I agree.

Trump should be fair game for the BBC as should be Clinton. There are of course aspects of Trump that are easier to go after. That is fine, it's how you do it....the tone.

My complaint is that whoever is in charge of monitoring the treatment and language used on these two candidates isn't doing their job properly and is allowing overt bias to come through.

The BBC is clearly attacking Trump most of the time.....'how do we stop Trump', 'look how terrible Trump is' that is essentially the message.

Repeating the Democratic propaganda isn't what they should be doing......analyze, question, those are the attributes the BBC should be employing.....And not just onto one candidate.

Edited by Stirlingsays (01 Aug 2016 10.50am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I found it interesting during the Brexit debates that they would publish articles that they had tried to fool people that they were neutral. For example, we spoke to people who were both for and against Brexit. The articles would have four people who wanted to remain and two who wanted to leave. That's a vague example, but I do take on board the comment that people on both sides of an argument may have a perception that the reporting was more biased than it really was, or even biased the other way.

Would love to see that. Sadly, there'll never be enough people in this country with enough dislike of the BBC to ever hit them where it hurts. Shame though. I detest the BBC (not just because of the subject in question by the way).

Maybe that because Trump and Corbyn aren't on the same page. One is a maniac, and one is a decent human being.

It was my dream to play for Palace and to make my debut. I've always played for the club so if I'm playing here, I wouldn't want to be anywhere else.

- John Bostock (Nov 2007)

I found it weird that people would try to convince people on the basis of a lot of rather speculative material, that wasn't really relevant to why they were pro-Exit / Remain. More concerning was the way that politicians were deceitful to the point of lying though.

I think it was always pretty clear that economically the UK was better off in the EU, and that at best it would only ever be about as well off economically outside the EU. But that wasn't why people were pro-Exit, they believed, I hope, that the economic hit, once stabalised would be compensated for by the increased independence from EU directives.

The concern was more with how much the exit strategy maybe underplayed certain issues (such as the scale of negotiating trade agreements).

For example, an exit for me, delivers the prospect longer term of stabilising the working population and its wage demands, by reducing competition for jobs. That the EU created jobs wasn't an issue for me, its that it created low paying jobs due to freedom of movement - and that damages society.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

You think Trump is a good choice for POTUS?

It was my dream to play for Palace and to make my debut. I've always played for the club so if I'm playing here, I wouldn't want to be anywhere else.

- John Bostock (Nov 2007)