BREXIT GOES BACK AND FIFTH

[Johnny Yesno]

Yes, just because the Guardian or BBC might publish the odd good article/program doesn't excuse their fundamental propaganda underpinnings, like all mainstream and corporate media - the Times, Telegraph, Sun, they exist to control their wing of a very narrow establishment orthodoxy, to keep their constituents within the boundaries of what is acceptable to our rulers. It's all got to go I'm afraid, if we ever want to bust out of the control mechanisms they use to maintain their power hierarchy.

I don't believe for one minute that you are unaware that the vacuum will be filled by other corporate interests, currently the big tech companies. Corporate interests that are completely outside democratic accountability. This is why I find you sinister.

I don't care.

Yes, you do. You have a dream that everyone will get their information from crackpot websites like theunderacted.com. You are utterly deluded. Or plain lying. I don't know which, tbh.

[greencalx]

Remember how a few years ago the corporation's major competitors whinging to fuck about the BBC's website being too big and too good? It was never explained how this meant their own websites had to be full of shit, nor how  closing down large swathes of the BBC's site would magically make theirs better.

Licking their wounds, the BBC duly shut down some sections of their website, to the point now that it's basically a news site + the iplayer. If you want to get information, for example, about upcoming shows and when they're going to be broadcasted, you won't find that on their website - despite the fact that's the one thing you might reasonably expect to find there. Meanwhile I don't see a sudden growth in sites providing - ad-free - what the BBC used to, so now instead of one good site plus inferior competitors we now have one crap site and the same old crappy competitors.

None of which excuses the poor quality of the TV news output, which is nothing new. It's been terrible for as long as I can remember, it's maybe just now that more people are starting to notice. I think the argument that this is providing a public service is weak at best. By contrast, there are other aspects of the output that  do provide services that would probably be unviable in the private sector. I would advance local news, stations like R3 and R6 where music is the primary content, children's programming - particularly preschool - and various educational resources. There's probably others.

I'm not sure what the solution to news is. I think to some extent they are hamstrung by requirements to be impartial, which is clearly impossible. In general I would advocate moving towards a model where you still have the value for money that comes from a universal subscription, but with the funds thereby raised available to a wider range of broadcasters with the proviso that there must be a public service remit, free access and no advertising. Then one could see organisations like Sky News, ITN etc competing for funding alongside the BBC and maybe some chance that this would create a level playing field.

[Replies From View]

Yeah. And the fact that the abolition of the BBC would be of massive benefit to a certain Leeds-based employer in no way influences this view, I'm sure.

I mean, I know BBC News is dreadful, but it's not as though we have Woodward and Bernstein waiting in the wings is it? What's a better option?

If we've learned anything from biggy it is that it's completely impossible to change something to make it better.  With both the EU and the BBC the only option is to nuke them from just below the maximum height of the mushroom cloud.

[ToneLa]

If we've learned anything from biggy it is that it's completely impossible to change something to make it better.  With both the EU and the BBC the only option is to nuke them from just below the maximum height of the mushroom cloud.

FUCK TIDYING MY ROOM

[Replies From View]

I think to some extent they are hamstrung by requirements to be impartial, which is clearly impossible.

Not least because they are clearly biased in favour of the Tories.

[Pranet]

The tories have put the frighteners on them it seems. But right wingers are still convinced it is a hive of Marxism. I dunno. At least most of the time it has a least a foot in reality.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

The tories have put the frighteners on them it seems. But right wingers are still convinced it is a hive of Marxism. I dunno. At least most of the time it has a least a foot in reality.

That's below my threshold to trust. The Venezuela coverage demonstrates where having a selective foot outside reality leads.

[Replies From View]

Yes, they cross that line many times I think.  Not infrequently they are knowingly publishing fiction as fact, yet somehow seem able to sleep at night.

I sincerely hope they all die in a lava level.

[greencalx]

Not least because they are clearly biased in favour of the Tories.

I think it's more subtle than that, and that this bias (like others, for example, a complete tone deafness when it comes to scottish politics) is a symptom of a deeper issue, namely a reverence towards national institutions, like the royal family, and the political classes (the way LK talks about "this place" in her dispatches really grinds my gears), and an upper-middle class London-dwelling Oxbridge-graduate mindset.

[Pranet]

I think it's more subtle than that, and that this bias (like others, for example, a complete tone deafness when it comes to scottish politics) is a symptom of a deeper issue, namely a reverence towards national institutions, like the royal family, and the political classes (the way LK talks about "this place" in her dispatches really grinds my gears), and an upper-middle class London-dwelling Oxbridge-graduate mindset.

To an extent that is a problem with journalism and journalists. Largely from the social background you describe.

[BlodwynPig]

The whole point is it's not up to me or anyone else to decide what to 'replace it with'. It doesn't need replacing with anything, we just need to avoid any outlets - almost always representing powerful interests, having disproportionate control over how the public see the world.

HAHA! You love the BBC!

[BlodwynPig]

That much is clear. Then your opinion is worthless. We should not destroy anything until we know what we replace it with. Let those who do care do it; but ah, you are too weak to allow that.

How about this, "we" don't replace it with anything. Let the void speak.

[BlodwynPig]

This is so paranoid (and lacking in vision, which is more important) I don't know where to start, so I won't.

Start by reaching the next level of enlightenment. *LinkedIn*

[Buelligan]

I think a fairly sensible way of eating your news is to go for a varied diet.  Think about a thing, like Brexit and then browse the information available.  Don't always eat the same meal or you will become deficient.  And check how clean each cook's hands are too before you gobble it all up.  Don't swallow everything you're offered without wondering whether it's going to be good and thinking about where it came from.  That's my advice.

[biggytitbo]

If we've learned anything from biggy it is that it's completely impossible to change something to make it better.  With both the EU and the BBC the only option is to nuke them from just below the maximum height of the mushroom cloud.

We've had that guff for 30 years, reform from within etc, even if it was possible they have no intention of ever doing any such thing. But it also shows you don't understand what the EU is and why it can't be reformed, it's a project designed around treaties and constitutions that is specifically designed to be resistant to change or the vagaries of national politics or public opinion. EU supporters so often scoff at the brokenness of American politics, seemingly unaware that the reason so many problems in the US seem intractable is because its system is built around the exact same kind of constitutional order they support with the EU.


Trying to reform the EU is like trying to reform the catness out of a cat, the bad things about it are what the EU is - a set of mechanisms designed to make life easier for corporate power and capital. Even the middle class cherries like free movement only exist in the first place because it greases the wheels of business, not out of some cuddly feely sense of internationalism., considering it only applies if your within the boundaries of the trading block.

[Buelligan]

You could just unplug your internet.  Smash your telly.  Put your phone down the bog.  All gone.  Listen to the psilence.

[Paul Calf]

it only applies if your within the boundaries of the trading block.

So, are you arguing the case for abolishing international borders?

[jobotic]

We've had that guff for 30 years, reform from within etc, even if it was possible they have no intention of ever doing any such thing. But it also shows you don't understand what the EU is and why it can't be reformed, it's a project designed around treaties and constitutions that is specifically designed to be resistant to change or the vagaries of national politics or public opinion. EU supporters so often scoff at the brokenness of American politics, seemingly unaware that the reason so many problems in the US seem intractable is because its system is built around the exact same kind of constitutional order they support with the EU.


Trying to reform the EU is like trying to reform the catness out of a cat, the bad things about it are what the EU is - a set of mechanisms designed to make life easier for corporate power and capital. Even the middle class cherries like free movement only exist in the first place because it greases the wheels of business, not out of some cuddly feely sense of internationalism., considering it only applies if your within the boundaries of the trading block.

How is your plan of wanting Trump to win to sort out the problems of the US system going?

[Replies From View]

We've had that guff for 30 years, reform from within etc

I already know you think this, you idiot.  That's why I was taking the piss out of you.

There isn't a person in this thread who is unaware of your opinions on this subject.  You don't need to keep pasting them in!

[Cuellar]

We've had that guff for 30 years, reform from within etc, even if it was possible they have no intention of ever doing any such thing. But it also shows you don't understand what the EU is and why it can't be reformed, it's a project designed around treaties and constitutions that is specifically designed to be resistant to change or the vagaries of national politics or public opinion. EU supporters so often scoff at the brokenness of American politics, seemingly unaware that the reason so many problems in the US seem intractable is because its system is built around the exact same kind of constitutional order they support with the EU.


Trying to reform the EU is like trying to reform the catness out of a cat, the bad things about it are what the EU is - a set of mechanisms designed to make life easier for corporate power and capital. Even the middle class cherries like free movement only exist in the first place because it greases the wheels of business, not out of some cuddly feely sense of internationalism., considering it only applies if your within the boundaries of the trading block.

I agree, free movement should apply to everyone, regardless of their country of origin.

[Talulah, really!]

"The thing is with the EU, this isn't what we signed up for, they changed it all."

"The thing is with the EU, you can't change it."

[hummingofevil]

The BBC seems to have a different lite-interst piece about "influencers" on its front page ever day. For that alone it should be nuked out of existence. Also has a really weird quirk whereby it's live scores for National League games are always 15 mins behind. Nuked. Please.

[biggytitbo]

"The thing is with the EU, this isn't what we signed up for, they changed it all."

"The thing is with the EU, you can't change it."

Oohh a HOT TAKE!


Except of course they knew exactly what we were signing up to, they just didn't bother to tell us at the time did they? https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/acft/FCO+30+1048.pdf


If we'd know what is stated in that in the 1975 referendum its possible the result would have been very different, as it was the entirely correct statements of the likes of Tony Benn and Barbara Castle were just seen as a kind of atavistic purism at best, scaremongering at worse, when unbeknownst to the public pretty much everyone in power knew full well they were right.

[biggytitbo]

I already know you think this, you idiot.  That's why I was taking the piss out of you.

It's fun to be called an idiot by a man whose main contributions in these threads is to pop up occasionally and fling a bit of poo as if it was a serious contribution.

[BlodwynPig]

The BBC seems to have a different lite-interst piece about "influencers" on its front page ever day. For that alone it should be nuked out of existence. Also has a really weird quirk whereby it's live scores for National League games are always 15 mins behind. Nuked. Please.

Wrong thread. Take it to the "PLEASE FOR THE SAKE OF HUMANITY NUKE THE BB FUCKING C" thread

[Cuellar]

£33 for a SINGLE to Southampton from Waterloo, a journey of about an hour. And it's not even a train to Southampton, because there is of course a rail replacement bus.

HARD BREXIT NOW. and I hope it kills us all

[chveik]

The BBC seems to have a different lite-interst piece about "influencers" on its front page ever day. For that alone it should be nuked out of existence. Also has a really weird quirk whereby it's live scores for National League games are always 15 mins behind. Nuked. Please.

seriously? I'd be very happy to have in my country a public broadcasting that has commissioned so much great tv & radio.

[Replies From View]

It's fun to be called an idiot by a man whose main contributions in these threads is to pop up occasionally and fling a bit of poo as if it was a serious contribution.

Oohh a HOT TAKE!

[Uncle TechTip]

Oohh a HOT TAKE!


Except of course they knew exactly what we were signing up to, they just didn't bother to tell us at the time did they? https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/acft/FCO+30+1048.pdf


If we'd know what is stated in that in the 1975 referendum its possible the result would have been very different, as it was the entirely correct statements of the likes of Tony Benn and Barbara Castle were just seen as a kind of atavistic purism at best, scaremongering at worse, when unbeknownst to the public pretty much everyone in power knew full well they were right.

We've done this. The No campaign was quite clear on where it thought the project would lead to. The people were informed. They still voted yes.

"Laws are made over Britain's head. Laws which we must obey and which may only be used to our disadvantage."

"If one day the Market moves further towards a political federation... Britain will be just one province."

[BlodwynPig]

seriously? I'd be very happy to have in my country a public broadcasting that has commissioned so much great tv & radio.

A very very subjective argument.