Mungler Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 Keith, easy there tiger. It would be bizarre if you left the site in circumstances where the BBC reported an incident correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 The whole idea od debate and discussion is to have more than one point of view. Keith was putting the side that he knows and I personally don't think he should be berrated for it. Keep posting Keith P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cranfield Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 What's more likely is that when Radio Four broadcast at lunchtime, they didn't have a definitive version from the police and so relied on newsagencies like AP and PA. Speaking as a former BBC news journalist and current journalist trainer, they would have taken the common aspects of the 2 corroborating agency reports to make the story. They would have got the word pellets from the description of the injuries. I didn't hear it but would take a guess that the air gun reference came from the reference to pellets and was maybe in an interview where the presenter will have been asking about the weapon. When the police statement became available they changed to shotgun as per the police interview available as video on a link put up in an earlier posting. Without wanting to start a row like y'day and derail the thread, news reports are never infallible and are only as good as the info made available by police, hospitals and eye-witnesses, none of whom can always give a 100% accurate account. so journos have to make judgements and sometimes they are wrong but not always through their own failings. It's often simply because insufficient info is available but people will still want that news in their bulletins. Not that journos don't make mistakes - they do - but not all the time. But there will be more and more mistakes or inadequate reporting as more and more jobs are cut in newsrooms. 2,500 going in bbc over next three years. that may gladden the hearts of some of you, butn your news will not improve as a result. I thought that was an informative post, its nice to hear facts and not speculation about what goes on behind the scenes. What I heard on Radio4 news at lunchtime I posted, I didn't make it up, or dream it, I heard it very clearly. Its probable that having to go to Hospital to have a pellet(s) removed from her leg, may have made somebody think of airgun pellet, I have no idea and care even less. Hopefully , the policewoman will make a full recovery and they will apprehend the villain(s). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 Berlimey Keith, just like I don't dislike all policemen, only the ones who make it up - I did say nothing personal mate, and it wern't you making a story up out of bits was it? I ain't Mr. Perfect either if that makes you feel any better me old chum. Have a good one tonight mate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayward Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 not even going to bother arguing with people with such narrow minds. this will be my last post on the site as i don't wish to waste my time conversing with fools and bigots. Good pie !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnGalway Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 so journos have to make judgements and sometimes they are wrong so they print a load of ********. sorry keith i dont know you mate and wish you a happynew year , but i would sack the lot of you. I would sort of agree with Mark, except I'd sack (and line up against a wall) all the people who have turned factual reporting into a "We need to get there first, facts come later" affair, rather than actual proper factual reporting of events. Example, TV news reporting on the first time George Bush was elected, or was it Al Gore, or was it George Bush - I can't remember, and they didn't know but it didn't stop them guessing then broadcasting to thew world. I can do that myself, at home, without a satalite dish, run and hide Rupert. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustyfox Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 Mungler where was the armed police this time? Isnt it "dont fire till fired upon". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bagsy Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 Mungler where was the armed police this time? Isnt it "dont fire till fired upon". Eh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustyfox Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 Mungler where was the armed police this time? Isnt it "dont fire till fired upon". Eh Its the army way isnt it, and I am just winding sum1 up as well. Whats the point in listening to the media anyway one says this and another one says a totally different thing. you just dont know who to believe. I havent brought a newspaper for years now, they are just full of ********. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead-Eyed Duck Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 Mungler where was the armed police this time? Isnt it "dont fire till fired upon". Eh Its the army way isnt it, and I am just winding sum1 up as well. Whats the point in listening to the media anyway one says this and another one says a totally different thing. you just dont know who to believe. I havent brought a newspaper for years now, they are just full of B*******. I've never believed most of what I read in the papers, as "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story" prevails. I am old enough to remember when the BBC was held up to be the icon in good reporting. OK, perhaps this reputation was 'sold' by the BBC, but it was widely regarded worldwide as the best source of factual information. The current mob in charge of the BBC have done their best to dumb down to the level where is about as good as most US sources - which is about as bad as you can get. Apologies here to anyone from the BBC, as no doubt they would be quick to point out that they are doing their best - sorry but guestimating what has happened in the chase for high ratings will win few friends when the guess is wrong. Don Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myuserid Posted December 31, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 So does anyone know what happened? When I posted that link it said "Armed robber blasts woman officer" which has now changed, it also said 12 pellets where lodged in her leg fired from a shotgun, that has also been changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A K A Posted December 31, 2007 Report Share Posted December 31, 2007 far too many knowalls in this world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starlight32 Posted January 1, 2008 Report Share Posted January 1, 2008 Mungler where was the armed police this time? Isnt it "dont fire till fired upon". Eh Its the army way isnt it, and I am just winding sum1 up as well. Whats the point in listening to the media anyway one says this and another one says a totally different thing. you just dont know who to believe. I havent brought a newspaper for years now, they are just full of ********. I have'nt bought a newpaper for years either. Not cos they are full of rubbish.... I worked out a paper a day was costing me 100 quid a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.