Yet another case of a commercial rival to the BBC showing their bias and their willingness to fabricate criticism.
Daily Mail 13 March 2013:
The 'bedroom tax' is the new great lie of the Left and the BBC. How on earth can a small welfare cut be a tax?
The first rule of political propaganda is that if you repeat a plausible slogan enough times, and it goes unchallenged, it will eventually be widely believed.
So it has proved with the so-called ‘bedroom tax’. Invented by an obscure crossbench peer called Lord Best, seized upon by the Labour Party and magnified by the BBC, the emotive phrase has generally been accepted as proof of this Government’s wicked treatment of the poor.
But, of course, the bedroom tax is not a tax at all. A tax is a levy imposed by the State on the earnings of an individual or a company, or it is added to certain purchased goods. The ‘bedroom tax’ is a deduction in benefit, and is essentially voluntary.
Daily Mail 27 July 2013:
Middle-aged man in despair about bedroom tax cuts his own throat in middle of benefits advice office
So they criticise the BBC for using "an emotive phrase" because it's unfair to the government and isn't a tax, but happily use the very same wording in their own headlines.
If it's "wrong" for the BBC to use that name then isn't it wrong for the Daily Mail to use it? Or are they just hypocrites smearing a competitor to ITN for commercial reasons because the Daily Mail is a major shareholder of ITN?
Yet another case of a commercial rival to the BBC showing their bias and their willingness to fabricate criticism.
Daily Mail 13 March 2013:
Daily Mail 27 July 2013:
So they criticise the BBC for using "an emotive phrase" because it's unfair to the government and isn't a tax, but happily use the very same wording in their own headlines.
If it's "wrong" for the BBC to use that name then isn't it wrong for the Daily Mail to use it? Or are they just hypocrites smearing a competitor to ITN for commercial reasons because the Daily Mail is a major shareholder of ITN?
Careful, the forum police might show up and give you a ticking off for going off topic. Oh, wait, your comments are largley pro-BBC, so they won't.
Careful, the forum police might show up and give you a ticking off for going off topic. Oh, wait, your comments are largley pro-BBC, so they won't.
Given that the subject of this thread is an "issue blown up because of "anti-BBC" bias by private media owners", I would have thought zz9's post was entirely on topic, wouldn't you?
Given that the subject of this thread is an "issue blown up because of "anti-BBC" bias by private media owners", I would have thought zz9's post was entirely on topic, wouldn't you?
so *private media owners* can not be anti bbc why.
Careful, the forum police might show up and give you a ticking off for going off topic. Oh, wait, your comments are largley pro-BBC, so they won't.
The post wasn't pro BBC though. As far as I can tell he just highlighted the hypocrisy of the newspaper, which is nothing to do with the BBC. And as someone else posted, I don't even see how it is off topic.
Comments
Daily Mail 13 March 2013:
Daily Mail 27 July 2013:
So they criticise the BBC for using "an emotive phrase" because it's unfair to the government and isn't a tax, but happily use the very same wording in their own headlines.
If it's "wrong" for the BBC to use that name then isn't it wrong for the Daily Mail to use it? Or are they just hypocrites smearing a competitor to ITN for commercial reasons because the Daily Mail is a major shareholder of ITN?
Careful, the forum police might show up and give you a ticking off for going off topic. Oh, wait, your comments are largley pro-BBC, so they won't.
i do not why people can not be anti bbc.
The post wasn't pro BBC though. As far as I can tell he just highlighted the hypocrisy of the newspaper, which is nothing to do with the BBC. And as someone else posted, I don't even see how it is off topic.