Jump to content


Inexcusable Quality From Bbc

Recommended Posts

Personally I don't hold the BBC in high regard, nor do I contribute to the licence fee tax.

 

However, time to time I will browse through the BBC news app , as occasionally they have a gem on there, unfortunately the odd gem tends to be surrounded by complete trash.

 

Today I read an absolutely amazing piece on the BBC app about an ex Mafia guy, and the story of how he ended up in a Lancashire caravan park, it was beautifully written.

 

However, the op-eds arent proof read, or quality checked, which is inexcusable. 

 

The BBC is a media giant, there is no excuse for the embarrassing grammatical/contextual standard of the op-eds they publish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All news are doing it now, read so many with mistakes in recent times, seems like they've dumbed down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't start me off!!! I have a pile of rubber bricks by my side that I throw at the tv! Journalists and top presenters who do not speak gramatically...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, crookesjoe said:

Personally I don't hold the BBC in high regard, nor do I contribute to the licence fee tax.

 

However, time to time I will browse through the BBC news app , as occasionally they have a gem on there, unfortunately the odd gem tends to be surrounded by complete trash.

 

Today I read an absolutely amazing piece on the BBC app about an ex Mafia guy, and the story of how he ended up in a Lancashire caravan park, it was beautifully written.

 

However, the op-eds arent proof read, or quality checked, which is inexcusable. 

 

The BBC is a media giant, there is no excuse for the embarrassing grammatical/contextual standard of the op-eds they publish.

Neither are your own postings.....I read the same article myself yesterday, very interesting.

In their defence, the volume of material published by the BBC is possibly such that to perform a detailed check on everything is too costly. 

Edited by Bargepole23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the BBC - "My crimes range from murder, attempted murder and mafia assoiation, extotion, drug trafficing, arms trafficing and money laundering".

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/extra/XOd9gHAS6Y/gennaro_panzuto_mafia_boss_lancashire_caravan_park

 

I guess he is a minor fish not designated as a "serious foreign national offender" by the government. Not on that plane on Monday? Is it because he is white and rich?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, crookesjoe said:

Personally I don't hold the BBC in high regard, nor do I contribute to the licence fee tax.

 

However, time to time I will browse through the BBC news app , as occasionally they have a gem on there, unfortunately the odd gem tends to be surrounded by complete trash.

 

Today I read an absolutely amazing piece on the BBC app about an ex Mafia guy, and the story of how he ended up in a Lancashire caravan park, it was beautifully written.

 

However, the op-eds arent proof read, or quality checked, which is inexcusable. 

 

The BBC is a media giant, there is no excuse for the embarrassing grammatical/contextual standard of the op-eds they publish.

Someone who "proudly" sponges off others by using a service they refuse to pay for, complains the service they refuse to pay for doesn't have the funds to pay someone else to spell check every article, on a service they've previously proclaimed they hate!

 

Maybe you should have made the title "How can I better highlight my rank hypocrisy?" :?

 

Edited by Magilla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, El Cid said:

I guess he is a minor fish not designated as a "serious foreign national offender" by the government. Not on that plane on Monday? Is it because he is white and rich?

Where do you think Italy should put him on a plane to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Magilla said:

Someone who "proudly" sponges off others by using a service they refuse to pay for, complains the service they refuse to pay for doesn't have the funds to pay someone else to spell check every article, on a service they've previously proclaimed they hate!

 

Maybe you should have made the title "How can I better highlight my rank hypocrisy?" :?

 

I wont give  money  to an organisation deeply involved with pedophiles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Magilla said:

Someone who "proudly" sponges off others by using a service they refuse to pay for, complains the service they refuse to pay for doesn't have the funds to pay someone else to spell check every article, on a service they've previously proclaimed they hate!

 

Maybe you should have made the title "How can I better highlight my rank hypocrisy?" :?

 

Are you having a bad day?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's about time politicians got a hold with this quango.Has anyone ever thought about the fact that Radio Sheffield have to many people in the studio presenting programs at the same time? For example on Ronay Robinsons daily programme they have one person for the weather,one person for reading sport headlines ,one person to read the news,all of which have probably no more than a 2 minute slot at a time.The whole organisation is over manned.I contacted the station twice asking what their annual budget was to no effect. Anyone know how to get the figures I'm asking about?

On another point,the BBC TV side are of no interest to me now.They have become an  irrelevant money wasting left wing organisation,  that make poor programmes and pay too much to their employees,£2million for Gary Lineker get real...get rid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chaddamp said:

It's about time politicians got a hold with this quango.Has anyone ever thought about the fact that Radio Sheffield have to many people in the studio presenting programs at the same time? For example on Ronay Robinsons daily programme they have one person for the weather,one person for reading sport headlines ,one person to read the news,all of which have probably no more than a 2 minute slot at a time.The whole organisation is over manned.I contacted the station twice asking what their annual budget was to no effect. Anyone know how to get the figures I'm asking about?

On another point,the BBC TV side are of no interest to me now.They have become an  irrelevant money wasting left wing organisation,  that make poor programmes and pay too much to their employees,£2million for Gary Lineker get real...get rid

How do you think that "news". "weather" and "sport" is collated?  It is a full time job writing bulletins and reading them on air. The presenter could not possibly do that whilst attending to the needs of his own programme.  Take, for instance, a Sports Producer. He/She will have to maintain close liaison with local teams, that means every individual involved, players, coaching staff, managers and owners....and not just football! Then going to matches/tournaments, recording interviews, editing them, writing up scripts.  I can assure you there is no over-manning in local radio, either BBC or commercial. Many people have to work shifts starting well before 6am and many don't get home before midnight.  You don't appear to know even half of the story. And I would point out that  BBC Local radio costs you precisely nothing whether you receive it off air, on line or whatever. You don't have to have a licence to receive it and you are not paying for it when you buy something which is the way commercial radio works.  I'm not saying it couldn't do better, because I think it is nowhere near as informative, up-to-date or as sharp as it was in the 70s and 80s, but your criticisms are unjustified and ill-founded. 

 

Edited by DavidFrance
Extended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.