The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

BBC blames everything on Brexit proved

BBC has been blaming the closure of the Honda car plant in Swindon, in a statement from Honda they said that the closure has nothing at all to do with Brexit. However still days on BBC says "Brexit uncertainty" caused the closure, and they even go on to blame the PM "If the PM had managed to secure a deal faster would those jobs have been saved." This is a clear example of how bias BBC is against Conservative, and how they may not want to but do come across as bias when they should be objective.

Scroll to see replies

....
You need to provide evidence.
The crux of your argument rests on taking Honda at their word that it indeed had nothing to do with Brexit.

Supposing they did move as a result of Brexit, why would they reveal that fact? They have no political capital to gain from doing so, which may harm their business and reputation both in the UK and at home, and possibly even risk a diplomatic incident. It would make more sense to deny it, to try and maintain good relations with the UK government and it's customer base in the UK, if it was to do with Brexit.

Thus, they would say that it had nothing to do with Brexit in either case realistically, and you can't really make the assumption that they are "telling the truth" in that case...so the rest of the argument falls apart, because it might well be due to Brexit.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by TensorTympani
BBC has been blaming the closure of the Honda car plant in Swindon, in a statement from Honda they said that the closure has nothing at all to do with Brexit. However still days on BBC says "Brexit uncertainty" caused the closure, and they even go on to blame the PM "If the PM had managed to secure a deal faster would those jobs have been saved." This is a clear example of how bias BBC is against Conservative, and how they may not want to but do come across as bias when they should be objective.

You need to show us the article as people are unlikely to take your word for it.
Are you able to do that?

Heres a BBC article

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47287386
Honda confirms Swindon car plant closure

Within three lines it has...

Honda said the move was due to global changes in the car industry and the need to launch electric vehicles, and it had nothing to do with Brexit.

Awaiting your evidence off BBC reporting to back up your claims. Can you do that?

Most businesses when making decisions will consider a number of factors and if they feel it is a factor then they will say so.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by Decahedron
You need to provide evidence.

Yesterday on newswatch provides all the evidence.
Original post by TensorTympani
Yesterday on newswatch provides all the evidence.


Newswatch is viewer opinions of BBC aired news stories...not the BBC's opinions...
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by artful_lounger
Newswatch is viewer opinions of BBC aired news stories...not the BBC's opinions...

They provided evidence of the time at when Honda said that it was not caused by Brexit, then they give the time of the next time live when a BBC reporter still said it was caused by Brexit...... :sorry:
Original post by TensorTympani
They provided evidence of the time at when Honda said that it was not caused by Brexit, then they give the time of the next time live when a BBC reporter still said it was caused by Brexit...... :sorry:

I have literally no idea what you are trying to say here.

You've also still not provided any of the relevant footage...and ignored the fact as I pointed out, your argument is flawed anyway.
Original post by artful_lounger
I have literally no idea what you are trying to say here.

You've also still not provided any of the relevant footage...and ignored the fact as I pointed out, your argument is flawed anyway.

I'll see which argument is flawed.
You wanted footage:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0c3j8fr/newswatch-22022019
The first point in the video provides the times and the footages of the BBC reporters saying that it was caused by Brexit even after Honda made it clear that it was not caused by Brexit.
Original post by TensorTympani
I'll see which argument is flawed.
You wanted footage:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0c3j8fr/newswatch-22022019
The first point in the video provides the times and the footages of the BBC reporters saying that it was caused by Brexit even after Honda made it clear that it was not caused by Brexit.


You've still not actually grasped that the argument is flawed because you're assuming Honda is fully truthful and correct in their statement...which as above, is not a valid assumption because they have no reason to admit closing it due to Brexit, were that the case. So it's perfectly valid for the BBC to question that and suggest the possibility of Brexit being the reason, because it may be, regardless of their press release on the matter. It's rather naive to assume they're telling the truth.
Original post by artful_lounger
You've still not actually grasped that the argument is flawed because you're assuming Honda is fully truthful and correct in their statement...which as above, is not a valid assumption because they have no reason to admit closing it due to Brexit, were that the case. So it's perfectly valid for the BBC to question that and suggest the possibility of Brexit being the reason, because it may be, regardless of their press release on the matter. It's rather naive to assume they're telling the truth.

We are not talking about what it "could" and based on assumptions we are talking about what it is, and what has been officially said and anything that has not been officially said is bias.
Original post by TensorTympani
We are not talking about what it "could" and based on assumptions we are talking about what it is, and what has been officially said and anything that has not been officially said is bias.


BP said officially that Corexit would not harm the environment and had been tested for use in the oil spill - this was a lie, and they knew it, and it greatly increased the toxicity of the oil in the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Hitler officially said he wouldn't invade Poland, and then he did anyway. All propaganda, past and present, is "official".

If you take everything that has been officially said as true without critically examining the motives of those "officially" making those statements, you are going to be very easily manipulated...
Original post by artful_lounger
BP said officially that Corexit would not harm the environment and had been tested for use in the oil spill - this was a lie, and they knew it, and it greatly increased the toxicity of the oil in the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Hitler officially said he wouldn't invade Poland, and then he did anyway. All propaganda, past and present, is "official".

If you take everything that has been officially said as true without critically examining the motives of those "officially" making those statements, you are going to be very easily manipulated...

So I am going to be manipulated by cunning people like you?
Original post by TensorTympani
So I am going to be manipulated by cunning people like you?

I guess providing a counter-argument is manipulation now.
Original post by stoyfan
I guess providing a counter-argument is manipulation now.

I provided footage and evidence what more do you want?
What are you saying are you even reading the conversation?
If you read it correctly I don't think that you may have understood it so please read it again. Artful clearly said that I am going to be manipulated.
Please don't talk when you have point which is flawed. People these days...cough cough @stoyfan
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by TensorTympani
I provided footage and evidence what more do you want?

You may not know this, but just because you provide evidence, it doesn't make your argument correct or waterproof.
Original post by stoyfan
You may not know this, but just because you provide evidence, it doesn't make your argument correct or waterproof.

Please can you read properly.
I provided footage and evidence what more do you want?
What are you saying are you even reading the conversation?
If you read it correctly I don't think that you may have understood it so please read it again. Artful clearly said that I am going to be manipulated.
Please don't talk when you have point which is flawed. People these days...cough cough stoyfan
Original post by stoyfan
You may not know this, but just because you provide evidence, it doesn't make your argument correct or waterproof.

What is you point and where are you heading with your argument?
You said "I guess providing a counter-argument is manipulation now."
Ok, I replied by saying
"What are you saying are you even reading the conversation?
If you read it correctly I don't think that you may have understood it so please read it again. Artful clearly said that I am going to be manipulated.
Please don't talk when you have point which is flawed. People these days...cough cough stoyfan"
Original post by stoyfan
I guess providing a counter-argument is manipulation now.

Is it really that surprising that someone who makes claims of bias doesn't, A) present evidence and B) listen/acknowledge counter arguments/rebuttals?

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you