Classic Books Off The Gcse List But Only...
News0 min ago
Bbc Set Record Straight Re James Dyson Accusation:
“The BBC’s characterisation of me as a prominent Conservative donor, or supporter, leveraging a position of power to extract favours from the Prime Minister, is completely untrue,” he wrote in The Daily Telegraph.
“I have met Boris Johnson only three times – always with officials – the last time in 2016. I have not attended any Conservative social events.”
On a BBC corrections and clarifications web page, the publicly-funded broadcaster responded to Sir James’ objections to the way he had been described.
“In our coverage of texts he had sent to the Prime Minister we referred in various outlets to Sir James Dyson as a prominent Conservative supporter or said he backed the Conservatives,” the website entry on Monday said.
“Sir James says this is factually incorrect. We are happy to set the record straight.
“I have met Boris Johnson only three times – always with officials – the last time in 2016. I have not attended any Conservative social events.”
On a BBC corrections and clarifications web page, the publicly-funded broadcaster responded to Sir James’ objections to the way he had been described.
“In our coverage of texts he had sent to the Prime Minister we referred in various outlets to Sir James Dyson as a prominent Conservative supporter or said he backed the Conservatives,” the website entry on Monday said.
“Sir James says this is factually incorrect. We are happy to set the record straight.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by lankeela. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
> I bet you wouldn't refuse a ventilator made by him if you needed one.
>> I wouldn't, if I needed one, and he made any.
I am of course referring to the news from just over a year ago, 24 April 2020: "Dyson will not supply ventilators to NHS to treat Covid-19"
https:/
>> I wouldn't, if I needed one, and he made any.
I am of course referring to the news from just over a year ago, 24 April 2020: "Dyson will not supply ventilators to NHS to treat Covid-19"
https:/
// The squeaky clean journalism of the BBC, Ellipsis. Always to be relied upon. ;o)//
what is this? I remember the lady protesting that if it was nt on the Beeb and in English it hadnt happened
( knife man knifing monk in er Clermont Ferrand - you know the place in France)
how things change according to circumstances
what is this? I remember the lady protesting that if it was nt on the Beeb and in English it hadnt happened
( knife man knifing monk in er Clermont Ferrand - you know the place in France)
how things change according to circumstances
Naomi, "Correct Mistakes" is in the same guidelines I referred to in the other thread. I'll suggest again, very few publishers have, let alone publish, similar standards and guidelines and ask to be held accountable to them. I'll ask again, where do you prefer to get your news of UK politics from?
https:/
Correcting Mistakes
3.3.28 We should normally acknowledge serious factual errors and correct such mistakes quickly, clearly and appropriately. Inaccuracy may lead to a complaint of unfairness. An effective way of correcting a serious factual error is saying what was wrong as well as putting it right.
Mandatory Referral
Where we believe we have broadcast a defamatory inaccuracy, Programme Legal Advice must be consulted.
Mistakes in on-demand and online content
Where mistakes in our on-demand content, which is available online after broadcast, are unlikely to be a serious breach of editorial standards, a correction should be published on that platform, so that it is visible before the output is played. Such on-demand content does not then normally need to be changed or revoked.
Where mistakes to our on-demand content are likely to be considered a serious breach of editorial standards, the content must be corrected and the mistake acknowledged, or in exceptional cases removed. We need to be transparent about any changes made, unless there are editorial or legal reasons not to do so.
In online text content, any mistake that alters the editorial meaning should normally be corrected and we should be transparent about what was wrong.
https:/
Correcting Mistakes
3.3.28 We should normally acknowledge serious factual errors and correct such mistakes quickly, clearly and appropriately. Inaccuracy may lead to a complaint of unfairness. An effective way of correcting a serious factual error is saying what was wrong as well as putting it right.
Mandatory Referral
Where we believe we have broadcast a defamatory inaccuracy, Programme Legal Advice must be consulted.
Mistakes in on-demand and online content
Where mistakes in our on-demand content, which is available online after broadcast, are unlikely to be a serious breach of editorial standards, a correction should be published on that platform, so that it is visible before the output is played. Such on-demand content does not then normally need to be changed or revoked.
Where mistakes to our on-demand content are likely to be considered a serious breach of editorial standards, the content must be corrected and the mistake acknowledged, or in exceptional cases removed. We need to be transparent about any changes made, unless there are editorial or legal reasons not to do so.
In online text content, any mistake that alters the editorial meaning should normally be corrected and we should be transparent about what was wrong.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.