BBC World Ad Campaign (Pic)

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Why? There are many biased and flawed news outlets in America, on all sides. Why this ire for the BBC (eg. "bastards" "worst news org in the world")?

Without getting into detail - just got home and Armed Assault takes precedence over this conversation (Its just the way it is! Sorry! ), I agree to disagree. To you, it is OK to allow one more biased news agency into this world who is biased (and doesn't plan to change it either - that's the sad part), and you would add a 100 more. But since even you say that this is biased, and in the next sentence tell me that they are accountable and transparant, is kind of what? Hypocritical? That is my problem.

I understand it is your country and they have a news agency that stands up to the garbage the US of A produces (They are almost all garbage, I agree) and you are proud of that. It is commendable. But now you must do your duty and call your representative to get them to give un-biased news, since the last time I checked, or at least this is what every reporter is supposed to strive for. This is the pinnicle of news broadcasting. It is the first thing they will teach you in any media class. To sit here and tell me that this is good stuff when they're biased (and even say they are) is just leading people down the wrong path, who all probably know better here anyway.

Now back to Armed Assault. I need to check out this new sound patch!

-S