WHY are BBC calling the libiyan people 'rebels' AND NOT "revolutionaries?"

The BBC shouldn't be calling the people in Libya 'rebel's'. It's terms that means there up to no good and are to blame. I thought the BBC was supposed to be an impartial and bias organisation. Clearly not.

Reply 21

RyanT

15

Original post by sixthformer

How can they be neutral? Are they trying to be fair to gaddafi?

There is only one side, a dictator surported by western governments (proof of trading weapons) is being ousted by the opressed people of libiya, who are not REBELS, but A REVOLUTION

Being true to your user name I see.

They are not revolutionaries until they have a revolution. At the moment, they have a revolt, not a revolution.

Revolts involve rebels. Revolutions may also involve rebels. Rebelling against Gadaffi's rule is a perfectly acceptable label for those who are doing that. It's also respectable.

The problem with the word 'rebel' exists in your head.

Reply 22

Aj12

18

Original post by sixthformer

do you want me to call you a rebel?

no, it's degrading.

it's the same synonim for a bandit, or people with no real aim or goal.

"you rebel"

can you see how clever MEDIA are?

Call them revolutionary forces, because it is LIBIYA revolution, and i hope the USA does NOT meddle with who they elect

"insurgent: a person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority (especially in the hope of improving conditions)"

Reply 23

JIRAIYA-ERO-SENNIN

19

Original post by sixthformer

How can they be neutral? Are they trying to be fair to gaddafi?

There is only one side, a dictator surported by western governments (proof of trading weapons) is being ousted by the opressed people of libiya, who are not REBELS, but A REVOLUTION

yes, they are trying to be politically neutral. BBC news reporters are advised not to use politically incendiary language in cases like this. the role of BBC news is to present the facts not their judgment of the facts, they are meant to present an amoral account of events and refrain from making normative judgments. if you want to hear judgments about the Libyan crisis, listen to political pundits rather than news journalists. the term 'rebel' is not an incendiary word when used in its correct context.

Reply 24

JIRAIYA-ERO-SENNIN

19

my word, whenever anything happens in the Arab world people always come up with their logically destitute diatribes.

Reply 25

garethDT

13

It's not Libyans who need to unite, it's not Arabs, it's all of us.

Reply 26

yellowmeringue

2

Someone's got a whole lotta Libya-lovin' going on....

Okay, in all seriousness - does it matter? Revolutionaries or rebels, they are all dissidents at the end of the day.

Reply 27

Nigel9

12

Better the devil you know

Reply 28

AP1989

11

Rebels are communists.

Reply 29

lonelykatana

17

Original post by sixthformer

Notice the subtle hint? Call them rebels, let them get rid of Gaddafi, and then, say how can "Rebels" form a government , so we'll help?

i know there are other libya threads, but i HAD to post this.

Opinions?

Libiya will not split into east or west, weakening middle eastern countries is a well known tactic. These are not my own words, it was ofcourse, israeli and us governments who said this 30 years back/mentioned it.

I don't want a 'provisional western government'

i don't want east or west libiya

i want a powerful, strong, UNITED libiya

Because they are rebelling against the current establishment. There for, regardless of the fact they might be fighting for a brighter future, they are REBELS.
Its a rebellion, many rebellions have been for a greater good. The word rebel does not define good or bad.

Did you learn nothing from Starwars?
The good guys in that were also called the rebels.

Reply 30

callum9999

16

Original post by jblackmoustache

The Beeb is the tool of the government. Impartial my arse. Their reporting in Palestine sucks. Gadaffi has done some bad **** yes, and the libyan people have geunine worries and I Hope tgey unite to crush their govt. Gadaffi, in his speeches He actually speaks sense when he talks about British foreign policy. Listen to Farrakhans take on the situation. Libya is winning the argument. I mean where the hell were America in Congo? They don't care about the people. Iraq part 2

1. It's clearly not a tool of the government - hence the arguments they occasionally have.

2. What Palestinian coverage? They go far further than most other British networks do in highlighting the suffering Israel inflicts on them - certainly a LOT further than the UK government (who is supposedly controlling it?).

3. To care enough to intervene in one conflict does not mean you are obliged to intervene everywhere. I'm not too familiar with the Congo, but could they have gone in with a few airstrikes and it would have sorted itself out? I doubt it. Had intervening in Libya involved a full-on invasion like Iraq, no-one would do it. The only reason we are involved is because it's easy. Read into that what you will.

Why do people keep specifically referring to Britain and the US? There is broad international support for this. It is not like Iraq at all...

And the original poster needs to stop getting caught up in semantics. They are called rebels because they are rebelling - it shouldn't take a genius to figure that out. It's only derogatory if that's the emphasise you place on it - it's pretty clear the coverage by the media puts the rebels in a positive light.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 31

milesofsea

15

Original post by RyanT

Being true to your user name I see.

They are not revolutionaries until they have a revolution. At the moment, they have a revolt, not a revolution.

Revolts involve rebels. Revolutions may also involve rebels. Rebelling against Gadaffi's rule is a perfectly acceptable label for those who are doing that. It's also respectable.

The problem with the word 'rebel' exists in your head.

And 'revolters' hardly sounds better than rebels LOL.

I agree with the OP to an extent, because the popular and immediate perception of the word 'rebel' is that of people doing wrong; it has negative connotations. Even if the technical definition fits the current activities perfectly well.

For example the Syrians are being called protesters by the BBC because that's exactly what they're doing at this stage; protesting against government laws rather than trying to remove it altogether.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 32

There will be Particles

1

Original post by sixthformer

Notice the subtle hint? Call them rebels, let them get rid of Gaddafi, and then, say how can "Rebels" form a government , so we'll help?

i know there are other libya threads, but i HAD to post this.

Opinions?

Libiya will not split into east or west, weakening middle eastern countries is a well known tactic. These are not my own words, it was ofcourse, israeli and us governments who said this 30 years back/mentioned it.

I don't want a 'provisional western government'

i don't want east or west libiya

i want a powerful, strong, UNITED libiya

Ok... nice to know :s-smilie:

Maybe leave the decision to the people of libya? :biggrin:

And what's wrong with the term rebels? They're rebelling against the illegitimate authority of gaddafi the tyrant.

Also rebel isn't negative in any way, it's the correct term to use in this situation "A rebel is a participant in a rebellion; or more generally, an individual who resists authority or control."

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 33

Doyle&TheFourFathers

11

Original post by sixthformer

Libiya will not split into east or west, weakening middle eastern countries is a well known tactic. These are not my own words, it was ofcourse, israeli and us governments who said this 30 years back/mentioned it.

I don't want a 'provisional western government'

i don't want east or west libiya

i want a powerful, strong, UNITED libiya

i dont think anyone cares what you want, particularly on a student forum

Reply 34

NellGwynne

2

A. Because I suppose it would be a biased stand point.
B. Because I think the word 'revoloutionary' died with Guevara.

Reply 35

There will be Particles

1

Original post by Aj12

"insurgent: a person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority (especially in the hope of improving conditions)"

Yeah but that honestly would hint some association with anti-US insurgent forces in Iraq etc.

Reply 36

OMGWTFBBQ

17

Original post by Aj12

No one wants the rebels to split and the rebels are advancing as we speak anyway.

I did't say anything about the country splitting. The rebel council is being prodded into forming a proper government so they can take over after Gadaffi and get the country ready for legit elections.

lol.

Reply 37

Legends

Have you thought about the fact that they're rebelling against a government? Rebel: opposing or taking arms against a government or ruler.