BBC World Ad Campaign (Pic)

[Boris]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

True.

Yes, let's believe some woman's blog over a global news network with hundreds of highly proffessional reporters.

[joea]

Originally Posted by Boris

Yes, let's believe some woman's blog over a global news network with hundreds of highly proffessional reporters.

Ok.



Ahh no...:rotfl:

Always try to watch at least once a day or visit the website.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by Boris

Yes, let's believe some woman's blog over a global news network with hundreds of highly proffessional reporters.

Melanie Phillips is a professional journalist, commentator and author.

Are you a professional analyst of journalism? :hmm:

[SUBMAN1]

What a bunch of crap! Biased polls conducted via cellphone only from a Biased news media! This just goes to show me that the BBC needs to pack up and bring its UK politics back home!

Here is how accurate and reliable the BBC is - they even admit it!:

BBC report finds bias within corporation - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...17/nbbc217.xml

BBC admits: We are biased on religion and politics
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...318582,00.html

Here is even one from yesterday:
BBC report damns its ‘culture of bias’ - http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle1942948.ece


We are biased, admit the stars of BBC News - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770


http://bustingbbcbias.blogspot.com/

http://biasedbbc.proboards45.com/index.cgi

http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/

Need I go on?

This bastards need to get out of AMerica. We don't want them here

[Tchocky]

I wonder how many US news outlets comission investigations into their activities, looking for flaws or bias.

How are the polls biased, SUBMAN?

[DAB]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Melanie Phillips is a professional journalist, commentator and author.

Are you a professional analyst of journalism? :hmm:

Actually, shes generally considered discredited these days.

Shes denounced far too many people for apparent misdemeaners, only to retract when faced with legal action, to be taken seriously. Her main problem seems to be a tendency to take a blog entry, email or even word of mouth as proof positive and run with it.

Didn't someone once call her Britains answer to Ann Coultar?

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

I wonder how many US news outlets comission investigations into their activities, looking for flaws or bias.

How are the polls biased, SUBMAN?

I'd consider any poll based on 'cell phone only' and charges per text message flawed. It is definitely not even close to a scietific poll that is random, unbiased, has a margin of error that can be calculated.

-S

[Tchocky]

OK, so it may be flawed.

But a bias implies directed results.

How are they biased, just going on what we see here?

Here is how accurate and reliable the BBC is - they even admit it!

Well, they ordered the report and released it to the press, that's fairly accurate and reliable for something so critical.

See my news transparency thread, BBC comes in 3rd for accountability and transparency, things like this report.

[Takeda Shingen]

I'm pretty sure that those polls are presented as nothing more than a clever advertising campaign, and are not going to be cited on The McLaughlin Group or Meet the Press. Let's not make too much out of this.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

OK, so it may be flawed.

But a bias implies directed results.

How are they biased, just going on what we see here?

Simple - you target your select group that you think will give you the proper results. This is even easier in America where most conservatives do not even answer polls like this unless asked via a random phone call.

Well, they ordered the report and released it to the press, that's fairly accurate and reliable for something so critical.

If you have been following the story, it was not voluntary about a year ago, where this news broke.

See my news transparency thread, BBC comes in 3rd for accountability and transparency, things like this report.

They are actually among what the normal world would consider the worst offenders. They have even amitted as much. Not sure where you went on that thread because I didn't read it, but they are definitely profit motivated for #1 (hype and oversensationalizing things is how they sell), and they are Politically motivated #2, and they are Religiously motivated #3. This is very very very far from tranparency - espeically with what they have tried to hide, and ruins their accontability as well.

I think the kitchen knife deal was about the clincher for me when they suggested banning all kitchen knifes because they could be used for violence in the street. A police officer had to clue them in that carrying a knife around that large was already illegal! :rotfl:But they still wanted them banned anyway!!!:rotfl:They have got to be the worst news organiation on the planet!

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I'm pretty sure that those polls are presented as nothing more than a clever advertising campaign, and are not going to be cited on The McLaughlin Group or Meet the Press. Let's not make too much out of this.

That about sums it up perfectly.

[The Avon Lady]

Originally Posted by DAB

Actually, shes generally considered discredited these days.

:rotfl:

Shes denounced far too many people for apparent misdemeaners, only to retract when faced with legal action, to be taken seriously.

Can you document this?

Her main problem seems to be a tendency to take a blog entry, email or even word of mouth as proof positive and run with it.

Can you document this?

Didn't someone once call her Britains answer to Ann Coultar?

The closest correlation I could find documented between the 2 is on this page of the Muslim Public Affairs Commitee - MPACUK. Thanks for the tip.

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Simple - you target your select group that you think will give you the proper results. This is even easier in America where most conservatives do not even answer polls like this unless asked via a random phone call.

So they place billboards at liberal intersections? The text numbers are only reachable from Democrat-registered voters? How do you know that they are doing this from what we see here?
You said the polls were biased, based on the images I posted (unless you have other info). Where, in the images, is this bias?

(It looks like confirmation bias, but I hope not)

If you have been following the story, it was not voluntary about a year ago, where this news broke.

Really? Link?

They are actually among what the normal world would consider the worst offenders. They have even amitted as much. Not sure where you went on that thread because I didn't read it, but they are definitely profit motivated for #1 (hype and oversensationalizing things is how they sell), and they are Politically motivated #2, and they are Religiously motivated #3. This is very very very far from tranparency - espeically with what they have tried to hide, and ruins their accontability as well.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=116720 - here's the thread.

How the HELL is the BBC profit motivated?

[Boris]

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Melanie Phillips is a professional journalist, commentator and author.

Are you a professional analyst of journalism? :hmm:

Well I am a Media student, so I am an analyst of journalism... but I admit my comment was hasty and I certainly did no analysing

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

So they place billboards at liberal intersections? The text numbers are only reachable from Democrat-registered voters? How do you know that they are doing this from what we see here?
You said the polls were biased, based on the images I posted (unless you have other info). Where, in the images, is this bias?

(It looks like confirmation bias, but I hope not)

To get a directed result, you must know your market. They are obviously targetting a group or audience with these posters and without studying exactly where they are and what their motivations are (There is not enough data), it is hard to tell exactly what they are targetting. I can for sure tell you just from looking at it that the main target audience is probably under 40 - the tech no geeks and young adults, and even all the way down to school children. How many adults (at least not over here) over 40 even know what the hell a text message is? Not a whole lot. THis is the American Idol type mentality with a specific age range in mind coming up with the numbers.

See where I'm coming from yet?

Really? Link?

Dunno right now. Google is your friend though, or if you care searching Subsim forums, its on here too in the General section. We had a big discussion on it back in like 2005 or 2006 - not sure the exact time.

I bet you could find it rather quickly if you visit some of the blog links from the above post though.

http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=116720 - here's the thread.

How the HELL is the BBC profit motivated?

Most news agencies are these days - CNN is another that is profit motivated. I took a class on this a while back for fun. The BBC used to get trashed every now and then in that class. So did CNN though. Basically it comes down to how you present your media. You over hype or over sensationalize typical stories in an effort for ratings. It banks on the rubber necker syndrome type mentality as you see in auto accidents.

If it makes you feel any better, CNN is biased pretty badly too, but they are a bit more in tune with the American phycie, so they can get away with it better. The BBC however has ideas that are still foreign over here, so they stand out as biased a bit more easily.

-S

PS. I think it is impossible to be compeltely un-biased in a news agency, but as close as you are going to get is from publically funded stations. We have several in the US.