CNN anchor just called Osama Bin Laden 'this guy'. This CNN coverage is insipid, along with the terrible adverts saying 'Go beyond borders, we're breaking down barriers, we'll give you the complete picture, we'll put the news under a prism'. What a load of guff!
On a side point, how do BBC News book guests like 7/7 relatives? How do they get in contact with them, and other guests in general, and in such short notice?
Now is the time I wish I had a stream for BBC World News. Might get a satellite sorted eventually. How are they covering it so far? I'm surprised some form of simulcast hasn't been done for BBC NC/WN.
Livestation works well, but you'll need to buy a non UK IP proxy
Geeta GM is presenting with someone I've never seen before. No 11am headlines, just continuing coverage.
But UK public service broadcasters have a duty to be 'balanced' at least.
I don't think they are being, they are repeating propoganda.
What choice would they have if they couldn't find anyone to say "this is a bad thing"?
Don't they have a duty to find someone to provide that view?
Perhaps I wouldn't agree with it: but surely there is an argument here that someone has been assassinated? An individual is being lambasted by the media as responsible for crimes they haven't been charged with, convicted or sentenced for.
Surely it's wrong for PSBs to take such a one-sided view without such a process having taken place?
I appreciate that Bin Laden doesn't probably deserve the defence of such rules, but they are there for a reason.
But UK public service broadcasters have a duty to be 'balanced' at least.
I don't think they are being, they are repeating propoganda.
What choice would they have if they couldn't find anyone to say "this is a bad thing"?
Don't they have a duty to find someone to provide that view?
Perhaps I wouldn't agree with it: but surely there is an argument here that someone has been assassinated? An individual is being lambasted by the media as responsible for crimes they haven't been charged with, convicted or sentenced for.
Osama Bin Laden said he planned the attacks of 9/11, and gave the order.
On the BBC, well done Babita! I've lost all skepticism for her ability - vey calm, composed and factual. CNN on the other hand, the less said the better. Why put on American Morning around the world to presumably bump World One? Now we've got disjointed coverage that is being 'branded' as World One from Hala Gorani in Atlanta.
This CNN coverage is insipid, along with the terrible adverts saying 'Go beyond borders, we're breaking down barriers, we'll give you the complete picture, we'll put the news under a prism'. What a load of guff!
But UK public service broadcasters have a duty to be 'balanced' at least.
I don't think they are being, they are repeating propoganda.
What choice would they have if they couldn't find anyone to say "this is a bad thing"?
Don't they have a duty to find someone to provide that view?
Perhaps I wouldn't agree with it: but surely there is an argument here that someone has been assassinated? An individual is being lambasted by the media as responsible for crimes they haven't been charged with, convicted or sentenced for.
How can you put any spin or balance on the death of someone responsible for the worlds biggest terrorist attack? Presumably only Al Qaeda think it's a bad thing, and there would be absolute outrage if they were given air time on the BBC and for it to be balanced, they wouldn't be allowed to challenge them.
Those who seem to be against it aren't necessarily bothered about his death, more the repercussions of it, and that is being covered in good depth.
If rolling news existed in 1945, would you have wanted balanced news on the death of Hitler? Balanced coverage is essential, but there are always exceptions to the rule and certain situations where it is just impossible or where feelings are more or less universal and said coverage is irrelevent.