begin oe_protect.scr
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> __/ [ peterwn ] on Saturday 03 February 2007 23:35 \__
>
>> On Feb 4, 9:47 am, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> __/ [ peterwn ] on Saturday 03 February 2007 19:09 \__
>>>
>>> > On Feb 4, 7:54 am, 7 <website_has_em...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> >>http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37411
>>>
>>> >> The Beeb criticised for promotion shambles while vista crap FLOPS.
>>> >> They don't appear to show any balance and received record
>>> >> number of complaints about balance of content.
>>>
>>> >> Many other channels showed Linux as competitors to the market
>>> >> and had become more informative as a direct result of being
>>> >> balanced.
>>>
>>> > The 'Beeb' was not the only broadcaster suckered into running
>>> > Microsoft's propaganda as a 'current affairs' item.
>>>
>>> NBC and CNN are just a couple among many that fall under the same
>>> category. They are dependent on Microsoft, so they have no guts to say the
>>> truth. It's a suppressive cycle of fear and reward.
>>>
>> They are bad enough, but this makes the 'Beeb' far worse in comparison
>> as it is not dependent on advertising pounds/ dollars.
>
> It's perspective is possibly affected by those who come in touch with the
> reporters over lunch. Journalists mingle with friends (or friends of
> friends) who are 'field experts'. As it stands, technical folks who watch
> over the Web site are likely to pass on the 'Microsoft religion'. It's a
> case of 'in Rome, act like a Roman'.
>
I do tend to agree, though, that there is positively no excuse for the
BBC falling for corporate press releases and propaganda, when they have
fantastic resources to do a properly researched story. Even their
click-online programme is better than that.
Bring back Tomorrow's World :-)
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Stult's Report:
Our problems are mostly behind us. What we have to do now is
fight the solutions.
|
|
