HA
It might be true that World's news output remains excellent, but I'm afraid this is more than can be said in terms of the overall journalistic content. There was a time when weekend programmes were aimed at delivering extra interviews and analysis of the wolrd's economic and political shape, thus adding to the dedication of the channel to provide a picture of the issues that make the global agenda. I feel that nowadays that dedication fails to materialize in the weekend programming. The've opted for a more lifestyle-like kind of output, which creates a discrepancy between weekdays and weekends that is almost comparable to CNBC's. Apart from Dateline London and some occasional interviews, I seldom watch the weekends programmes.
On to the FoxNews allusion in the Sunday Times' article now. FoxNews isn't a newschannel, whatever themselves may claim to be. It is sort of an opinion station where a handful of so-called journalists with strong views and sharp minds come up to, in ordrer to express their beliefs. The rest of the output stems from an attempt to persuade viewers that those people are journalists and that therefore their discourse is fully trustworthy and shouldn't be taken with a grain of salt. However appalling BBCWorld's output may have become, it is purely illegitimate to purport to compare it to the one of a disguised-as news channel.
On to the FoxNews allusion in the Sunday Times' article now. FoxNews isn't a newschannel, whatever themselves may claim to be. It is sort of an opinion station where a handful of so-called journalists with strong views and sharp minds come up to, in ordrer to express their beliefs. The rest of the output stems from an attempt to persuade viewers that those people are journalists and that therefore their discourse is fully trustworthy and shouldn't be taken with a grain of salt. However appalling BBCWorld's output may have become, it is purely illegitimate to purport to compare it to the one of a disguised-as news channel.