The front page of the BBC right now, at the very top, is a large photo of protests in Iran. The headline reports that hospitals are overwhelmed by the regime cracking down on protestors.
The article focuses on first-hand accounts from medics inside Iran, describing the crackdown and casualties. It also contains statements from the Iranian opposition, the UN, US and French presidents and British PM, all critical of Khamenei, with just two mentions of the regime’s official statements.
Also, I just switched to the BBC News TV broadcast. The Iran protests are the lead story: a special report with a focus on the protestors, showing videos shared by them.
> Government building on fire as protests continue in Karaj, Iran
Peaceful “protestors” dont burn down whole office buildings my guy
> Members of the security forces have also been killed, with one human rights group putting the number at 14.
Peaceful “protestors” dont kill 14 cops.
The Iranian response is not random killing of innocent “protesters”. They are fighting back against open terrorists who are shooting at cops and burning down buildings. You can support or oppose Iran’s policies but if people were doing this in Washington DC the US government would be stacking the bodies of “protestors” just as high.
You’re welcome to your own opinions but some of your arguments here are trivial to debunk.
Literally the first article on the BBC News homepage is an about Iran with accounts from doctors and others critical of the regime.
This is the exact opposite of what you claimed we’d find.
My recommendation here is: if your research is this sloppy for your most trivial to check argument, then maybe you should spend a little time reviewing your other assumptions and whether you believe them out of faith or through research.
The first pieces of coverage from the BBC were on day >10, after internet blackout and hundreds of deaths, and to copy-paste a statement from Khamenei.
> A BBC spokesperson said: "These criticisms are factually incorrect; we have been covering the protests in Iran daily across all of our platforms, including our main news bulletins, in English and via BBC News Persian."
I’m sure you’ll then respond with some opinion piece about how you perceive the quality of reporting, but that’s a more nuanced, subjective, argument. One which I don’t see any value discussing given the clear biases and agendas behind your arguments (ie it wouldn’t be fair, rational, and balanced discussion)
However for the “facts” of your comment, they’re clearly and easily disproven.
The front page of the BBC right now, at the very top, is a large photo of protests in Iran. The headline reports that hospitals are overwhelmed by the regime cracking down on protestors.
The article focuses on first-hand accounts from medics inside Iran, describing the crackdown and casualties. It also contains statements from the Iranian opposition, the UN, US and French presidents and British PM, all critical of Khamenei, with just two mentions of the regime’s official statements.
Also, I just switched to the BBC News TV broadcast. The Iran protests are the lead story: a special report with a focus on the protestors, showing videos shared by them.
Source: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj9rengvnp9o
From YOUR article:
> Government building on fire as protests continue in Karaj, Iran
Peaceful “protestors” dont burn down whole office buildings my guy
> Members of the security forces have also been killed, with one human rights group putting the number at 14.
Peaceful “protestors” dont kill 14 cops.
The Iranian response is not random killing of innocent “protesters”. They are fighting back against open terrorists who are shooting at cops and burning down buildings. You can support or oppose Iran’s policies but if people were doing this in Washington DC the US government would be stacking the bodies of “protestors” just as high.
You’re welcome to your own opinions but some of your arguments here are trivial to debunk.
Literally the first article on the BBC News homepage is an about Iran with accounts from doctors and others critical of the regime.
This is the exact opposite of what you claimed we’d find.
My recommendation here is: if your research is this sloppy for your most trivial to check argument, then maybe you should spend a little time reviewing your other assumptions and whether you believe them out of faith or through research.
The first pieces of coverage from the BBC were on day >10, after internet blackout and hundreds of deaths, and to copy-paste a statement from Khamenei.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/ashamed-john-cleese-ri...
From the article:
> A BBC spokesperson said: "These criticisms are factually incorrect; we have been covering the protests in Iran daily across all of our platforms, including our main news bulletins, in English and via BBC News Persian."
And this can be seen with examples like this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqj2llkjv8vo
I’m sure you’ll then respond with some opinion piece about how you perceive the quality of reporting, but that’s a more nuanced, subjective, argument. One which I don’t see any value discussing given the clear biases and agendas behind your arguments (ie it wouldn’t be fair, rational, and balanced discussion)
However for the “facts” of your comment, they’re clearly and easily disproven.
1 reply →