During an election? I thought they had to be impartial but the BBC have edited a clip of Boris Johnson to make him appear better. Is that actually allowed?
If you're on about the debate last night they have edited all four. One I've seen shows the highlights and one shows the lowlights which was entertaining.
I mean a particular clip when Boris Johnson was laughed at by the audience when questioned on something. The BBC have edited out the laughs to make it appear he was better received than he was
They have to be able to edit mate, otherwise, if a politician rambled on for four hours, they'd have to show the whole lot. If you believe the edit changed the meaning of what Johnson said you can make a complaint to offcom
It's not that it changed the meaning of what he said. I just didn't think they'd be allowed to edit the situation to create a false reality. I understand they can edit from a time point of view but find it astonishing they can edit the reality. Is editing out laughter really any different than for example editing the people in the background to add in or take out certain people? Edit in a load of Jewish people cheering when Corbyn says something for example.
It’s a disgrace what they’ve done with that clip. They’ve clearly taken the laughing out to make Johnson look better.
Isn’t there a BBC poster on here? I seem to remember him defending them a lot in the past. Would love to know when they became the propaganda arm of the Tories.
Don’t forget the “mistake” with the wreath at the Cenotaph - the one where Johnson put down a red wreath upside down! Miraculously, at the specific moment, he was seen putting down a green wreath (from 2016 or 2018, can’t remember which) - the beeb said it was an editing mistake! Really?
It’s not illegal but it’s definitely against the BBC charter to edit things to give a different impression. Removing laughter and adding applause is the sort of thing you expect in Russia or North Korea. I’ve lost a lot of respect for the BBC over the last 2 or 3 years.
I've now seen it and I'm not impressed. I don't really like criticising the BBC, particularly with regard to political bias, as for every example of supposed Tory bias someone can usually give an example of where they believe there is bias toward the Labour Party. If you're being criticised by both sides, each claiming you're in support of the other, you've probably got the balance about right. But I expect a lot better from a public service broadcaster than this. They had no obligation to repeat that section at all or even report on it, it was one of many questions asked, any of which could have been shown on a news bulletin. But if they're going to show that one, the decision to edit out the audience reaction was a very poor one and gave an entirely different impression than the reality. Very disappointing.
They also edited out him stuttering at the start of his reply to make him look a lot more decisive and authoritative. It must have taken a fair bit of work to do that level of editing and it's totally unacceptable.
It all boils down to money and the wages these BBC employees are on, Fiona Bruce and rest must be in the 5% of top earners who will be taxed more under labour £20 a week more I read and remember it's us that pay them, That's my opinion why they try to make the Buffoon look something like.
Yes, that really was appalling. Far worse than this. For anyone who doesn't know they broadcast events in the wrong order. The batten charge by the police looked as though it came after the miners charged the police lines. It looked like the police were protecting themselves. That wasn't the case at all. The police were the aggressors and the miners were defending themselves. The official line remains that it was a mistake. This can happen. If the time code isn’t synched between cameras it can easily happen. I've seen football highlights edited in the wrong order. But for something of this magnitude where the course of events were witnessed by so many journalists, I'm not so sure.