begin oe_protect.scr
Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> __/ [ Mark Kent ] on Tuesday 09 January 2007 08:11 \__
>
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> [H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> Mark Kent wrote:
>>> > begin oe_protect.scr
>>> > Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> >> __/ [ [H]omer ] on Saturday 06 January 2007 07:37 \__
>>> >>> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>>
>>> >>>> Oh goody, another puff piece.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> *starts up DOOM-style chainsaw*
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> And yes, I'm going to bash Vista to little eentsy beentsy bits.
>>>
>>> >>> [snip]
>>>
>>> >>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6160327.stm
>>>
>>> >>> Well after the BBC climbed into bed with Microsoft, it was only a
>>> >>> matter of time before they started the blowjobs.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=35282
>>>
>>> >> There's also this one...
>>>
>>> > <snip>
>>> >
>>> > I don't think that the BBC could ever be in bed with anyone,
>>> > including MS, their charter does not allow it. If you think the
>>> > article is flawed or mistaken, then say so - they will fix it. They
>>> > are not allowed bias.
>>>
>>> Come on Mark, that article is *dripping* with bias. With the vast
>>> majority of previews, reviews, opinions and blogs about Vista having
>>> almost nothing positive to say, the BBC comes up with an article that
>>> has absolutely nothing *negative* to say about Vista
>>> whatsoever. That's considerably more than just suspicious, it's
>>> neon-flashing-light obvious.
>>>
>>> Even if they don't want to express an opinion ("report the news, don't
>>> make the news"), at the very least they should have cited some of the
>>> criticisms that *others* have about this OS, particularly as many of
>>> those critics are the grassroots Microsoft faithful.
>>>
>>> It doesn't even read like it was written *by* them; it reads more like
>>> it was handed *to* them, and told to print it. It's like an advert.
>>>
>>> The BBC might have a charter, but pesky charters, laws, and policies
>>> never stopped Microsoft breaking the rules; I doubt it will stop the
>>> BBC from being coerced to break them either.
>>>
>>> And yes ... I will tell them.
>>>
>>> /me looks up BBC contact addresses.
>>>
>>
>> Good - complain - they're not allowed bias. I didn't say that the
>> article wasn't biassed, I just said that they're not allowed to have
>> bias in their articles, so they can, and should, be biased. The same is
^^^^^^^^
What was I thinking?
I meant to say that they should be complained to in order to fix the
article, and it all came out very wrong indeed!
>> true of all of our television and radio media, too.
>
> Little update: Homer's letter has made its way into the FSF Web site. Also,
> yesterday I spotted an ABC 'News' (follow the money) article which excluded
> criticisms of Vista. This led me to pointing to Homer's letter, which is now
> a powerful reference to have. If the BBC caves, anyone could. Even bloggers
> with shiny Ferrari laptops.
>
Excellent, well done Homer. We need to protect ourselves against lazy
journalism at the BBC, if they're getting it wrong, then nobody else is
likely to get it right at all. Interestingly, I suspect that the BBC's
global influence is greater today than it has been since the latter days
of the once globally dominant British Empire. For all the US's
global power, it lacks any equivalent to the BBC.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Some changes are so slow, you don't notice them. Others are so fast,
they don't notice you.
|
|
