"Britain needs a channel like Fox"

[Dimentio]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/mark-thompson-bbc-fox-news

Your stance on this?

[ed miliband]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/mark-thompson-bbc-fox-news

Your stance on this?

The BBC does a pretty good job of defending capitalism and the state itself, thank you very much.

ITV and Sky News are also of a very right-wing persuasion, with Sky being probably the most right-wing of the three. The idea that there's any sort of impartial media in Britain is (obviously) completely absurd.

[Spawn of Stalin]

The BBC and Sky are already pretty similar to Fox, they are just more subtle about it because they aren't traditionally viewed as exclusively right wing, so it's more like subtle brainwashing while Fox is openly reactionary and their only job is to preach to the converted. I've noticed the BBC getting more and more reactionary the last couple of years as well. But BBC controllers have always basically been fascists, Labour fascists and Tory fascists, Thompson is no exception.

[Red Future]

The BBC and Sky are already pretty similar to Fox, they are just more subtle about it because they aren't traditionally viewed as exclusively right wing, so it's more like subtle brainwashing while Fox is openly reactionary and their only job is to preach to the converted. I've noticed the BBC getting more and more reactionary the last couple of years as well. But BBC controllers have always basically been fascists, Labour fascists and Tory fascists, Thompson is no exception.

Glad to see i have not been alone in noticing a rightward trend

[Lunatic Concept]

This is bad ofc, but it could lead to us getting some good left-orientated channels, as unlikely as that seems.

[ed miliband]

This is bad ofc, but it could lead to us getting some good left-orientated channels, as unlikely as that seems.

TV channels, barring the BBC, rely on advertising revenue. What company would advertise on a "left-orientated" channel?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

The BBC has it's faults to be sure, but to dismiss it completely and not give a shit about whether it has any semblence of impartiality is the wrong angle to take. Surveys have shown that people who regularly watch Fox News truly do know less than those who watch CNN, CBS etc - do we really want that to happen over here in the UK? At least I can engage with the average BBC viewer on level somewhat approaching reasonable debate, rather than the partisan screaming matches that Fox-style journalism encourages.

Having a clone of Fox in this country would not improve things. We already have shit like the Daily Mail and the Express, and those fuckers are bad enough. Canards about how such rabidly right-wing outlets "preach to the converted" miss the fact that not only do people change their minds, but people's opnions are influenced by the media as they grow up. How do you imagine most people will turn out if all the news is like Fox?

[Red Commissar]

He could have used a better channel as an example if he wanted to show differing opinions. Everyone knows this, but Fox has done a lot of bad damage with reporting standards. When Fox News first launched it got large quickly and overtook traditional news outlets because of the way it presented the news. Other stations followed along to stay competitive and profitable.

And consequently it leads to the decreasing political and historical knowledge of its viewers.

Plus as Nox's post shows, doesn't the UK already have that kind of rabid nonsense?

[RedAnarchist]

Sky News are partly owned by the company that own Fox, so I wouldn't be surprised if they became the British Fox. The two even sometimes show each other on their channels.

[Rushistheshit]

Has anyone wondered why all the news engines in the UK are beginning to lean right?

Could it be because that's what boosts their ratings because that's what people want to see and hear. In other that is what's in demand by the people. Maybe they are fed up with all of you alls Marxist and Maoist angry rants and raves.

I mean because come on I the workin class ruled we would see a massive break down in society because the working class is the working class. They do not possess the ability to lead a society in the right direction all the are going to do is seek revenge on the rich and completely stifle all innovation and everything good that capitalist societies bring.

Thoughts....?

[Hit The North]

Thoughts....?

Yes, you should try it.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Sky? Channel four? Channel 5?

The higher up you go, the more extreme they get. BBC is relatively centrist in it's positions (not impartial, centrist on the left-right scale), ITV is rather pro-status quo, channel 4 and 5 news is always incredibly reactionary and Sky News, well. Kay Burley, that little piece of ginger sperm, she sums it all up. ****.

[Hit The North]

Channel Four news is way more critical than ITN which is the most jingoistic of the major British news services.

It is interesting how all the news and current affairs shows on British TV are increasingly populated by right-wingers pushing the ConDem coalition's economic strategy and ratcheting up the criticism of the poor, who are being recast as the major problem underlying the so-called financial crisis. Of course, the last time Tory scum were in government, the same thing happened. The rich were lionised and the poor were scape-goated. They can't help themselves.

Neither should we be surprised that the British media, run by the same clique who run the government - privately educated, bloated Oxbridge hoorah Henry's and Henrietta's - will side with their pals when they get the chance.

Even the best mainstream media fails at the first hurdle of critique; shrilly parroting the narrow agenda of austerity politics.

What's been great, recently, is watching these stuffed shirts, so used to sneering at everyone else, getting the stuffing kicked out of them by the current crop of student protesters, who are the only ones in the media spotlight currently articulating the notion that another way of doing things is possible and desirable.

[Hexen]

The BBC, FOX, Sky news, etc are all propaganda misinformation agents.

[Pravda Soyuz]

one major problem with capitalism: biased media. FOX news projects right-wing propaganda joyfully. Borgeoisie media must be stopped.

[gorillafuck]

Rupert Murdoch already owns media in Britain.

[Obs]

one major problem with capitalism: biased media. FOX news projects right-wing propaganda joyfully. Borgeoisie media must be stopped.
groundbreaking

[Apoi_Viitor]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/17/mark-thompson-bbc-fox-news

Your stance on this?

In my opinion, setting up a news agency similar to Fox News within the UK would be extraordinarily beneficial. It is quite obvious that there is a large liberal/leftist bias in the media, and the public is in dire need for more news agencies such as Fox news, who are fervently committed towards being fair and balanced.

[Apoi_Viitor]

Thoughts....?
Obvious troll is obvious.

[Rocky Rococo]

The whole idea of an "impartial" or "unbiased" media is absurd. Gramsci explained to us decades ago that the hegemonic ideology is the one that gets to pretend it's not an ideology, that it is "common sense" or "unbiased" or "just the way the world works", but that doesn't make it any less of an ideology than any other ideology. The sooner people get past this bourgeois ideological presentation of an "impartial" or "non-ideological" media outlet in a capitalist society, the better off we'll all be.

[FreeFocus]

As an outsider I have to say that from what I see, BBC is far above anything that is a mainstream news source in the US (besides PBS, which sometimes puts forth really interesting, informative, and truthful documentaries and coverage). It's not anything close to Fox. Seriously. Those of you who are saying that really don't know how fucking horrible Fox is.

[Raúl Duke]

As an outsider I have to say that from what I see, BBC is far above anything that is a mainstream news source in the US (besides PBS, which sometimes puts forth really interesting, informative, and truthful documentaries and coverage). It's not anything close to Fox. Seriously. Those of you who are saying that really don't know how fucking horrible Fox is.

This

I mean, those who say "it's the same", have you ever actually seen Fox News and compare/contrast?

True, the media belongs to the elites and will always skew things in their favour, but at least they're not as bat-shit crazy as Fox is.

Do you want to see a Glenn Beck-like show in the UK? (i.e. a guy, on TV, screaming that crypto-communists have taken over the government or that the student protesters are pseudo-anarchists who are really evil communists which are the same as Nazis, etc?) I surely wouldn't want to see that happening anywhere.

[RadioRaheem84]

BBC>>>>>FOX

BBC is still pro-capitalist but it's still pretty informative.

[ed miliband]

What really matters is not the 'informative-but-biased' shows that the BBC produce, but the news broadcasts that are watched by millions of people (BBC Breakfast, News at Six and News at Ten) in Britain. I think, and I may be wrong, that some Americans have a slightly romanticised image of the BBC; take that weird Gore Vidal interview on election night '08 where he started talking about knowing 'what viewers of the BBC want' or something, as if the BBC only produced the news for discerning left-wing intellectuals (or at least that's how I interpreted it).

The BBC do produce some good news / current affairs shows*, but these aren't broadcast on primetime TV and they don't draw audiences of millions. On the other hand, try and sit through something like 'BBC Breakfast' which is produced for a large audience. Yeah, it may be better than Fox News, but not by much.



*I mean, Newsnights economics editor is a former Trot who spoke at the London Anarchist Bookfair - that's pretty cool. But for the flagship news programmes the economics editor is Robert Peston, a new Labour type.