pwa wrote:There is no need to edit out anger or unreasonable argument because the viewer can draw his/her own conclusions, but there is a need to edit out things that it is illegal to broadcast, such as somebody inciting others to harm gays, muslims or whoever. That is why a time delay has to happen.
I don't agree. I don't accept your argument.
If someone breaks the law then given clear documented evidence they will be prosecuted in the normal way. It will be rightly publicized, and end of story.
The BEEB obviously don't want their programme to be a platform for illegal comments. If someone stands up and says they hate everyone from a particular ethnic group, yes they can be prosecuted and the media can criticise them, but their view will be out there and doing the damage it was intended to do. The knowledge that unacceptable stuff will be removed before airing must also help to maintain order in the venue. Imagine how tedious it would be if every other edition had a protest stunt holding up proceedings.
The audience is vetted; to what extent in the age of big data is uncertain. The questions are totally vetted. The venue is totally secure. I don't think in the light of all that your argument stacks up.
Passions and strong feeling get aroused, that's ok, surely? Same as on here if it stays civil and reasonably polite, it's ok- good even, for our democracy. What is not good for our democracy is a biased press. Much powerful nuance can be achieved by a little clever editing.
Furthrmore you have not seen fit to comment regarding my points regarding the OP clip.
Up thread you stated that people will see through a "ranter" and draw their own conclusions. That seems like a contradiction to your last post?
That political influence has been present in some form I think is beyond question. (no pun intended!)
PDQ Mobile wrote:The audience is vetted; to what extent in the age of big data is uncertain. The questions are totally vetted. The venue is totally secure. I don't think in the light of all that your argument stacks up.
Passions and strong feeling get aroused, that's ok, surely? Same as on here if it stays civil and reasonably polite, it's ok- good even, for our democracy. What is not good for our democracy is a biased press. Much powerful nuance can be achieved by a little clever editing.
Furthrmore you have not seen fit to comment regarding my points regarding the OP clip.
That political influence has been present in some form I think is beyond question. (no pun intended!)
The media is biased? I think QT tries not to be, though getting that right is tricky. And left-leaning folk see right-leaning bias in programmes where right-leaning folk see left-leaning bias.
If I've missed your points about the OP clip it is unintentional.
PDQ Mobile wrote:The media influences. It's a given. QT just as anywhere else.
You seem deeply trusting; I, on the other hand, am deeply distrusting.
My points about the OP clip are still there. page 5!
Having had a look at that innocuous clip I'm not sure what you are objecting to. Do you approve of JRM and hate Dimbleby picking on him for having been a posh kid at Eton? And D is defending GM against (presumably) unreasonable attack from someone in the the audience, thereby upholding the right of GM to put forward her views. And taking a man to task for alleged holocaust denial, putting him on the spot and demanding that he says plainly what he thinks. Griffin came out of that appearance very badly if I remember correctly. Clips picked because of what they say about Dimbleby I think.
Your assessment is different to mine. Which I already gave.
That assessment, and it is considered, is that after twenty five years, which include the Iraq war, the crash of 2008, and many other important events, is that it is slanted to a political end.
I also feel you overlook the visual power of TV, many avid TV watchers do. It is subtle and easily manipulated. Yet has huge power to influence. That is the primary reason for the editing.IMV.
Both clips for example, show JRM in a favourable light, dig deeper and you will find he is not Mr Nice at all.