Why the BBC sucks (2)

clipped from the BBC News website:

Many young people do not know how dangerous roads are for inexperienced motorists, a survey suggests.

Some 32% thought that one in 40 drivers killed were aged under 25 and 5% thought it was one in 400, when the figure is actually 25% of deaths.

There are two problems with this slack piece of journalism.

1. What’s with the use of the word ‘some€™ in this context? Does the work experience trainee who wrote this piece mean ‘more than 32%’ ‘less than 32%’ or even ‘32%’? It’s a ridiculous use of the word ‘some’ in the professional world of journalism. And yet… have good trawl through the BBC News website and you’ll see they use ‘some’ in this context as a matter of routine. Twats.

2. How confusing is the second paragraph? 32% of people thought one in 40, 5% thought one in 400 – that’s OK – but the figure is actually 25% of deaths. What on earth? Where’s the consistency?


I’m starting to wonder if the BBC is employing an infinite number of monkeys…



Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Why the BBC sucks (2)

  1. Harry says:

    The BBC does indeed many faults but then they come up with a programme like ‘The Thick of It’ and it all seems worth while.

  2. Brennig says:

    Hi Harry.

    Parts of the BBC are excellent; programming and innovation are two things the BBC does incredibly well.

    Sadly other parts (any news output to name but a few bits) are awful.

    Our channel of choice is, I suppose, C4.

    I love C4’s news – it doesn’t talk to me as if I’m a four-year-old.


  3. Joe says:

    The BBC should have its charter revoked.