Whaaattt?

The BBC are in trouble not for this one instance or even the fact they did badly edit the speech, mistakenly, or on purpose, but the fact they tried to cover it up and they have known it was a problem for nearly a year now and done nothing.


Then there was the news reader who they suspended on full pay for months before sacking him, Gary Liniker was another over payed problem, and others.

It comes across as a closed shop all looking after one another and the big names can get away with anything and will be protected.

They do seem to employ people with just one type of politics.

I noticed a news reader was in trouble over changing her script from 'pregnant people' to 'pregnant women', apparently the look on her face as she said it was also bad taste according to the BBC.

The W word comes to mind big time but its not a word I use, I think stark raving bonkers is a better description.

 

Oh yes and a great success it was; the country has boomed, illegal migration has plunged, crime levels have declined, prices dropped and we are all a lot better off.
And I voted the wrong way yet again.

 

Does the BBC TV news differ significantly from the BBC radio news? As what you are describing doesn't fit with what I listen to on the radio.

 

That's not the point though. It was a majority vote, one the BBC refused to accept graciously and work with, instead undermining it at every opportunity.

Personally, I think it could have been a success, but those at the top didn't want it to be. I was entirely on the fence and had there been a "don't mind" option on the ballot paper, I would have chosen it. I didn't decide which way to vote till I was in the booth, pencil in hand. We shouldn't have been asked the qu, IMV, but once we had been and the votes were counted, everyone in the media and parliament should have immediately lined up behind it as part of their job and got on with delivering a workable exit.

 

I never listen to any form of radio so cannot answer that.

 

I do tend to watch a fair bit of the BBC tv news, but not radio these days, there has to be a difference in reporting purely because you cant watch all the filming that is shown on a TV news programme.

Also I bet you dont get them plugging their TV programmes on the radio?
Seems to be a constant thing nowadays.

The lunchtime politics programme seems to have been dumbed down recently as well.

 

You can't exactly blame the BBC for the Conservative Government under various PMs making a complete pigs ear of negotiating a decent workable exit treaty or can you.

 

Oh yes they do I know exactly what the latest Attenborough epic is about, when it's on and how I can watch it.
Now I'm sure they don't plug radio programmes on the TV as they'd never be allowed to broadcast bits of "I'm Sorry I haven't a Clue" before the watershed and as for how poor old Samantha is treated the viewers would never stand for it.

 

I don't think presenters need to be paid loads of money but the BBC has to pay them what ITV, Sky or any other broadcaster would offer or there would be nobody presenting anything. Its all well and good saying that there are loads of people who would do the job for less money but if they would get paid more elsewhere, most would go there for the job!

 

Indeed it seems that watching a radio is not really worth it.

 

Do you mean woke? It would take a braver person than I to use that word round here.

 

And I thought I was the only one who didn't use it.

 

I use it fairly often. It's meaning has morphed over time.

If, to me, someone is woke,, they are a posturing buffoon and not capable of independant thought.