So BBC, while on the cusp of censorship for "defamation of Trump", still sees it necessary to watch his arse?
These bootlickers man
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
So BBC, while on the cusp of censorship for "defamation of Trump", still sees it necessary to watch his arse?
These bootlickers man
They all have the same owners. Mainstream media is a compromised asset. Don't go there for "news" they are all no better than fox these days.
Censorship works.
Well, kidnapping implies he will be used for ransom and returned. He was abducted.
BBC bans journalists from telling the truth?
It's so unprecedented!
/s
Change "BBC" to "Global Media" and you are closer to the truth.
BBC is propaganda for the Empire.
BBC is appeasing Trump. The UK is a lost cause. An Irrelevant ex-empire. Just like the US is going to be, once it finally implodes.
Can it please implode faster?
One part of me hopes so but if/when it does, I doubt something better will emerge - which is terrifying.
I want it to implode enough that the federal government can't keep hurting its citizens, but not so much that the citizens are worse off than when they were being repressed.
Perhaps "unfreed" could be used instead?
Adultnapped
Rehomed
Wouldn't it be "unhomed"? ;)
Newspeak: "In the 1949 dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (also published as 1984), by George Orwell, Newspeak is the fictional language of Oceania, a totalitarian superstate. To meet the ideological requirements of Ingsoc (English Socialism) in Oceania, the Party created Newspeak, which is a controlled language of simplified grammar and limited vocabulary designed to reduce a person's ability to think critically."
See also: "the officer's gun discharged" instead of "police shot the man"
I remember thinking this aspect of the book was far fetched, but holy shit was he spot on. Language really does inform how we think, and controlling that can be very powerful
I always thought Winston's job, of literally rewriting history, would be an impossible task.
Nowadays? I'm not so sure. When we look at where most of the news comes from in America and follow the money up, you've got like 90% of it coming from about a couple dozen people.
Some of those people control LLMs along the way. They control our social media and search engine and what posts and answers and advertisers we see. They control the servers through which most of the internet routes their traffic. They control the certificate authorities that all of our web browsers intrinsically trust. And most of them are friends with each other...or at least keep it cordial.
And they're patient. They play a long game. Half of them aren't even middle-aged and are in peak physical health.
Shit even that sounded like a crazy conspiracy theory like 15 years ago, and while I'm being hyperbolic...I'm really not being that hyperbolic.
Oh boy… are you opening the door to concept philosophy? Because that’s a fucking mind bender. First big assumption you need to let go of in this domain: mankind is not on some path of iterative progress where we find ourselves at the most knowledgeable and capable in the present. Rather, we’ve conveniently redefined what progress is in the first place.
Maduro was ~~kidnapped~~ expropriated
I'm more a fan of "reverse ICEd"
BBC Has Fallen is Gerard Butlers next movie
They also murdered about 80 people when they kidnapped and trafficked them.
Abducted, then
The BBC is no longer reputable
It stopped being reputable after the Iraq invasion in 2003. The Blair government stuffed it with loyalist apparatchiks to make sure the government line was never seriously questioned. This has been the case ever since.
September Dossier - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Dossier
The 45 minute claim lay at the centre of a dispute between Downing Street and the BBC. On 29 May 2003, BBC defence correspondent Andrew Gilligan filed a report for BBC Radio 4's Today programme in which he stated that an unnamed source – a senior British official – had told him that the September Dossier had been "sexed up", and that the intelligence agencies were concerned about some "dubious" information contained within it – specifically the claim that Saddam Hussein could deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes of an order to use them.
It's not a "war", it's a "special operation". Anyone who says it's a war is committing treason.
Since only Congress has the power to declare war, people who care about accurate language (especially journalists!) use other terms to describe troop deployments outside officially declared wars.
The US military has had names for nearly all of their operations since the mid-1960s, and these traditionally have been used by the press. Operation Power Pack in 1965 (invasion of the Dominican Republic) was the first one I found in my cursory search.
Major ones I remember from my life include Operation Desert Shield/Storm/Strike (1990s), Operation Enduring Freedom ("war on terror" in Afghanistan after 9/11), and Operation Iraqi Freedom ("war on terror" expands inexplicably to Iraq).
This type of framing is not new, and it's not a conspiracy. It's a bunch of language nerds making sure that they use accurate terminology.
This was literally the header of the New York times on Sunday...
so much for that alleged freedom of the press
I'll allow it, as long as they call it a war crime.
~~Kidnapping is an emotionally loaded term which isn't used in journalism. Makes sense.~~ Edit: nah I'm wrong. They'd use it for the actual crime of kidnapping.
I hate this shit. We need media to call a spoon a spoon.
Call lies, lies. "Misinformation", "inaccuracies" "incorrectly said..." Nah fuck that. Trump lied.
Question : I break into someones home and take them to my home (from their bed) and lock them up. What's that called?
It depends. What’s your net worth?
"Abducted" it is then.