Murdoch: "We are better" than those clowns at the BBC

[Tahoma 2,292]

It exists only between a handful of multinational media conglomerates.

So you admit it exists.

Maybe you're right. Sometimes I can't decide what to watch between all of those shopping channels and all of those televangelists.

Or, if you're in the mood for politics, Maddow or Hannity. No competition? Get the fuсk outta here.

Faux or MSNBC? Now you're down to two competitors. Some "competition!"

Let's not forget CNN, where it's all about what their viewers are telling them on Twitter. Just sayin.

I was trying to forget CNN. Now see what you've done!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

CNN anchorwoman: PiggyPete from Akron writes, "why is Obama being such a Muslim?".

/opens mouth slightly, either in polite outrage or because she wants to suck Pete's diсk

CNN anchorwoman: I guess the issue lives. Just sayin.

[Peikko 1,575]

Murdoch is great, he publishes boobs and sells access to the greatest sporting moments in your very own living room. What else is there?

[Tahoma 2,292]

CNN anchorwoman: PiggyPete from Akron writes, "why is Obama being such a Muslim?".

/opens mouth slightly, either in polite outrage or because she wants to suck Pete's diсk

CNN anchorwoman: I guess the issue lives. Just sayin.

[Peikko 1,575]

Regarding the BBC, I actually think there is merit in the argument that it can be both too pc, and too 'popularist' at one and the same time, something that is peculiar to BBC management.

The recent Ross/Brandgate illustrates the former - such a lot of nonsense, that really annoyed me and then this tendency in political interviews to interrupt, be brusque and antagonistic towards politicians just in order to be able to say that they are being 'tough'. They have never needed to do this because the questions posed, at least in the radio political shows are genuinely tough. There is absolutely no need to bark out the questions just to appeal to the sort of people that don't listen to these shows anyway.