posted on June 16, 2005 09:48:00 AM
"NOBODY can deny public TV has better programming."
Yeah, all those British sitcoms are SOOO much higher quality than those in the US. Or not!
They do have some good science shows. If the Discovery Channel or Science Channel would get back to their roots and move away from the continuous showings of "Shark Week" and other lowbrow junk, they could easily replace PBS.
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
posted on June 16, 2005 09:52:11 AM
Granted, Replay, some British comedies are just as stupid as American sitcoms.
But there are exceptional ones also.
Have YOU an example of bias on public TV.....just asking because the righties in here sure shut up fast(or go off topic) to cover up the fact that they have no facts
posted on June 16, 2005 10:40:20 AM
It's been so long since I watched any kind of news program on PBS that I couldn't comment.
I will definitely go so far as to say NPR (radio) is VERY liberal. I don't have any specific examples, as I don't listen much to NPR anymore either, but you could tell just by listening to the tone of their voices and the spin on the news that they weren't on the side of the conservatives. I would ASSUME that public TV has gone the same route.
But when I don't really know what I'm talking about, I'll admit it. This is one of those times. I'm inclined to agree with Linda, but will admit I am basing this on information that is several years old.
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
posted on June 16, 2005 04:45:40 PM
"You can't judge the facts in a story based on the tone of voice of the announcer."
OK, now THAT I'll take issue with. You don't have to dispute the "facts" to show bias. If Bush sends more troops to Iraq, and the reporter says "GWB sent another 1000 troops to Iraq today" and you can just hear the disgust and hatred of GWB in his voice, then I would count that as bias. The facts are most certainly true, but the facts are only part of the presentation. The tone and manner of their voices (on radio) count as commentary as far as I'm concerned.
The same would go with a smirk or eye roll with a TV reporter.
"Do you know that last year a study on NPR showed they had interviewed more Republicans than Democrats."
I don't see where that means anything. If the interviewers asked questions along the lines of "how many babies did you eat last year" to the Republicans and "How many homeless poor did you feed" to the Democrats, the exact numbers don't mean much. You can be plenty biased while interviewing the other side. Ask Hannity or Rush, if you want opposite examples.
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
[ edited by replaymedia on Jun 16, 2005 04:49 PM ]
posted on June 17, 2005 05:44:01 AM
Sorry, Replay, I still have not seen even ONE example of bias on public TV .
Hannity or Rush.....sorry again....those two rabid hate mongering neanderthals are perfect examples of bias but no one and nothing on public TV comes even close to their antics, lies, distortions, and total lack of ethics.
posted on June 17, 2005 06:21:11 PM
Kiara, I see from another thread you're getting a little sassy ....are you watching that subversive commie Red Green again ?
You can't fool the neocons ...they know that "Red Green" is secret Canadian Liberal code words for Communist tree hugger
