I'm a visitor from /pol/, and I'd like to enrich my knowledge of the world. I'll admit, I'm a bit of a pleb, and am a tradesman for a living, so I don't have time to read physical books. I do, however, enjoy podcasts, so I got an Audible subscription.
Are there any good things on there by Veeky Forums's standards? My only expectation is that it's non-fiction. It doesn't have to be alt-right propaganda; I won't get triggered if the contents have their little liberal bias or whatever, I'm just hoping to find content that isn't tired yet.
It's not because I don't like it, in fact I couldn't care less, but what the fuck do you learn in /pol/ apart from memes?
Alexander Garcia
And what the fuck does anyone learn here?
Mason Ross
I get decent information on current events there. Also a lot of the maymays are pretty funny.
Brody Robinson
you didn't let him get to his second step >first step: quitting /pol/ >second step: quitting Veeky Forums those two actions alone will make you 100% more knowledgeable about history
Matthew Nguyen
> asks something >get mad it's not the answer you want
Carson Harris
If you browse and identify with /pol/, stormfront, realhistoryww, or abovetopsecret, you're probably never going to have a very good understanding of history. But that's kind of inevitable if you don't have time for books anyway.
>cannot use the replies/poster function you have to go back
Jordan Moore
>/pol/ is too biased >the bbc is not Come on
Gavin Nguyen
I'll give you some torrent links for Great Courses lad.
They're college level courses on loads of different topics, in video and audio format.
Usually cost quite a bit of money.
I'll upload em later, on my phone.
Jackson Clark
The only bias In Our Time has is from the host's classical British empiricist outlook
Get your /pol/ goggles off
Jose Bell
even the most egregious example of bias from the bbc is not even close to the level of lying, historical revisionism, and downright stupidity found on /pol/ stop this meme
Jayden Fisher
>/pol/ is too biased >the bbc is not >Come on
Ok, explain the BBC's bias, specifically talking about the In Our Time series on radio 4.
Sebastian Kelly
The extent of BBC bias when discussing history is essentially just "We wuz a good empire, we dindu nuffin. We wuz tryin to get money to give the natives them programs".
Joshua White
All this, he said, “creates an innate liberal bias inside the BBC”.
–Andrew Marr
“It’s a bit like walking into a Sunday meeting of the Flat Earth Society. As they discuss great issues of the day, they discuss them from the point of view that the earth is flat.
“If someone says, ‘No, no, no, the earth is round!’, they think this person is an extremist. That’s what it’s like for someone with my right-of-centre views working inside the BBC.”
– Jeff Randall, former BBC business editor
By far the most popular and widely read newspapers at the BBC are The Guardian and The Independent. Producers refer to them routinely for the line to take on running stories, and for inspiration on which items to cover. In the later stages of my career, I lost count of the number of times I asked a producer for a brief on a story, only to be handed a copy of The Guardian and told ‘it’s all in there’.
– Peter Sissons, Former BBC News and Current Affairs presenter
“In the BBC I joined 30 years ago [as a production trainee, in 1979], there was, in much of current affairs, in terms of people’s personal politics, which were quite vocal, a massive bias to the left. The organisation did struggle then with impartiality. And journalistically, staff were quite mystified by the early years of Thatcher.
“Now it is a completely different generation. There is much less overt tribalism among the young journalists who work for the BBC. It is like the New Statesman, which used to be various shades of soft and hard left and is now more technocratic. We’re like that, too.”
– Mark Thomspon, former BBC Director General
“I do remember… the corridors of Broadcasting House were strewn with empty champagne bottles. I’ll always remember that”
– Jane Garvey, Radio 4 presenter, recalling Tony Blair’s election victory in 1997
Nolan Parker
The host has a clear empiricist bias that is evident in episodes such as "Neo-Platonism" which although in itself is not necessarily bad, but can the harm discussion of less empirical viewpoints.
Isaiah Nelson
I absorbed and expressed all the accepted BBC attitudes: hostility to, or at least suspicion of, America, monarchy, government, capitalism, empire, banking and the defence establishment, and in favour of the Health Service, state welfare, the social sciences, the environment and state education. But perhaps our most powerful antagonism was directed at advertising. This is not surprising; commercial television was the biggest threat the BBC had ever had to face.
– Sir Antony Jay, former BBC producer and creator, inter alia, of “Yes, (Prime) Minister”
“Liberal sceptical humanists tend to dominate television”.
The “default position in broadcasting” – when covering issues such as gay marriage and the Roman Catholic position on IVF – revolved around human rights, and that opponents should not be treated as “lunatics”.
“All I’m saying is, if you have at the centre of News an editor, he could explain why people in particular areas…are motivated, why they behave as they do and I think that would just increase understanding.”
– Roger Bolton, Radio 4 presenter and former head of Panorama and Nationwide
“And, in the tone of what we say about America, we have a tendency to scorn and deride. We don’t give America any kind of moral weight in our broadcasts.”
– Justin Webb (pg. 66), Today presenter and former BBC North America editor
“We need to foster peculiarity, idiosyncrasy, stubborn-mindedness, left-of-centre thinking.”
– Ben Stephenson, BBC controller of drama commissioning
Gabriel Edwards
You don't have to listen to it if it's going to trigger you so hard. Please just go back to your containment board
Chase Martin
>gets btfo >cries
Those are direct quotes from BBC employees. But I'm sure you know better than they do
William Murphy
that's a nice list of quotes friend but you have yet to show clear bias in any of their programs
Thomas Morales
Half of this board doesn't read, you're asking the wrong place
Thomas Garcia
ITT
>people think /pol/ is primarily concerned with history
Luis Reed
I'm sorry your favorite news organization is a state owned propaganda outlet.
Aiden Wood
Lol this thread is funny.
OP if you consider the BBC too biased to even consider listening to you might as well just stick to getting all of your history from infographs made by stormfront.
Liam White
See this is your fucking problem.
A guy recommended you a well respected podcast and then you go on an autistic quest to epically BTFO an anonymous guy.
This is a discussion board, not a debate club. Fuck off to reddit or /pol/ if you want to win internet points.
Your points don't even show how In Our Time is bias, but then again, you've never even listened to it. You're just here to impress others with your epic debate skillz
Oliver Parker
>state owned propaganda outlet
The BBC is fairly autonomous from the government.
How can you argue they are both tools of the government *and* left wing, when we have a right wing conservative government in power?
Easton Wilson
>implying that's the OP >implying OP isn't writing down these suggestions for later >implying some other stupid meme kiddo didn't come in to try and shitpost up the thread defending his board
Dude straight up said he didn't care about bias and that he just wanted something new.
>hello please give me tools to study history it doesn't have to be pro alt right >no no all of those suggestions aren't alt right enough
do the autistics from /pol/ ever take a step back to realize how intellectually dishonest they are? or are they simply not self aware enough?
Grayson King
if you want to learn mythologies, read the epic of gilgamesh (its short) metamorphoses prose edda the bible ( at least the first five books, you dont gotta read all the 1000+ pages) the oddysey the tain and rama the steadfast
i would highly suggest you read and not listen. these books can be very dense, and very bad literature (genesis) and you will probably have to reread something multiple times to get the meaning of it
if you read all of these, you will for sure be a smarter person about the world, and could BTFO retards on /pol/ talking about shit they didnt research
Nicholas Hernandez
here's the link to the Great Courses
as I mentioned in:
Logan Fisher
/pol/ is a fucking cacophony on actually intelligent people, Canadians, banterous shitposters, political activists, commentators and just people interested in current events. You can learn some things.
Owen Myers
You calling everything of a certain political leaning biased just makes you sound biased you fucking idiot.
It is though. They are not majority pro-conservative.
Cameron Wilson
minority pro-conservative
unless you imply an unknown plurality made possible by the influence of inherited monarchy.
Luke Martin
I'm not him, but I will answer. It's not political leaning it's the level of discourse they have there. If you will be successful in you journey and get to more complex sources you will understand what he means. pol, breitbart and haffington are cringe. It's watching stupid people discuss complex processes in a really stupid and hysterical way and getting away with it because it's not mathematics so you can claim anything. If you read them for something other than parody or to get a feel for public moods you are probably just looking for some order in the chaos of human life at expense of realism, not for more complexity that doesn't provide any answers but is closer to the truth.
