The (not so) impartial and emotive reporting of news via the MSM- particularly the BBC

I have noticed over the years, not only a decline in reporting standards of the MSM….actually the media as a whole, but also the ‘trend’ for bringing emotions into reporting which has the effect of removing impartiality.

Furthermore, those not only reporting but those in a position of responsibility who are being included in said reports also remove their position of impartiality by making emotive comments. Comments, they all seem to think we should agree with……..to me it comes across as an opportunity for government propaganda.

The reporting today of the deaths of several illegal rag head cunts in the channel overnight really brought it to a head for me. Here are some examples:

Headline on home page reads: ‘Four people dead in Channel crossing tragedy’ and here’s the editorial:
Kent on Line

‘Dover MP Natalie Elphicke said she was “very saddened” by the tragic loss of life. She added: “My thoughts and prayers with all those involved.”

Suella Braverman said the tragedy was a “sobering reminder that we have to end illegal crossings”. She added: “This is the day to express our sympathy with the families of the victims and thank the rescue services.”

These kind of statements in so way are pretty much saying ‘we cocked up, and maybe we should have sent a proper boat to Calais to bring you back, so it’s our fault you’ve died’

Fuck me, these are illegals……you can make a ‘professional’ statement without the need to say how sorry you are, or what needs to happen, because if you don’t then anything else you say can and will garner sympathy for these illegals…maybe that’s the narrative.

BBC interviewer on R4 this morning was reporting on these ‘traumatic events’ (yup- that’s how it was reported, then went on to say how upsetting it was and ‘sad’. Surely it is for ME to decide if I consider this story (or any other story for that matter) sad, traumatic a tragedy or any other emotion…..not an ‘impartial’ reporter.

The new reports should report the facts in a professional manner without and agenda to influence thought, but that’s the way the MSM now operate.

I forgot to add:

This is the BBC’s own ethics guide on emotive reporting from 2014 I found.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/emotivism_1.shtml

It would seem they don’t now follow their own guidelines

Nominated by: Chuff Chugger

And on a similar note with the Beeb and MSM in general, there’s this from Themagiccunt

The mendacious BBC and the rest of the MSM

This may have already been nominated recently, if so please disregard.
Follow the science we were told in the early days of Covid, anyone who tried to disagree with the official narrative was silenced and demonised, woe betide those who questioned the safety and efficacy of the untested experimental vaccines millions were forced to take.

Well, it is now becoming clear that we were repeatedly lied to by the medical establishment, politicians and the poodles of the liberal media. There was never any justification for immunising young healthy people, but they went ahead anyway.

Result? More children and young adults have died from vaccine complications than the virus itself. A lot more. With the possible exception of the very old it now appears likely the “cure” is more dangerous than the disease. I refused to have the booster this year but was amazed that it was still being pushed for groups at very low risk from Covid. The NHS have failed miserably at protecting the public, though GPs were very good at protecting themselves, hiding under the bed for months while their patients had to muddle along.

So where are the outraged headlines and TV reports on this scandal? Is it anything to do with the cowardice of so many who were only following orders and now hope their actions, or inaction, do not come under scrutiny?

Watch Dr John Campbell’s Youtube video of the recent parliamentary debate on the subject.

Helpful Link provided by: Chuff Chugger

azangru.livejournal. News Link