A Very Bad Day For The BBC

[RetiredAndLovingIt]

[mod edit]

Apparently Martin Bashir created fake documents to convince Princess Diana and her brother that the palace was paying her staff to spy on her. All this in an effort to get her to do the interview with him which she did. It seemed kind of strange at the time that she would burn her bridges by doing what she did back in 1995. If he had not done that her life may have been completely different.

Makes you wonder how much of the Michael Jackson documentary was also manipulated by Bashir.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15017685/prince-william-bbc-investigation-princess-diana-interview/

 

[TheRunningMan]

What...is this Facebook now?

 

[Winemaker]

What...is this Facebook now?

Imagine, the MSM lying or manipulating to get a story, or in a story.

 

[Major Tom]

Imagine, the MSM lying or manipulating to get a story, or in a story.

Thanks for making this thread seem even more "Facebooky". IMO, it is critically important that all reporting adhere to the strictest journalistic standards, whether the outlet be a large "mainstream" outlet, or a smaller more independent outfit. It is not just the large "mainstream" organizations that fail in this respect. I trust you realize that? Nevertheless, I agree with the sentiment that this is definitely not good for the BBC, who have historically been credited for the quality of their output.

Is this the Early Retirement Forum, or have I stumbled upon an excellent "deep fake"

 

[Winemaker]

Thanks for making this thread seem even more "Facebooky". IMO, it is critically important that all reporting adhere to the strictest journalistic standards, whether the outlet be a large "mainstream" outlet, or a smaller more independent outfit. It is not just the large "mainstream" organizations that fail in this respect. I trust you realize that? Nevertheless, I agree with the sentiment that this is definitely not good for the BBC, who have historically been credited for the quality of their output.

Is this the Early Retirement Forum, or have I stumbled upon an excellent "deep fake"

I'm not on Facebook nor have I read anything on Facebook.

Yes, I realize the Press, be it mainstream or local, must report to the "strictest of journalistic standards", in order to guarantee the future of our constitutional republic. But it has not, since Cronkite changed the narrative of the Viet Nam War.

Please excuse my sarcasm of my post #3.

 

[meierlde]

Imagine, the MSM lying or manipulating to get a story, or in a story.

Actually the media was historically biased consider that before the civil war papers were sponsored by the various political parties and quite often there was a whig/republican and democratic paper in the city. Cost of entry to the media was low, as you could get all you needed in terms of equipment to start a newspaper in a waggon. It is only after the invention of the steam press that allowed much larger printing of newspapers that advertisement became important. Indeed the non political media was really a child of there being but three tv networks in the us and the FCC fairness doctrine.

 

[jimbee]

Manipulation/slant/bias/even lying of/in the news by the media presenting it has been going on longer than anyone on this forum has been alive.

 

[audreyh1]

This story is not about slant or bias. It’s about lying and commiting fraud to mislead and influence a public figure you want to interview. Faked documents even!

 

[jimbee]

This story is not about slant or bias. It’s about lying and commiting fraud to mislead and influence a public figure you want to interview. Faked documents even!

You're correct, but I see incorrect information published in the news just about every day. It's wrong but it seems to sell.

 

[audreyh1]

You're correct, but I see incorrect information published in the news just about every day. It's wrong but it seems to sell.

Sure, there is that and it’s widespread.

But this is a different situation. It can’t be excused as media bias.

 

[jimbee]

Sure, there is that and it’s widespread.

But this is a different situation. It can’t be excused as media bias.

I'm not intending to excuse this. I agree it's a problem, but it isn't new. We'll have to agree to agree.

 

[eytonxav]

Unfortunately there is very little integrity in journalism. Bring back uncle Walter please.

 

[Chuckanut]

Perhaps the BBC should read Jim Lehrer's Rules for Journalism:

https://www.pbs.org/ombudsman/2009/12/lehrers_rules.html

Do nothing I cannot defend.
Cover, write and present every story with the care I would want if the story were about me.
Assume there is at least one other side or version to every story.
Assume the viewer is as smart and as caring and as good a person as I am.
Assume the same about all people on whom I report.
Assume personal lives are a private matter, until a legitimate turn in the story absolutely mandates otherwise.
Carefully separate opinion and analysis from straight news stories, and clearly label everything.
Do not use anonymous sources or blind quotes, except on rare and monumental occasions.
No one should ever be allowed to attack another anonymously.
And, finally, I am not in the entertainment business."

 

[RetiredAndLovingIt]

OP here.
This is simple fraud committed by an individual with absolutely no ethics or morals. His complete disregard for the damage he caused to that family in his quest for fame and fortune is unforgivable. I hope he's made to return the Bafta he earned for the interview and I wish him nothing but misery for the rest of his life. He deserves to be tossed in jail for what he did.
As a Brit and an ardent supporter of the royal family I've always felt that their no comment and hunker down policy was the best way to handle anything that was thrown at them. Unfortunately Harry has become a bit of a loose cannon, he definitely has some issues to work through, I hope he gets some help before it's to late, reminds me of the Charlie Sheen meltdown.

 

[Music Lover]

Unfortunately there is very little integrity in journalism. Bring back uncle Walter please.

Walter was biased too, he was just more subtle about it. The media has been biased for decades but in the last several years they have been outright lying.

 

[Mr._Graybeard]

Walter was biased too, he was just more subtle about it. The media has been biased for decades but in the last several years they have been outright lying.

Give the people what they want.

 

[Music Lover]

You're correct, but I see incorrect information published in the news just about every day. It's wrong but it seems to sell.

It sells but the real goal is to deliberately mislead.

 

[Music Lover]

Give the people what they want.

Misinformation?

 

[Mr._Graybeard]

Misinformation?

The media function in the marketplace of ideas. The abundant supply of lies is merely a response to consumer demand.

 

[Mr._Graybeard]

It sells but the real goal is to deliberately mislead.

No, it's all about the money for media moguls. If the viewership dried up, they'd find another hobby horse.

 

[jimbee]

No, it's all about the money for media moguls. If the viewership dried up, they'd find another hobby horse.

Yep.

 

[Music Lover]

The media function in the marketplace of ideas. The abundant supply of lies is merely a response to consumer demand.

The media isn't about sales anymore and hasn't been for a very long time. Their goal is to promote an agenda. If you only think it's about sales, then you've been duped.

 

[Mr._Graybeard]

in the television era of Cronkite and Murrow, news programming was actually unprofitable.
The current "journalistic" environment is much more of a money maker.

I put the word "journalistic" in quotes because many news channel personalities, when pushed to the wall, will identify themselves as entertainers, not journalists. Some entertainment.

 

[Mr._Graybeard]

The media isn't about sales anymore and hasn't been for a very long time. Their goal is to promote an agenda. If you only think it's about sales, then you've been duped.

Obviously not your agenda. But no worries; there's surely a channel that will fit your preconceived notions.

 

[eytonxav]

Walter was biased too, he was just more subtle about it. The media has been biased for decades but in the last several years they have been outright lying.

While Walter may have had his own personal biases, they did not come out in his news coverage many decades ago. Back then, all networks were governed by the Fairness Doctrine and the FCC was the overseer whom the networks feared. For example, if a journalist interviewed a democrat on something like the vietnam war, they were compelled to also get a view from the republican side to ensure viewers saw both sides of a difference. I believe this type of regulation by the FCC eventually went away after Cronkite's hay day.