tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3272054900018746845.post9110582906287426029..comments2024-01-01T17:21:52.555+00:00Comments on Is the BBC biased?: 140 character assassinationCraighttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08741318067991857821noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3272054900018746845.post-25899695364608569872017-02-03T22:39:53.762+00:002017-02-03T22:39:53.762+00:00It seems pretty clear the only 'discussion'...It seems pretty clear the only 'discussion' the BBC is ever interested in is one where they control the topic, moderator, guests, audience and edit for subsequent broadcast.<br /><br />Proof of BBC anything likewise is easily intercepted by a 'purposes of' exemption.Emmahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11550976834509947355noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3272054900018746845.post-45940651262534424722017-02-03T22:24:47.405+00:002017-02-03T22:24:47.405+00:00Yes, it's a pretence. The QT programme is alre...Yes, it's a pretence. The QT programme is already done and dusted before Dimbleby makes an invitation to 'become involved in the discussion'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3272054900018746845.post-2719555425321644242017-02-03T20:24:17.793+00:002017-02-03T20:24:17.793+00:00I've never understood the reason for the QT Tw...I've never understood the reason for the QT Twitter thing. Dimbleby always announces it as a way to get involved in the discussion, but they never read them out on air or reference it at all during any broadcast. Is just a way for the BBC to 'prove' audience interaction and reach? Another way they claim to have their finger on the pulse, etc.?David Preiser (USA)https://www.blogger.com/profile/00055001852090086556noreply@blogger.com