BBC World - FULL TV coverage - September 11, 2001 - Part 10
Top Comments
Video Responses
All Comments (22)
-
BBC propaganda channel
-
his was one of the greatest disasters in years and all u fucking people are on about is the news reporter taking so long to announce stuff in England and she's dumb yeah because i forgot u american's are so fucking intelligent ain't u
-
then why did they immediately assume that 2 planes hitting 2 towers was an accident. That's every bit as much a rash conclusion as the assumption that it's from a terrorist attack is.
-
And in the case of 9/11, they did it poorly. For example, when the second plane hit, it took the reporters there at least 10-15 minutes to even NOTICE that gee, a second plane has hit!
Also, if they report "facts, not opinions," then why did they immediately assume that 2 planes hitting 2 towers was an accident. That's every bit as much a conclusion drawn from an opinion as the assumption that it's from a terrorist attack is.
-
at the beginning the reporter is trying to sound all calm and cool while they show scenes of people screaming, panicking, hiding behind cars, etc. ...
-
The BBC footage is all screwed up. Anyone notice that at 9:08 when the man is talking to the reporter that the 2nd tower is STILL standing?
-
It's pronounced, "Pent-a-gahn," not Penta-g'n, We actually pronouce that last "o," we don't cut it off into "g'n." I'm sorry but it's driving me nuts.
-
this woman is a spastic
-
@flupmakintosh Yes, but they were reporting facts incompetently this particular morning.
-
@christiandior1947 I'd like to see Australian news coverage of 9/11, actually
The BBC prides itself in being neutral, thats why they dont make rash conclusions
johnfox3 1 year ago 20
@GuatemalanKid17 You must understand that the british have a different national characteristic and the BBC are very much old-school - the brits believe in stiff-under lip, being cool under pressure and in a crisis etc. They also are neutral and report fact, not emotion.
THthefirst 1 year ago 3