Godfrey has been at it again.

Status
Not open for further replies.
These journalists are not getting any smarter:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/the-quote...se-to-the-london-terror-attack-123005074.html

One of the features of current news bias is when a journalist is giving undue prominence to a non-story, i.e. something someone said on Twitter that has no place being reported in the news. Just by reporting it, you give more exposure to the tweet, the story becomes self-perpetuating and then can tack on a story about the argument that goes with it. The problem is because of the bias in reporting it in the first place, and the often ardent and un-reasoned outlook of the journalist, it can often be difficult for the journalist to interpret the meaning of people's posts. Godfrey Elfwick is the master of exploiting this.
 


These journalists are not getting any smarter:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/the-quote...se-to-the-london-terror-attack-123005074.html

One of the features of current news bias is when a journalist is giving undue prominence to a non-story, i.e. something someone said on Twitter that has no place being reported in the news. Just by reporting it, you give more exposure to the tweet, the story becomes self-perpetuating and then can tack on a story about the argument that goes with it. The problem is because of the bias in reporting it in the first place, and the often ardent and un-reasoned outlook of the journalist, it can often be difficult for the journalist to interpret the meaning of people's posts. Godfrey Elfwick is the master of exploiting this.
Where as you are a mensa candidate
 
I'm still not sure what the OP is banging on about anyway. Shouldn't this be in the Politics forum where it can properly be analysed in excruciating forensic detail?
 
PC dominated mass media?! :lol:
I would have thought the BBC's reporting of the terrorist attack would have made everyone realise that it is PC dominated.

They refuse to even use the words Moslem or Islam in case they offend anyone, even when those words were the most germane to understanding the motives behind the atrocity.
 
Where as you are a mensa candidate

"Whereas."

I would have thought the BBC's reporting of the terrorist attack would have made everyone realise that it is PC dominated.

They refuse to even use the words Moslem or Islam in case they offend anyone, even when those words were the most germane to understanding the motives behind the atrocity.

Until the facts where established i.e. Who did it and why, the BBC aren't going to comment on specifics. Now that they have, the BBC have reported extensively that the man that committed this attack was an Islamist extremist linked to Daesh.

So you're talking shite.
 
Last edited:
I would have thought the BBC's reporting of the terrorist attack would have made everyone realise that it is PC dominated.

They refuse to even use the words Moslem or Islam in case they offend anyone, even when those words were the most germane to understanding the motives behind the atrocity.

You're talking shite aren't you?
 
These journalists are not getting any smarter:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/the-quote...se-to-the-london-terror-attack-123005074.html

One of the features of current news bias is when a journalist is giving undue prominence to a non-story, i.e. something someone said on Twitter that has no place being reported in the news. Just by reporting it, you give more exposure to the tweet, the story becomes self-perpetuating and then can tack on a story about the argument that goes with it. The problem is because of the bias in reporting it in the first place, and the often ardent and un-reasoned outlook of the journalist, it can often be difficult for the journalist to interpret the meaning of people's posts. Godfrey Elfwick is the master of exploiting this.

Sorry, what was wrong with this article?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top