we discussed the merits of the MLMB the other day and today an interesting little success in the war against BBC 'propaganda' or 'inaccuracy':
This morning upon reading the headline "Rice seeks speedy Mid-East truce" prominently displayed on the BBC news website I posted this message on the board at 10:29 am (British time):
"Rice", "speedy" and "truce" all mentioned in same scentence: BBC in parallel universe
Isn't the BBC's Headline on the first story of their News Website glaringly inaccurate:
"Rice seeks speedy Mid-East truce"
given that "hostilities began on July the 12th" how is taking two or three weeks while people are dying to get a ceasefire "speedy" in any way?
(note to BBC ... it is now almost August)
Link to story
soon afterwards, two other contributors to the MLMB sent e-mails to the BBC news Online team:
"Dear Mr Herrmann, Ms Boaden,
What, exactly, is speedy about Ms Rice's seeking of a UN security council resolution. It has been 20 days since Israel began bombing civilians in Lebanon, longer for its bombing and destruction of civilians and infrastructure in the Gaza strip.
The US (along with the UK) has so far refused to call for an immediate ceasefire. How is this interpreted by the BBC as 'speedy'?
If your house were burning down with your children inside, would you label the fire-brigade's response as 'speedy' if it turned up two weeks later?
At 11:51 am (British Time) a message was posted reporting that the headline of the article had been changed to "Israel 'not ready for truce yet'" which at the time of writing was still the title of the article in question...