*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[OngBonga]

The BBC is state TV. They're very left when it comes to "diversity", ensuring wimmin's football is just called football, and making sure we know about multi coloured transpotatoes. But they're very right when it comes to sucking Tory dick.

[Poopadoop]

The BBC is state TV. They're very left when it comes to "diversity", ensuring wimmin's football is just called football, and making sure we know about multi coloured transpotatoes. But they're very right when it comes to sucking Tory dick.

They're not state media in the same way that Pravda was though...

I think there is an element of not criticising their bosses at play, but also a tendency for media types in general to be liberal.

The nice thing about the BBC is they don't rely on ad revenue. The not nice thing is they rely on state revenue. The balance is that the state is extremely unlikely to sack or imprison them.

[OngBonga]

They're not state media in the same way that Pravda was though...

Indeed, the Russians can only look on in awe at the beast we've created. The beauty of the BBC is that everyone thinks it's independent and unbiased, and bastard well pay a license for it. Imagine willingly paying for state tv while not even realising it's state tv.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the BBC doesn't do ads, and some of their content is truly world class entertainment, but I would prefer it to be overtly state tv rather than this bullshit about independence, and do away with the license, just fund it directly from the public purse. Use the channel for matters of public interest... national sports, education, news, popular entertainment... there is a place for state tv, they just shouldn't pretend it's not under government control.

[Poopadoop]

Indeed, the Russians can only look on in awe at the beast we've created. The beauty of the BBC is that everyone thinks it's independent and unbiased, and bastard well pay a license for it. Imagine willingly paying for state tv while not even realising it's state tv.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the BBC doesn't do ads, and some of their content is truly world class entertainment, but I would prefer it to be overtly state tv rather than this bullshit about independence, and do away with the license, just fund it directly from the public purse. Use the channel for matters of public interest... national sports, education, news, popular entertainment... there is a place for state tv, they just shouldn't pretend it's not under government control.

I think we have a different concept of the connotations of the term "state TV." Yes, the BBC by a literal definition is state TV, and everyone knows that, but it's hardly a propaganda mouthpiece for the gov't. If it were, you would expect it to change its angle every time a new party comes into power, and it just stays pretty vanilla regardless. It's not like it went from being like a TV version of the Guardian to the Daily Mail the day after the Tories won in 2010.

[OngBonga]

Odds are wildly fluctuating. Trump has been as high as 10/1, but he's currently 5/1. From what I can tell, he needs Arizona or Nevada, and is behind in both, though NV is very close. Either that or he needs a favourable recount in WI, which seems optimistic.

I'm going to stick my neck out and say that nearly all votes are legit, that any fraud is within normal margins and is probably negligible, but it's important that any credible claims of fraud are investigated. I mean, I wouldn't have wanted Brexit to happen as a result of direct voter fraud, like fake votes magically appearing. Biden supporters shouldn't want that either. Unknown powers deciding the result of elections is worse than a bad president.

I don't think any of the claims of fraud I've seen are credible, but it's not my job to decide that.