[mrbeast]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Well, since you want to dig up OLD threads:

This is more damning than anything Fox has ever done:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...highlight=bias

And here is an example of what type of articles you can expect on the BBC:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/show...ghlight=biased

I would take both of those articles with a pinch of salt. Both the Daily Mail and the Evening Standard (basically the DM but worse ) have had a vendetta against the BBC and public broadcasting in general and persue it at every opportunity. Theres even quite a number of dyed in the wool conservatives that dislike both of those papers. During the recent mayoral elections in London the Evening Standard was practically a propaganda sheet for the Tory candidate Boris Johnson and printed as many smear stories about Ken Livingstone as it could cram between its grubby pages.

You actually think Fox's thing is major? It is only a minor oops compared to what the BBC has done.

The BBC has an unconscious bias but it is not the politcally driven and orchastrated campiagn of falsehood and miss information that Fox news spews out on a daily basis.

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/organgri...to_libe_1.html

Its owned by Rupert Murdoch and if that man dosen't have an clear right-wing agenda then I'm a monkey's uncle!

Also I wouldn't call doctoring images to make people look ridiculous or give a poor impression of them an 'oops'. Opps implies an accident, so the pictures were accidentally doctored presumably?

The bottom line is who would most people take as more credible the BBC or Fox News?