?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Previous Entry Share Next Entry
"Fair and Unbiased"
angry
nmg

So, Top Gear's man of mystery, the Stig, has unmasked himself in order to sell his book. The BBC is objecting to the publication of the book on the grounds that it breaches contractual and confidentiality agreements.

HarperCollins, the would-be publishers of the book, have issued a press release in which they say that they "are disappointed that the BBC has chosen to spend licence fee payers' money to suppress this book".

Remind me again who owns HarperCollins, and why they might want to make political capital at the BBC's expense in the run-up to the renegotiation of the BBC charter, and possible abolition of the license fee.



  • 1
supposedly reputable news outlets

Often exactly the same supposedly reputable news outlets that give column inches to the naysayers.

Still, it's all good for the circulation figures.

Admittedly I don't really read newspapers very often anymore, but I can only remember seeing naysayers twice, once in the Guardian, and once in a pop science rag they flog in station newsagents (New Scientist maybe?).

The Guardian was more calling into question the motivations of some of the researchers from what I remember (it was a few years ago), the science rag was pointing out that some of the stronger claims were obviously (to anyone with an A level in physics or similar) bullshit.

Could be that newspapers have started fact-checking articles, rather than just publishing any sensationalist press release that floats past, but I doubt it.

  • 1