear.
If you have to have someone tell you what you can see for yourself, then you are not even a person anymore.

I haven't seen any emails that are bad.

I have seen a bunch of tweets, and a big orange guy talking shit and nonsense though.

I feel bad for you.

Do you have to have someone chew your food for you as well?

Uh no.

>Let's have a pundit to discuss Donald Trump
>"RACIST SEXIST XENOPHOBE TOTAL LUNATIC DON'T VOTE"
>Thank you, now let's move to our reporter in New York
>"Clinton is winning, polls CNN. There's no reason not to trust them on this."
>Thank you, would you like to add to this mr. Farage?
>"This is a load of rubbish let's be fair"
>Pundit?
>"YOU'RE SEXIST RACIST TOO YOU NIGEL GERMAN IMMIGRANT HYPOCRITE"
>And I'm afraid that's all we've got time for, join us tomorrow for a special report on gay rights on Antarctica and how penguins deal with Sea Shepherd

The BBC as of late has a horrendous leftist bias, and strongly supports Clinton over Trump.
t. someone who has nothing better to do in work.

They're not the worst but they've basically never moved on from Blair's Britain except from muh snapchats

When I was younger my dad would always conceal all his political positions and so on. Whenever I asked about anything politics related he'd just walk me through the various sides of it, raise the relevant questions and points, and leave me to come to a conclusion. I think it was only with the rise of UKIP/Brexit/Trump that he wasn't able to hide his establishment powerlevel properly anymore. Also, I think a lot of journalists haven't worked out that posts on facebook walls aren't the same as private internal talk. He makes anti-Trump/Brexit posts and comments on other journalists' ones, constantly, like he thinks it's just his fellow journalists who can see his bias.

I agree, that is a serious problem with their approach to balance. Again, I don't think it's deliberate, it's more a combination of it being a flawed method to neutrality and them just having such an invariably hostile and contemptuous view towards anti-establishment/mainstream people and views that they think the shitty strawman they put up is as reasonable an example as there could be.

...

FUCKING RORY CELLAN JONES IS SUCH A KEK REEEEEE

depends on the article

I agree with your assessment. It's probably why I like This Week so much, since it's a show where they barely try.

Great meme source too, but that's a bonus.

No, it's terrible. During UK elections they smeared, well, everyone to be honest, especially UKIP and Conservatives, UKIP broadcasts were pushed to either 10 or 11 PM and when it came for Brexit it was a massive smear campaign all over again. When it I think the second batch of Podesta emails were released I remember tuning into the 10 oclock news, expecting there to be at least some mention of the emails. Nothing, instead they had some musician give their thoughts on Trump.

I should probably add that when it comes to stuff that isn't politics they can usually be relied on to report stuff accurately.

>BBC

BBC acceptable? Kek! No! They are horribly biased and pretend not to be. That makes them more dangerous than Fox.

lol
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7139797.stm

>anymore?

FUCK OFF BACK TO FUCKING LEDDIT REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Fucking shit millenials goddamnit

It's difficult on one hand they're clearly overpaid and full of shit, on the other hand SIR DAVID ATTENBOROUGH works for them

>Is BBC acceptable?

That's funny OP.

Yeah totally acceptable.

youtube.com/watch?v=xoBQAW9sWSc

...

>news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7139797.stm
Well this is kinda related to politics, but I see your point

>BBC
>honest

LOLOLOLOLOLO

Post acceptable BBC outlets ITT

Everything else is trash

this unironically

the only acceptable tv shows are the ones that confirm my bias. all others are shills

Remember this gem?
youtube.com/watch?v=XOTAzk5JZzk

Who is, quite unfortunately, anti-Brexit. The ignorant masses were tricked, donchaknow.

Thankfully a lot of Scots see the BBC for the Oxbridge government rejects that they are. Not good enough for the foreign office? Here's a panel show. Their soul purpose is keeping their school chums in government in order to keep the gravy train flowing. Fuck the truth. Thankfully services like periscope have shown up their misreporting as it happens. Since Top Gear died the only thing holding the BBC together is Planet Earth and Dr Who. Once those go they are done.

BBC is good… you just need to understand that they have a bias towards globalism.

All these news outlets are based in global cities and staffed by the sort of people who want to live in those cities -- there is an inherent bias. I know that and can spot it…

Most people aren't able to detect the slant. They take anything on the news or in the paper as something 'official' that deserves respect.

American media is absolutely retarded and wild -- but at least there is a bit of diversity of opinion… outside the mainstream.

BBC isnt perfect but at least it tries to an extent to be non-partisan and respectable. Maybe it doesnt do a great job of that a lot of the time but it's still far from the level of Fox, CNN or MSNBC in America.

It's a pretty big organization so its easy to find both ends of the spectrum. You can find some 10/10 journalism or great documentaries but you also get bullshit like the constant anti-Trump propaganda.

hahaha no

r u fkin serious m9? do you seriously watch the bbc?

Yeah, it's great, lets have a look and see what fantastic programming they have on tonight.

Oh, it's a dramatisation of the killing of some dindu that happened about 15 years ago

Bravo Korea, bravo.

No

the truth is that if you really want to know news you have to pay

The people who are really powerful use things like Stratfor