Quote from: MattyFez on July 28, 2014, 12:25:08 PM

Quote from: Trojanlord on July 28, 2014, 12:24:08 PM

Quote from: MattyFez on July 28, 2014, 12:20:50 PM

Quote from: Trojanlord on July 28, 2014, 12:19:59 PM

Quote from: MattyFez on July 28, 2014, 12:13:15 PM

Quote from: Trojanlord on July 28, 2014, 11:45:18 AM

Quote from: SuperIrish on July 28, 2014, 11:32:14 AM

I'd probably say BBC, but then again I haven't really been exposed to other news sites apart from the papers.

Quote from: SuperIrish on July 28, 2014, 11:32:14 AM

I'd probably say BBC,

Quote from: SuperIrish on July 28, 2014, 11:32:14 AM

BBC

> BBC
> Unbiased
Pick one.

Are you being serious?

Completely.

The BBC are incredibly unbiased. Have you even watched the stuff they report?

I take it your not an Anglo? Their biases should be plain as day if you are.

I live in England.

I'm actually shocked that you don't see how biased they are then.

How are they biased?

RT, Al Jazeera (although slightly doubtful) and BBC

BBC is unbiased, they have to be, British law demands that the BBC be wholly impartial as it is funded by the TV license

> Implying that just because the government said something that that's actually how it works.
Do you not remember what went on in the last decade?

Quote from: Spr?ngli on July 28, 2014, 12:27:14 PM

RT, Al Jazeera (although slightly doubtful) and BBC

BBC is unbiased, they have to be, British law demands that the BBC be wholly impartial as it is funded by the TV license

> Implying that just because the government said something that that's actually how it works.
Do you not remember what went on in the last decade?

Do you mean the hacking scandal, or something else?

Quote from: Trojanlord on July 28, 2014, 12:31:11 PM

Quote from: Spr?ngli on July 28, 2014, 12:27:14 PM

RT, Al Jazeera (although slightly doubtful) and BBC

BBC is unbiased, they have to be, British law demands that the BBC be wholly impartial as it is funded by the TV license

> Implying that just because the government said something that that's actually how it works.
Do you not remember what went on in the last decade?

Do you mean the hacking scandal, or something else?

I wasn't referring to the hacking scandal, AFAIK that was confined to the newspapers like the SUN etc. What I meant was stuff like Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, Russia being responsible for some Donetsk rebels shooting down an aircraft with some of their hardware, the Cameron government saying it's "cutting the budget" when spending remains the same and all that happened is some departments funding gets switched around etc. Just because the government said it doesn't make it true.

Why is Fox News even an option