Which has done more good in the world?

[Ajidica]

I was having a discussion with a friend about soft power and an interesting question came up. Since 1945 has the BBC or the British military done more "good" in the world? (ie: Making the world a better place. Define "better place" however you feel.)

I'd be interested to see what CFC thinks about this.

 

[Zkribbler]

The British military hasn't done much since WWII: It invaded Egypt along with France and Israel when the Suez Canal was nationalized but withdrew on the insistence of Pres. Eisenhower; it helped in the defense of South Korea when the communists invaded; it served as peacekeepers in Northern Ireland, mainly by being shot at ; it rescued the godforsaken Falkland Islands from the Argentines; it futzed around in the Middle East.

In comparison, the BBC has been churning out some very good news. My broadcasting professor held them out as the most truthful news reporters in the world [unless the story involved the Irish].

 

[BvBPL]

Can't I say Channel 4? It gave us Father Ted.

 

[abradley]

How do you compare the two?

The BBC is part of the leftist establishment. Broadcasting leftist propaganda to English speakers through out the world. During the Iraq invasion British troops requested Sky news replace BBC.

The British army saved Malaya from communists. It's exploits worldwide include the Battle of Imgin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Imjin_River

 

[Arwon]

Doctor Who is pretty good

 

[Perfection]

I think we first need to think Philosophically about how we do the calculation.


Link to video.

 

[Glassfan]

I'd have to say, the BBC is funnier. I'm currently watching the award-winning news documentary, W1A, and Ian Fletcher just edges out Bernard Law Montgomery as Head of Values...

I believe the British Army did save Suez from Israel, and kept the Falklands Falklandish, but the BBC has more cleavage.

 

[Evie]

The BBC, through the Doctor, has saved every planet in the known universe a minimum of twenty-seven times.

The British Army cannot even begin to compare.

 

[Agent327]

I believe the British Army did save Suez from Israel

Your belief is not based on any facts presented by the BBC. (Or anyone else for that matter.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis#Franco-U.K-Israeli_planning_for_a_war

 

[abradley]

As for the BBC and the British army, this bit from Nipun Gupta's essay sez bunches:

1.4k Views
A small attempt.
THE FALL OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE
{Snip}
15.The will to defend the empire was tested in 1982 when the Argentinians occupied the Falkland Islands. The British rose up to the challenge, and defeated the invaders. For probably the first time, the opinion at home was divided on whether a colony should be defended or not! Maggie Thatcher thought it was and attacked the Argies in return, and won back the colony. The BBC took an unbiased position in the whole conflict, and did not refer to the troops as our lads, rather as the British army!
{Snip}

 

[Atticus]

The BBC is part of the leftist establishment. Broadcasting leftist propaganda to English speakers through out the world. During the Iraq invasion British troops requested Sky news replace BBC.

Are you sure that opposing Iraq war or the justifications made for it when it happened is the touchstone for something being leftist propaganda?

 

[Daw]

I pointed my mouse on the "Neither" option, but "The poll is bad and you should feel bad" part stopped me from clicking that, because although "Neither" thing is very much true, I can't really say that the poll is bad and you definitely shouldn't feel bad about it.

On the second thought I do think BBC is the lesser of the two evils. Not diminishing admirable heroism and commitment of British men, the only good thing they were ever involved in, according to my records, was fighting Nazis in WWII. That thing was really invaluable, but even that does not make up for all the atrocities the British military is responsible for throughout the History.

BBC on the other hand has an incomparably shorter track record of bloodshed and villainy, and besides they run quite a few nice popular-scientific projects (which accuracy may be arguable at times but which still somewhat contribute to people's awareness of stuff and their interest about learning more).

So it's BBC after all, although they are jerkily biased about my country and they dumped Clarkson who was fun.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

I've not had much faith in the BBC news since their atrocious (non) coverage of the 2012 Health and Social Care Act, in which David Cameron completely and utterly betrayed one of his main election promises. I suspect most people in the UK are still completely ignorant about it.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourbe...eport-on-two-years-of-censorship-and-distorti

 

[Leoreth]

The BBC is part of the leftist establishment. Broadcasting leftist propaganda to English speakers through out the world. During the Iraq invasion British troops requested Sky news replace BBC.

BBC it is then.

 

[Kyriakos]

Who has done more good in the world, Sciron or Sciron's turtle?..

 

[Mise]

It depends on what you mean by "done". The things that the British military has actually done haven't been as "good" as the things that the BBC has actually done. But the existence of the British military probably has done a lot of good, in preventing wars through NATO, giving Britain a reason to sit on the UN security council (which has surely done some good over the years), enabling peaceful trade between European nations and the near and far East, and so on. What I'm trying to say is, it's nearly impossible to assess the effect of the British military, since its mere existence changes the nature of geopolitics. How many more wars would have started if Britain didn't have a military at all? Another in Europe maybe? Would we all be speaking Russian by now???

 

[warpus]

As far as I know the BBC didn't invade Iraq on made up pretenses, so they aren't in any way responsible for the rise of ISIS, so I'm voting for them.

 

[JustAnotherNerd]

Neither. BBC did not do anything, what some other media company couldn't do.
Or it does something special?
British army, as any other army, defend interests of their country, nation, even if this interests are far away from their borders; guarantor of their constitution etc
Don't do something special aswell, unless you are englishman probably.
So, answer is "Neither". Not a fact that topic starter should feel bad for this poll, but answer as for me is closer to option 3.

 

[warpus]

Neither. BBC did not do anything, what some other media company couldn't do.

To be fair they are one of the best relatively unbiased news report programmes/networks out there. Their news programmers are great and to the point, with little sensationalism, their documentaries are amazing, and their other programming can be interesting.

"Some other media company" could do the same, but.. nobody really comes close.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

The one that doesn't shoot people. With guns.