Chat Forum
It is currently Tue Jul 14, 2020 3:06 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 14, 2020 8:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 12074
Front page of the BBC news.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-51099622

Quote:
How do you tell your pet that you've broken up with your partner and they'll never get to snuggle them again?
When Abby Govindan, 22, from Houston, Texas, got dumped by her boyfriend, one of her biggest concerns was how to tell her cat that the guy they had both adored had left for good.

Et-fucking-cetera


Obviously the article is mainly including what people tweeted about it which is what most of content of BBC articles is these days.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 28494
Location: Chickenrunning...
Roast chicken will take a cat’s mind off anything else.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16234
Location: Haunting your dreams
ScarfaceClaw wrote:

Obviously the article is mainly including what people tweeted about it which is what most of content of most 'news' articles is these days.

FTFY


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 14, 2020 11:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 21421
ScarfaceClaw wrote:
Front page of the BBC news.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-51099622

Quote:
How do you tell your pet that you've broken up with your partner and they'll never get to snuggle them again?
When Abby Govindan, 22, from Houston, Texas, got dumped by her boyfriend, one of her biggest concerns was how to tell her cat that the guy they had both adored had left for good.

Et-fucking-cetera


Obviously the article is mainly including what people tweeted about it which is what most of content of BBC articles is these days.


Won’t lie, not the first internet link I’ve read that had a 22 year old Texan woman, her Pussy, and the BBC


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 12:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 28297
:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 1:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 12:24 am
Posts: 1325
Location: Sydney (for now)
Yeah, the BBC's journalistic output is absolutely abysmal and has been for the best part of 10 years.

Glad that the government are planning on decriminalizing non-payment of the TV tax, it's time to end the BBC in its current form.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 1:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 28297
Caley_Red wrote:
Yeah, the BBC's journalistic output is absolutely abysmal and has been for the best part of 10 years.

Glad that the government are planning on decriminalizing non-payment of the TV tax, it's time to end the BBC in its current form.


To be fair, the BBCs journalistic output dropped dramatically when Osborne placed hundreds of millions of cuts on them over the pensioners TV Licence. When global news trends are already heading towards what's on twitter, not letting them have good budgets for proper, quality journalism was dumb. Because what else is BBC News going to be able to do?

IMO the BBC should have a revamp. Fewer channels, more quality drama, ideally closer to the source material, less pandering to 'youth' trends and trash TV, have scholarships for young and varied talent outside the usual bubble they hire from and less internal political BS. Ending the BBC in it's current form to be commercialised is bad. It's neutrality is important, as is it's serious reputation and brand globally which adds to the UKs soft power.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 1:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3121
ScarfaceClaw wrote:
Front page of the BBC news.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-51099622

Quote:
How do you tell your pet that you've broken up with your partner and they'll never get to snuggle them again?
When Abby Govindan, 22, from Houston, Texas, got dumped by her boyfriend, one of her biggest concerns was how to tell her cat that the guy they had both adored had left for good.

Et-fucking-cetera


Obviously the article is mainly including what people tweeted about it which is what most of content of BBC articles is these days.


Do they tell you what’s in the tweet and then post a picture of the tweet so you get to read it twice?
I love I when they do that.
Quote:
i love it when they do that.
#bleedingeyes


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 2:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 12:24 am
Posts: 1325
Location: Sydney (for now)
eldanielfire wrote:
Caley_Red wrote:
Yeah, the BBC's journalistic output is absolutely abysmal and has been for the best part of 10 years.

Glad that the government are planning on decriminalizing non-payment of the TV tax, it's time to end the BBC in its current form.


To be fair, the BBCs journalistic output dropped dramatically when Osborne placed hundreds of millions of cuts on them over the pensioners TV Licence. When global news trends are already heading towards what's on twitter, not letting them have good budgets for proper, quality journalism was dumb. Because what else is BBC News going to be able to do?

IMO the BBC should have a revamp. Fewer channels, more quality drama, ideally closer to the source material, less pandering to 'youth' trends and trash TV, have scholarships for young and varied talent outside the usual bubble they hire from and less internal political BS. Ending the BBC in it's current form to be commercialised is bad. It's neutrality is important, as is it's serious reputation and brand globally which adds to the UKs soft power.


The BBC is still one of the world's best funded new organisations and, further, its revenue is guaranteed giving them the enviable ability to do serious long term planning (relative to a private company).

It's not just their journalistic output that has fallen, it's their entire suite of programming. Their sententious, metro ('woke') worldview has infected absolutely everything they create, the latest programmes to go being Dr Who on TV and Desert Island Discs on Radio 4. Not to mention the hugely disproportionate coverage given to women's sport which goes well beyond its interest level and is promoted for socio-political reasons. In addition, the salaries are absolutely exorbitant and a slap in the face for the many poor people dragged through the courts by the BBC. It's morally unjustifiable, in my view.

I don't disagree that their funding has fallen in real terms but the rot set in long before that, it's most certainly been the subject of woke, metro capture and institutions are almost impossible to reform under such circumstances. Best thing would be decriminalization of TV tax and let people choose whether they want to fund the BBC and they can use the existing encoding technology to ensure there's no freeeriders watching for free.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 5:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3094
When BBC news/sport send vast numbers of people to cover the Olympics and then you discover that your Regional bit of the BBC also needs to send journalists to cover it as well.
I could understand if it was the regional bits of the BBC for Scotland or Wales but not for Points West.


How many people do they send to cover Glastonbury? The total is not a small number.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1479
Location: Canadian Tundra
Canadian news sites are utter rubbish...

I look forward to reading the BBC pretty much everyday.......

I like to have a look get my news from a few sites - BBC, New York times and the LA times....


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16234
Location: Haunting your dreams
Caley_Red wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Caley_Red wrote:
Yeah, the BBC's journalistic output is absolutely abysmal and has been for the best part of 10 years.

Glad that the government are planning on decriminalizing non-payment of the TV tax, it's time to end the BBC in its current form.


To be fair, the BBCs journalistic output dropped dramatically when Osborne placed hundreds of millions of cuts on them over the pensioners TV Licence. When global news trends are already heading towards what's on twitter, not letting them have good budgets for proper, quality journalism was dumb. Because what else is BBC News going to be able to do?

IMO the BBC should have a revamp. Fewer channels, more quality drama, ideally closer to the source material, less pandering to 'youth' trends and trash TV, have scholarships for young and varied talent outside the usual bubble they hire from and less internal political BS. Ending the BBC in it's current form to be commercialised is bad. It's neutrality is important, as is it's serious reputation and brand globally which adds to the UKs soft power.


The BBC is still one of the world's best funded new organisations and, further, its revenue is guaranteed giving them the enviable ability to do serious long term planning (relative to a private company).

It's not just their journalistic output that has fallen, it's their entire suite of programming. Their sententious, metro ('woke') worldview has infected absolutely everything they create, the latest programmes to go being Dr Who on TV and Desert Island Discs on Radio 4. Not to mention the hugely disproportionate coverage given to women's sport which goes well beyond its interest level and is promoted for socio-political reasons. In addition, the salaries are absolutely exorbitant and a slap in the face for the many poor people dragged through the courts by the BBC. It's morally unjustifiable, in my view.

I don't disagree that their funding has fallen in real terms but the rot set in long before that, it's most certainly been the subject of woke, metro capture and institutions are almost impossible to reform under such circumstances. Best thing would be decriminalization of TV tax and let people choose whether they want to fund the BBC and they can use the existing encoding technology to ensure there's no freeeriders watching for free.


If you're dumb enough to get caught by the TV licencing people, you should be forcibly sterilized and sent to the gulags.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 12:24 am
Posts: 1325
Location: Sydney (for now)
Zakar wrote:
Caley_Red wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Caley_Red wrote:
Yeah, the BBC's journalistic output is absolutely abysmal and has been for the best part of 10 years.

Glad that the government are planning on decriminalizing non-payment of the TV tax, it's time to end the BBC in its current form.


To be fair, the BBCs journalistic output dropped dramatically when Osborne placed hundreds of millions of cuts on them over the pensioners TV Licence. When global news trends are already heading towards what's on twitter, not letting them have good budgets for proper, quality journalism was dumb. Because what else is BBC News going to be able to do?

IMO the BBC should have a revamp. Fewer channels, more quality drama, ideally closer to the source material, less pandering to 'youth' trends and trash TV, have scholarships for young and varied talent outside the usual bubble they hire from and less internal political BS. Ending the BBC in it's current form to be commercialised is bad. It's neutrality is important, as is it's serious reputation and brand globally which adds to the UKs soft power.


The BBC is still one of the world's best funded new organisations and, further, its revenue is guaranteed giving them the enviable ability to do serious long term planning (relative to a private company).

It's not just their journalistic output that has fallen, it's their entire suite of programming. Their sententious, metro ('woke') worldview has infected absolutely everything they create, the latest programmes to go being Dr Who on TV and Desert Island Discs on Radio 4. Not to mention the hugely disproportionate coverage given to women's sport which goes well beyond its interest level and is promoted for socio-political reasons. In addition, the salaries are absolutely exorbitant and a slap in the face for the many poor people dragged through the courts by the BBC. It's morally unjustifiable, in my view.

I don't disagree that their funding has fallen in real terms but the rot set in long before that, it's most certainly been the subject of woke, metro capture and institutions are almost impossible to reform under such circumstances. Best thing would be decriminalization of TV tax and let people choose whether they want to fund the BBC and they can use the existing encoding technology to ensure there's no freeeriders watching for free.


If you're dumb enough to get caught by the TV licencing people, you should be forcibly sterilized and sent to the gulags.


That's why they tend to prey on the vulnerable: elderly, single mothers etc. easier to insist that you have to enter the premises.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 16234
Location: Haunting your dreams
Caley_Red wrote:
Zakar wrote:
Caley_Red wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Caley_Red wrote:
Yeah, the BBC's journalistic output is absolutely abysmal and has been for the best part of 10 years.

Glad that the government are planning on decriminalizing non-payment of the TV tax, it's time to end the BBC in its current form.


To be fair, the BBCs journalistic output dropped dramatically when Osborne placed hundreds of millions of cuts on them over the pensioners TV Licence. When global news trends are already heading towards what's on twitter, not letting them have good budgets for proper, quality journalism was dumb. Because what else is BBC News going to be able to do?

IMO the BBC should have a revamp. Fewer channels, more quality drama, ideally closer to the source material, less pandering to 'youth' trends and trash TV, have scholarships for young and varied talent outside the usual bubble they hire from and less internal political BS. Ending the BBC in it's current form to be commercialised is bad. It's neutrality is important, as is it's serious reputation and brand globally which adds to the UKs soft power.


The BBC is still one of the world's best funded new organisations and, further, its revenue is guaranteed giving them the enviable ability to do serious long term planning (relative to a private company).

It's not just their journalistic output that has fallen, it's their entire suite of programming. Their sententious, metro ('woke') worldview has infected absolutely everything they create, the latest programmes to go being Dr Who on TV and Desert Island Discs on Radio 4. Not to mention the hugely disproportionate coverage given to women's sport which goes well beyond its interest level and is promoted for socio-political reasons. In addition, the salaries are absolutely exorbitant and a slap in the face for the many poor people dragged through the courts by the BBC. It's morally unjustifiable, in my view.

I don't disagree that their funding has fallen in real terms but the rot set in long before that, it's most certainly been the subject of woke, metro capture and institutions are almost impossible to reform under such circumstances. Best thing would be decriminalization of TV tax and let people choose whether they want to fund the BBC and they can use the existing encoding technology to ensure there's no freeeriders watching for free.


If you're dumb enough to get caught by the TV licencing people, you should be forcibly sterilized and sent to the gulags.


That's why they tend to prey on the vulnerable: elderly, single mothers etc. easier to insist that you have to enter the premises.


That's why it should either be considered a public service and paid for out of tax revenue, or done away with.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 2:38 am
Posts: 5144
Location: NZ
The chick is very hot.

There is a rule that has been missed some where


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 28297
Caley_Red wrote:

The BBC is still one of the world's best funded new organisations and, further, its revenue is guaranteed giving them the enviable ability to do serious long term planning (relative to a private company).


It's not close to being as well funded as many news organisations. But that is irrelevant, the quality dropped with less funding because they do fewr rinvestigations. The question is it funded well enough.

Quote:
It's not just their journalistic output that has fallen, it's their entire suite of programming. Their sententious, metro ('woke') worldview has infected absolutely everything they create, the latest programmes to go being Dr Who on TV and Desert Island Discs on Radio 4. Not to mention the hugely disproportionate coverage given to women's sport which goes well beyond its interest level and is promoted for socio-political reasons. In addition, the salaries are absolutely exorbitant and a slap in the face for the many poor people dragged through the courts by the BBC. It's morally unjustifiable, in my view.


This I alluded to. The political wokeness of shite like Doctor Who right now is why I said they should and must employ and train a wider variety of talent and respect source materials of what they make. as for salaries, while the likes of Linekar's is bollocks, we can list quite quickly the number of massive salaries at the BBC. Most are not. The issue is they hire to often from either The Guardian or Channel 4. They need to look further afield. When they were better funded they did and developed talent in house. This was the home of Clarkson's Top Gear remember?

As for the female sports programs. Name me a live piece of women's sport shown on the BBC this week? Or last week? Or until the 6 Nations where most women's matches will only be on the red button? The only weekly women's sport show is the women's Football one, it's on at 11:30pm on a Sunday after the 2nd match of the day program. How is this disproportionate coverage?

Quote:
I don't disagree that their funding has fallen in real terms but the rot set in long before that, it's most certainly been the subject of woke, metro capture and institutions are almost impossible to reform under such circumstances. Best thing would be decriminalization of TV tax and let people choose whether they want to fund the BBC and they can use the existing encoding technology to ensure there's no freeeriders watching for free.


The funding issue is separate to the culture issue. No need to conflate the two. IMO the funding may as well be paid for via income tax (add a penny and take away the TV licence) or via a tax on the sale of all electronic goods. It's pointless to make the BBC a commercial enterprise. It's neutrality for example provides a nice balance to the Guardian/Daily Mail/Sun political activism and to remain that way it needs to be free of commercial pressures and funded well enough it can confidently set it's own news agenda and ignore Twitter pressures.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 28297
Glaston wrote:
When BBC news/sport send vast numbers of people to cover the Olympics and then you discover that your Regional bit of the BBC also needs to send journalists to cover it as well.
I could understand if it was the regional bits of the BBC for Scotland or Wales but not for Points West.


How many people do they send to cover Glastonbury? The total is not a small number.


The BBC Olympic coverage is amazing though, and once every 4 years (The Winter coverage is more amateur stuff). That is worth while. It is also still smaller than NBCs in the USA and still far superior and more balanced. Those are the occasions where it's good to have a provider that doesn't need commercial considerations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:35 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 19244
As a non UKer you guys dont know what you have in the BBC.

The BBC is the most respected media organisation in the world. Its reputation alone is a force for good for British foreign relations.

Its reputation for unbiased quality journalism is warranted and quite frankly it shits all over anything Ireland or The Netherlands have (my 2 frames of reference). I would give my left nut to have something even half as good as the BBC in Ireland.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:47 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 28297
nardol wrote:
As a non UKer you guys dont know what you have in the BBC.

The BBC is the most respected media organisation in the world. Its reputation alone is a force for good for British foreign relations.

Its reputation for unbiased quality journalism is warranted and quite frankly it shits all over anything Ireland or The Netherlands have (my 2 frames of reference). I would give my left nut to have something even half as good as the BBC in Ireland.


Exactly my point :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 2:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1565
backrow wrote:
Won’t lie, not the first internet link I’ve read that had a 22 year old Texan woman, her Pussy, and the BBC


:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 4:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 758
Location: Boston, London, Quarantine
nardol wrote:
As a non UKer you guys dont know what you have in the BBC.

The BBC is the most respected media organisation in the world. Its reputation alone is a force for good for British foreign relations.

Its reputation for unbiased quality journalism is warranted and quite frankly it shits all over anything Ireland or The Netherlands have (my 2 frames of reference). I would give my left nut to have something even half as good as the BBC in Ireland.
Lived out of the UK for the past 6 years, and agree with the broad sentiment - so much better than US news, which appears to be entirely editorial rather than objective, fact-based reporting. BBC news online has been my primary news source for the time I've been away.

However, I do also agree with the OP, that the quality (online, don't know about the TV/ radio broadcasts) has noticeably declined in the last couple of years. So much wokery, non-stories, and general dumbing-down of the writing standards, pretty sad to see. I'd be happy to pay a little each month for high quality, objective news.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bayern, bessantj, Google Adsense [Bot], irishrugbyua, Leinster in London, RandomNavigat0r, Sensible Stephen and 34 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group