Search results

Having stomped yet another opponent, Looney takes a moment to consider his awesome power and intellect:

And to think I said I was childish. Okay, lets be childish: Next one of us two to post in this thread admits that everything they said was utter tosh. Staaaaaarrrrting.................. Now!

Don't waste your time Looney, I didn't read The Guardian article. I also don't really care whether or where you went to university. I was just mocking you. Childish I know, but you do set yourself up for it.

Of course the ESRC, or Economic and Social Research Council funds post graduate qualifications in the "social sciences", like Business, Politics, Geography & Economics. The real sciences are dealt with by the Science & Technology Facilities Council. By the way, would you mind sharing details...

I just posted it because I knew it would annoy you given your weird view that science outranks all other academic pursuits. By the way, if subjects were ranked in such a way you can be sure that Economics would be perennial relegation strugglers at the very bottom of the science league, so...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/11/nobel-prize-economics-not-science-hubris-disaster

My own view is that the BBC is much the same as other public sector organisations. Like in schools, universities, local and central government there is probably a majority of liberals among the staff and of conservatives among the management. However, staff loyalty to the organisation's ethos...

Is that because they wouldn't have a ready made blog to cut and paste them from? http://biasedbbc.org/quotes-of-shame/ The website's editor is David Vance, a right wing commentator and losing 2010 candidate for the TUV (Traditional Unionist Voice) a Eurosceptic, socially conservative party...

All of which is subject to review by the Houses of Parliament when discussing charter review: http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/key-issues-parliament-2015/media/renewing-bbc-charter/

And a monitored complaints procedure that can allow for investigations into accusations of bias: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/contact_us/making_a_complaint.html

Oh, and governing body independent of management which has the aim of making decisions in the best interests of license payers: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/

What about having a code of conduct that requires impartiality and provides programme makers with guidance as to what this means? http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/impartiality

Its been fun Looney, but given the latest incomprehensible drivel you have provided in response to me and to LlcoolJ, its obvious that you are incapable of, or unwilling to, understand the debate you are attempting to engage in. Read back through your own posts and ask yourself what evidence...

Okay Looney, although I know this will be like trying to teach Norwegian to a duck, lets give it a go. I don't have a science degree, but you may be surprised to learn that supporting your argument with evidence is also required when studying most subjects. In fact, at degree and...

Of course, your examples that the most well respected broadcast organisation in the world is really a tool of the Trotskyite left have been sourced from peer reviewed academic texts and journals beyond suspicion of any kind of partiality? Or are they from: 1) Migrantwatch, 2) Breitbart, 3)...

You are right, I would have to. Luckily I didn't say that and don't think that. I said that there wasn't bias. Easy for you to miss I know because I only said it and then repeated it, referencing back to the previous post that I said it in. Perhaps I should have been clearer, written it in...

As Basil Fawlty said "Please try to understand before one of us dies!" You said there were no perceptions of BBC bias from the left. I showed you links that show there are. You want to argue that these perceptions of bias have no basis in fact. Why would I argue with this? I said it myself in...

Go and look up the word 'perception' and then try again.

The first part of your first sentence is irrelevant as I provided the links only to show that there are perceptions of bias from the left, not that these perceptions have any substance. The rest of the sentence is unintelligible. Its ironic that, to support an argument that another media source...

You do go on and on. I can accept that you might not read what I have written before arguing, but I would hope that you would at least read what you have written. The first two links were obviously not provided to support an argument that there is a left wing bias, they were provided to...