Apparently the thread a year ago was only the beginning...now after a YEARS investigation they admit it

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/news/press_releases/2007/impartiality.html

once again, no surprise

*awaits the "life has a liberal bias" bullshit by idiots that dont understand that reality=individual perception*

6/21/2007 1:44:44 PM

we just need faux news to admit its conservative bias and we will be all set

6/21/2007 1:45:57 PM

so you've got fox news which is obviously conservatively biased

and then you have all the other news outlets with liberal bias

6/21/2007 1:46:36 PM

Can you post the smoking gun comment from that link where they admit it? That's a lot of shit for me to read, to be able to reply to this thread.

6/21/2007 1:46:58 PM

also now the news agencies are claiming "the left is getting better" at their jobs and the news outlets claim they were manipulated...lolz

heres the full report btw http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/18_06_07impartialitybbc.pdf

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 1:48 PM. Reason : .]

6/21/2007 1:48:27 PM

Quote :

"Can you post the smoking gun comment from that link where they admit it? That's a lot of shit for me to read, to be able to reply to this thread."

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 1:49 PM. Reason : because we all know you didn't read shit in either of those links]

6/21/2007 1:49:44 PM

i'd hate for you to actually have to do some reading before you continue trolling, god forbid

6/21/2007 1:50:48 PM

Jesus H Christ you ass bag. You said the BBC admits liberal bias in that god damned link you posted. I read the first 200 words of it, and don't see anything that gets close to it. I then do a search for liberal or bias and nothing appears there. We all know you didn't read shit about that link to arrive at your own conclusion about them admitting liberal bias. Now just point us to the newsmax link or some other link to a right wing blog where you got that idea that they admit some liberal bias.

You fucking cunt rag.

6/21/2007 1:53:02 PM

Quote :

"once again, no surprise"

yep

6/21/2007 1:53:40 PM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=411846

here's another link for Trolly McTroll

thats from the start of the investigation last year

the PDF i linked is the full report from a few days ago

from the PDF report

Quote :

"Andrew Marr, former Political Editor, said that the BBC is ‘a publicly-funded urban organisation with an abnormally large proportion of younger people, of people in ethnic minorities and almost certainly of gay people’ compared with the population at large.’ All this, he said, ‘creates an innate liberal bias inside the BBC’."

great reason for "innate" liberal bias!

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 2:04 PM. Reason : .]

6/21/2007 1:56:00 PM

I'm not trolling you. I just want you to stop acting like threads/posts like these are original thoughts of your own. Admit it, you read it on some other blog, and then tried to pass it off here like you are smart.

I'm not denying one bit that the BBC isn't liberal. I FUCKING AGREE WITH THAT POINT. I just wanted you to show me where it even comes close to saying as much in the link you posted. And as usual, you started calling me a troll and I should read, when the reality was, you didn't read shit at that link, and it is much easier to try and divert the attention away from your douchebaggery by calling me such.

You dick cheese.

6/21/2007 2:09:46 PM

Quote :

"I just want you to stop acting like threads/posts like these are original thoughts of your own"

The link I posted in the initial post should show everyone but only the biggest idiots that I'm not claiming shit to be my original thought... let alone if I claimed it to be my original thought people would say "post a link or you're wrong!"...quit trolling

in the pre-report thread on TWW a year ago (http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=440601) i had the same thought

realizing most media outlets are liberal isnt any kind of difficult view to come up with either...course when this thread was going on i guess you were trolling under a different alias

i wonder if geniuses like Scuba Steve still think "You will be surprised to learn that life has a decidedly liberal bias"

or if perhaps he's been surprised to learn that reality is individual perception and he's simply admitting his own liberal bias?

Quote :

"I just wanted you to show me where it even comes close to saying as much in the link you posted"

since you like to repost the exact same things, i'll do the same

Quote :

"Andrew Marr, former Political Editor, said that the BBC is ‘a publicly-funded urban organisation with an abnormally large proportion of younger people, of people in ethnic minorities and almost certainly of gay people’ compared with the population at large.’ All this, he said, ‘creates an innate liberal bias inside the BBC’"

thats from the BBC's official report...you know, the PDF link I posted? The former BBC political editors admits "liberal bias inside the BBC"

Is that black and white enough for you troll?

6/21/2007 2:11:17 PM

Quote :

"you've never had an original thought in your life so how are you doing anything here but trolling? i posted fucking links that show the bias...i dont claim them to be my own ideas...quit trolling"

Dude, my contributions and different ideas outclass yours any day of the weak. The first link you posted, which I questioned, DID NOT SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT BIAS OR ADMIT ANY LIBERAL BIAS, OR EVEN USE THE GOD DAMNED WORD BIAS. IT WAS A DAMN LINK DESCRIBING A REPORT THEY DID ABOUT IMPARTIALITY, WHICH ITSELF HAD COMMENTS ADMITTING LIBERAL BIAS.

So just admit it. You read a blog, and copy and pasted the wrong link and tried to pass it off to all of us like you read something specific. Then you retreat to calling me a troll, when it is obvious to everyone here who the true troll is. And here we are again posting about bullshit when we could be talking about the BBC liberal bias, because you failed in your responsibility to maintain the integrity this section once had.

6/21/2007 2:23:35 PM

Quote :

"So just admit it. You read a blog, and copy and pasted the wrong link and tried to pass it off to all of us like you read something specific"

so did i read the blog in october 2006 when this thread was going on http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=440601? when i had the exact same opinion on the issue?

btw, which alias were you trolling with back then? you probably dont even remember

6/21/2007 2:24:25 PM

So you admit it then?

6/21/2007 2:29:07 PM

you got anything to add to the thread topic or are you just going to continue trolling me personally? based off history, i'd definitely go with the latter

6/21/2007 2:29:54 PM

Why is there always at least one person who trolls/gets trolled [by] TreeTwisa at all times in TSB? I thought that once 409c asked to be suspended threads would be readable again but apparently I was wrong...

and that link you posted is more about safeguards to ensuring impartiality than some admission of left leaning (though we all know they do).



[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 2:32 PM. Reason : x]

6/21/2007 2:30:59 PM

Quote :

"and that link you posted is more about safeguards to ensuring impartiality than some admission of left leaning "

so you too only read the press release and not the PDF link i posted? or are you reading the thread slowly as you edit your post?

either way you must've missed this the first two times

Quote :

"Andrew Marr, former Political Editor, said that the BBC is ‘a publicly-funded urban organisation with an abnormally large proportion of younger people, of people in ethnic minorities and almost certainly of gay people’ compared with the population at large.’ All this, he said, ‘creates an innate liberal bias inside the BBC’"

6/21/2007 2:32:02 PM

You pretty much have to be [user]Blind[/user] Hate to not notice how liberal BBC is.

6/21/2007 2:34:25 PM

I'll add plenty to this topic once we get it settled that you didn't read anything in that first link you posted, and nothing in that second link you posted.

This comment that you posted twice

Quote :

""Andrew Marr, former Political Editor, said that the BBC is ‘a publicly-funded urban organisation with an abnormally large proportion of younger people, of people in ethnic minorities and almost certainly of gay people’ compared with the population at large.’ All this, he said, ‘creates an innate liberal bias inside the BBC’""

Does not appear anywhere on the page in that first link you posted when you thought you were being so clever.

Furthermore, if one were to read that entire page (way too much reading for the average TSB thread) and THEN folllow the link to the actual report, they would have to go through 66 pages of reading before they landed on that comment.

You didn't read the first link you posted, you didn't read the second link you posted. So I am asking you (though the best you can do is call a simple question trolling, because thats the easiest way to not answer it), which conservative blog did you read that made you aware of this report, that you thought you were being so smug when you posted the first link, and ended up clowning yourself.

You answer that, and I'll add my 2 cents for other people to respond to.

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 2:36 PM. Reason : simple question]

6/21/2007 2:35:00 PM

I posted as I read the thread... the first link I read and was drawn to the CAPITAL LETTERS... will read now.

6/21/2007 2:35:43 PM

^^why are you so caught up on the first link that you're ignoring the actual report? i post the press release for the report (which i later posted the PDF link to)...why are you so caught up on the summary? probably because you're just a troll

Quote :

"which conservative blog did you read that made you aware of this report"

dude...read the tww thread from 8 months ago when I HAD THE EXACT SAME OPINION...yet somehow i just read some blog? god damn you're a trolling bastard

the ONLY thing you've done in this thread is attack me...not comment on the BBC, or news bias or anything like that...just attack me directly...if thats not trolling i dont know what is

6/21/2007 2:35:54 PM

It is good to see you haven't forgotten what classic TreeTwista is about. That is, if all else fails, claim some sort of persecution that everyone is trolling you.

I will tell you exactly why your thread was shitty. It could have been posted by anyone else, and the result is the same.

Your title says "BBC admits liberal bias"




Durr, we all knew they were anyway (wait, I agree with you, I must be trolling you, right?!)

So lets check on this here link and see whats up.

Ummm

Wait, there is a problem here.

I see talk of impartiality, and a report, but nothing that immediately strikes as an admission of liberal bias guilt.

At this point, you failed as a TSB thread creator.

1) You didn't add shit for commentary to actually get the thread started.
2) No one in this section should A) have to read 4 pages of shit that isn't even a summary
then when that fails to prove your thread title, b) read 81 pages of a report

TO FIND THE NUGGET OF INFORMATION THAT CORROBORATES YOUR THREAD TITLE


But you can keep calling it trolling if it helps you to avoid admitting you didn't read shit.

6/21/2007 2:43:50 PM

And stop fucking sending me PMs you cock bag waste of electrons.

6/21/2007 2:45:00 PM

sounds like somebody is pretty pissed off that the liberal bias of the media world now actually has written documentation...shouldnt you be posting in the thread you created called "Another thing to bash Bush about?"

6/21/2007 2:54:39 PM

Reality has a liberal bias.

People's whose individual perceptions differ are wrong.

6/21/2007 2:58:37 PM

News is biased.

Stop the f***ing presses.

6/21/2007 3:04:01 PM

This is a thread grounded in stupidity. You do realize that "liberal" in the Britain is more of the classical liberal (see the Liberal party to a degree) and not the progressive/socialist ideology that has stolen the term in America, right?

6/21/2007 3:07:42 PM

^^i guess wanting any type of semblance of unbiased news is wrong...also this is just another example of something being obvious to me and plenty of others for a long time...course when we said it before we got a bunch of "omg reality has a liberal bias"

^thank you for at least saying the idea of the thread is stupid instead of just attacking me personally like some faggot trolls...even though you're wrong

6/21/2007 3:07:43 PM

Quote :

"reality=individual perception"

bullshit

as for the report, at least they are reporting on themselves and trying to remain impartial, unlike the rest of them

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 3:41 PM. Reason : BORK BORK BORK]

6/21/2007 3:41:42 PM

reality DOESNT equal individual perception? lololololol i guess there is also one set of morals that all humans live by too

and yes i do think its good that they are making SOME effort to reduce bias...although their excuses for why they have been biased are pathetic

6/21/2007 3:58:59 PM

well morals can be relative, obviously for many reasons, culture and location being two

but how can reality be anything other than reality? it's like math.

if i look at the ground and tell you there is a ball there, the reality is that there is a ball there.

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 4:00 PM. Reason : lkjasdf]

6/21/2007 4:00:44 PM

its still in the eye of the beholder

if a 12 oz glass has 6 oz of water in it, the reality is that it has 6 oz of water in it...then peoples' own opinions could allow them to say its half full or half empty or something completely different...doesnt matter whats in the glass, its how people interpret it, just like reality

if reality has a liberal bias, its because you're liberal...if reality has a conservative bias, its because you're conservative...this is basic philosophy

6/21/2007 4:03:26 PM

Quote :

"although their excuses for why they have been biased are pathetic"

Which are?


I guess it's good that talk radio is far right biased to balance out the BBC and it's kind.

6/21/2007 4:04:50 PM

well the BBC said since its audience includes youngsters, gays and minorities, thats they're inherently biased

other outlets have said the left has gotten more clever, essentially admitting their bias, but saying they were duped or tricked into it by the left

what talk radio is right? i know rush is but i dont listen to much non-sports talk radio...NPR is certainly left...i dont know about many other talk radio shows

6/21/2007 4:08:24 PM

Quote :

"well the BBC said since its audience includes youngsters, gays and minorities, thats they're inherently biased"

Where in the report does it say this?

6/21/2007 4:11:00 PM

i don't know. npr certainly isn't left like rush is right. it certainly isn't left like air america. it's far more balanced than most sources you can find on radio.

6/21/2007 4:12:16 PM

Quote :

"then peoples' own opinions could allow them to say its half full or half empty or something completely different...doesnt matter whats in the glass, its how people interpret it, just like reality if reality has a liberal bias, its because you're liberal...if reality has a conservative bias, its because you're conservative...this is basic philosophy"

saying it's half empty or half full doesn't change the reality of the 6 oz in the glass though. i think i see what you're saying though

i agree with the 2nd part

6/21/2007 4:12:40 PM

dbl post

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 4:13 PM. Reason : .]

6/21/2007 4:12:43 PM

Quote :

"Where in the report does it say this?"

the same quote i posted like 5 times?

Quote :

"Andrew Marr, former Political Editor, said that the BBC is ‘a publicly-funded urban organisation with an abnormally large proportion of younger people, of people in ethnic minorities and almost certainly of gay people’ compared with the population at large.’ All this, he said, ‘creates an innate liberal bias inside the BBC’"

6/21/2007 4:13:46 PM

You can't read and you just clowned yourself pretty hard. Stare at it a little more and see if you can figure it out.

So you don't ghost edit to save face

Quote :

"TreeTwista10 411 4M3R1C4N 51173 Posts user info edit post block user Quote : "Where in the report does it say this?" the same quote i posted like 5 times? Quote : "Andrew Marr, former Political Editor, said that the BBC is ‘a publicly-funded urban organisation with an abnormally large proportion of younger people, of people in ethnic minorities and almost certainly of gay people’ compared with the population at large.’ All this, he said, ‘creates an innate liberal bias inside the BBC’" 6/21/2007 4:13:46 PM"

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 4:15 PM. Reason : don't try that shit pal]

6/21/2007 4:15:03 PM

dont try what shit?

page 66 of the report http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/18_06_07impartialitybbc.pdf

?????

unless you're saying that since Marr is the FORMER political editor that he no longer speaks for the BBC?

you ever think of being straight forward instread of playing your little cryptic syntax games? i guess not since you've never been straightforward about your alias

6/21/2007 4:17:45 PM

Nah, dog. You claimed this

Quote :

"well the BBC said since its audience includes youngsters, gays and minorities, thats they're inherently biased"

And what you are quoting of Marr doesn't back this statement up.

6/21/2007 4:22:04 PM

so you're playing little syntax games

since Marr said this, and not the BBC, even though Marr used to be political editor at BBC and have the main say on what political content went out on BBC channels

or you have issue with my paraphrasing of the quote since i didnt mention "abnormally large proportion"

so you're just nitpicking to troll me once again...big shocker

6/21/2007 4:26:33 PM

Nope, that isn't it either.

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 4:28 PM. Reason : not what you ghost edited in there either...wrong wrong wrong, you are clueless you dolt]

6/21/2007 4:27:47 PM

more cryptic games

inherent to aliases who are by nature cryptic

i'm clueless yet you sure do a good job of not trying to clue anyone in...probably because you're just a troll

hey look i didnt ghost edit

maybe if you spent your money on a premium account instead of spending the same amount of money on numerous alias accounts you could tidy up your posts too

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 4:30 PM. Reason : .]

6/21/2007 4:28:44 PM

THERE IS NOTHING CRYPTIC ABOUT YOU CLAIMING SOMETHING BECAUSE YOU CAN'T READ.

That is what this boils down to. Try again. Rather than assuming I am playing syntax games (wtf is that? except a waste of time) or being cryptic (what kinda shit is that?) why don't you consider what I am saying, and go back and figure out where you fucked up you dolt.

If you can't see where you fucked up, and you certainly did (no trolling about it) then I'll show you where you fucked up. It's not a real big deal, but you are making it one thinking everyone is out to get you (why is that btw? maybe thats because you really do troll?)

6/21/2007 4:32:36 PM

ok i give up, why dont you show me where i fucked up

i dont know why you couldnt just tell me instead of typing a few paragraphs explaining that i fucked up but never mentioning how

6/21/2007 4:38:08 PM

Here is a hint, the part you quoted by Marr, doesn't say anything about the audience of the BBC.





Edit

It's to point out how you didn't read anything other than an original blog post that you won't tell us what it is, and what you did read, you weren't reading it very closely since you completely missed what Marr was fundamentally saying.


That, and you aren't infallible, and I don't automatically troll you even though you claim this in every thread I post in. Get over yourself. People don't set out to troll you, it's just that your comments and posting style is so absurd, that the appropriate reply (that is, a reply on the level you created) often comes across as trolling when most of the time it isn't.

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 4:41 PM. Reason : dolt]

6/21/2007 4:39:14 PM

ok the bbc is gay, young and urban, not its audience

im sure its audience is old, straight and white

[Edited on June 21, 2007 at 4:41 PM. Reason : .]

6/21/2007 4:40:44 PM