this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2026
770 points (98.7% liked)

World News

51868 readers
3577 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] whyNotSquirrel@sh.itjust.works 10 points 5 days ago (4 children)

Isn't BBC a British company? Why do they fear lawsuits in the USA?

[–] lechekaflan@lemmy.world 8 points 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

That dickhead in the Oval Office and his cronies have buildings full of lawyers who'll then launch trucks full of SLAPP suits. Couple with their usual OANN attack dogs.

[–] gigachad@piefed.social 5 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I have no idea what these acronyms mean but I agree with this guy

SLAPP are nuisance lawsuits without merit filed solely to bully the recipient into submission and OANN is One American News Network, a hive of fascist Trump loving propagandists pretending to be news.

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago

Because capitalists control everything and they don’t give a shit about national borders.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] aarRJaay@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

British Biased Corporation

[–] melsaskca@lemmy.ca 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

More billionaire media control. It's everywhere I tell 'ya!

[–] falseWhite@lemmy.world 9 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Possibly. But the BBC aired a pretty good segment on Trump and he sued BBC for $5bn. So, that's most likely why they're being careful going forward now.

[–] axmo@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 days ago

In what way is this not control? He has succeeded in changing the editorial position of the BBC.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Why didn't they take him to court over it? tRump has lost all the cases that companies actually took to court. The only ones who "lost" were the ones who capitulated, paid a settlement, fired the people trump didn't like, then changed their editorial positions to comply with the party line as dictated.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why didn’t they take him to court over it?

Because they took two half sentences from different parts of a speech, put them together and made him say something he hadn't said. (if I remember correctly)

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 days ago

I thought BBC was supposed to be better than that...

Control through legal threats is still control. The BBC is afraid of getting sued again, which means Trump has some impactful control over them.

[–] nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

they're probably worried about being blocked in more countries

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 3 points 4 days ago

BBC already got spooked for shilling for israel.

[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

"free speech"

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›