Reply With QuoteIsn't the point that people with a republican viewpoint might not want to know about beard stroking (I didn't), but people of a Royalist persuasion do? The BBC isn't the personal domain of either group.Originally Posted by rolymiller
Hall Of Fame
Thing is grovelling is not the same as reporting though is it Kerr. Why not just have a little news item at the end of the bulletin. In this case, saying the Royals have been visiting Australia blah de blah, show a few pictures and say now the weather. It doesn't need to last more than 30 seconds there are a lot more important news items that concern people. Royalists catered for.We don't need to know the fine details of beard stroking and that it was raining so they might get wet.
Hall Of Fame
Isn't the point that people with a republican viewpoint might not want to know about beard stroking (I didn't), but people of a Royalist persuasion do? The BBC isn't the personal domain of either group.
Hall Of Fame
But its to do with air space isn't it as well. There is only so much time allocated for the news. Surely there are more important items of news than trivial stuff like the beard stroking of a royal. The Royalists will just have to compromise with stuff that really concerns and worries people. And..come on...fecking beard stroking ...if that's all Royalists are bothered about in the news god help us. Are they stupid or what? Maybe their lives are that comfortable that such trivial things are all they need to concern themselves with. There is war, starvation and impending climatic disaster but we all need to know about some pampered toffs beard being stroked.
You know when you are in court and you have to defend someone . Do you ever think to yourself I really cant defend this person because it is an indefensible case. I know it will not stand up in court. Well here's another one for you...
Last edited by rolymiller; 17-10-2018 at 11:32 AM.
Hall Of Fame
On the Frack Me thread yesterday, you said:
sometimes you have to have a light hearted moment particularly when things are looking a bit gloomy.
Maybe the BBC news editors agree with you.
Hall Of Fame
Maybe so but I think there are a lot more light hearted stories they could find to appease the masses things that people can readily identify with. While accepting Royalists might think this is all very cute and quaint others might feel like putting a brick through the tv when they see their smug mugs on it.
I just wish you would defend the poor as well as you do the rich.
Last edited by rolymiller; 17-10-2018 at 11:39 AM.
Hall Of Fame
He's kept his promises more than any other politician I can think of, don't know what you're on about.
Hall Of Fame
@ Roly. I haven't defended the rich, I've merely suggested that the BBC news isn't and should never be the preserve of any particular faction.
My position is about freedom of expression and thought, including the freedom for people to hold and express views that I personally disagree with. That's why I worry when I hear Corbyn talking about 'change' coming for the free press that we should cherish.
Hall Of Fame
...and yet, by the same argument, should not Corbyn be allowed his own free thought and expression on the press?
What about people's right of free thought and expression through their unions whose powers have been curtailed by several governments.
What about people's right of free thought and expression through a biased press?
What about peoples right of free thought and expression through the judicial system?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-10182396.html
Last edited by rolymiller; 17-10-2018 at 01:10 PM.
Hall Of Fame
Of course Corbyn has a right to express his views on the press. Who would argue otherwise? It is his rather chilling message that 'change is coming' for our free media that concerns me. What do you suppose he meant by that?
Union legislation has strengthened the voice of union members. The days of the likes of the NUM railroading it's members into strikes and setting a mob onto those who fail to follow its instructions are over.
A free and privately owned press will display a range of political biases. That's why the 'Left' leaning posters on here often link to The Guardian (the only newspaper I have ever bought on a regular basis, by the way). How do you propose to address that other than through state control, in which case, it's hard to see how the press would not become a Pravda style mouthpiece of government.
Agree completely on the judicial system, but it's hard to guard against unconscious bias when, by definition, you don't know you being influenced by it.
Last edited by KerrAvon; 17-10-2018 at 03:26 PM.
Hall Of Fame
That is your absolutely best one yet, and if you ever were after folk accepting your arguments as 'normal' then that has blown you straight out of the water, laughing my head off here
80% of the British 'free press' is owned by 5 people, rich, right wing nutjobs, who make out in their rags how patriotic they are, while sitting on their tax free beaches and paying f - all in UK tax, glad you support them....
Posting Permissions
