I know it's a little thing, but couldn't the BBC employ people who know what they're talking about when writing political stories on their website? Look at THIS from this morning on the Bromley & Chislehurst candidate selection...
"Others include Tory London Assembly leader Michael Harris and A-listers Syed Kamall and Julia Manning. A decision will be made on Saturday evening."
Last time I looked, Bob Neill was the Tory London Assembly leader and Michael Harris was chairman of Bromley & Chislehurst Tories. Now, how long will it take for someone at the BBC to read this and get it changed?!
UPDATE: Still no update on the BBC page - and as Kevin Davis points out in the Comments, the least they could if they're lifting whole chunks of a David Cameron interview is to credit the source - ConservativeHome. I am sure Tim Montgomerie will be sending in an angry email.
UPDATE: It's now been corrected.
8 comments:
The words "BBC" and "facts" in the same sentence!.....wonders never cease!.
...and I thought they were selecting this morning!!
Incidentally all the DC comments on the BBC site come from an interview given to Conservativehome. You would have thought they would have had the decency to credit them.
Newspapers are not better. The Times once wrote that Breant East's by-election was caused by Red Ken's resignation. After the local elections, the Indy confused the boroughs where the Greens won seats. And when the Libdems were electing the deputy leader, the Guardian wrote that Matthew Taylor was the chair of parliamentary party
Didnt the Guardian this week suggest the Tory Chairman was Angus Maude?
BBC News 24 got it right, why not the website?
It's been changed now.
Andrea,
Newpapers are a lot better.
Name one newspaper that threatened 360,000 people with jail last year?
Post a Comment