Jump to content

The Biased Broadcasting Corporation


bickster

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, bickster said:

Which is completely off topic for this discussion and thread

Well fair enough, i suppose it could have gone in the general chat thread. I haven't followed this thread at all because I generally steer well clear of most political things but this is definitely being forced onto me from all angles at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Wainy316 said:

That's encouraging.  I genuinely thought they'd have a small bounce.

Me too, I genuinely thought Callous Cruella's naval escapades would strike a chord with the baser elements of the nation's psyche, but I'm glad to see it's not more widespread.

It's fair to say the BBC have not covered themselves in glory over this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bickster said:

This absolutely wasn't a dead cat

Sunak's internal monologue will be one of absolute fury. It's the second week in a row his attempt to recover his popularity in the polls has been absolutely drowned out of the news cycle.

First week it was Matt Hancock and last week Lineker.

To add to this, it also misunderstands what the Tories are doing with their policy. 

The takes of "all this is to distract people from their positon on refugees" are completely wide of the mark - they think that it is the right policy and they think that it's popular. They want all the papers reporting on Sunak's "win" with France and how they are "stopping human traffickers".

The last thing they wanted this to turn into was half a week of headlines on BBC social media policy.

Edited by ml1dch
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, AVFCDAN said:

Well fair enough, i suppose it could have gone in the general chat thread. I haven't followed this thread at all because I generally steer well clear of most political things but this is definitely being forced onto me from all angles at the moment.

Because something really really important has just happened. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I can't say I've ever found a news story forced on me, If I'm not interested, I click on something else.

Like big boobies. Phwoarr 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, AVFCDAN said:

Thank god they've resolved this as swiftly as possible, not sure how we would all manage without Gary's incredible presenting skills and million pound plus salary on the books.

The media realise that the country is in such a parlous state, that the population needs distracting from the the many present miseries and imminent crises the political class have inflicted on us. 

They needed a distraction after interest in Harry and Megan had started to fade.

Saint Lineker of Leicester and Barnes obliged.

The BBC are supposed to unite the country, or at least give the appearance of doing so, but they have followed Gramsci's plan to the letter, and their slip has been showing.

The only good thing to come out of the issue, is that it invites questions about the way the BBC's is financed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

 

Lineker is in the strong position of being able to walk into work at any of the other broadcasters. Without the worry of having bills to pay he was never going to back down to the BBC/Tories.

Edited by Genie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

The media realise that the country is in such a parlous state, that the population needs distracting from the the many present miseries and imminent crises the political class have inflicted on us. 

They needed a distraction after interest in Harry and Megan had started to fade.

Saint Lineker of Leicester and Barnes obliged.

The BBC are supposed to unite the country, or at least give the appearance of doing so, but they have followed Gramsci's plan to the letter, and their slip has been showing.

The only good thing to come out of the issue, is that it invites questions about the way the BBC's is financed.

 

The only thing the Lineker episode was a distraction from was Sunak attempting to resurrect the Tories and his flagging position in the polls. Unfortunately his own dogs of war put paid to that.

As for the funding issue, nice to see you parroting the Tory agenda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

The only good thing to come out of the issue, is that it invites questions about the way the BBC's is financed.

Not the only good thing - lots of Tories have been made to look silly, the "not a bell-end" side won for a change and a lot of terrible people are upset by that. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

The media realise that the country is in such a parlous state, that the population needs distracting from the the many present miseries and imminent crises the political class have inflicted on us. 

They needed a distraction after interest in Harry and Megan had started to fade.

Saint Lineker of Leicester and Barnes obliged.

The BBC are supposed to unite the country, or at least give the appearance of doing so, but they have followed Gramsci's plan to the letter, and their slip has been showing.

The only good thing to come out of the issue, is that it invites questions about the way the BBC's is financed.

 

What a very odd take. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ml1dch said:

The last thing they wanted this to turn into was half a week of headlines on BBC social media policy.

I think this is another of those "who is they" ones. There is a section of the Tory party that is pretty vehemently anti-BBC and "they" absolutely do want to take any opportunity to have a go at it. There is another, larger, section of the Tory party which is not really arsed about the BBC one way or the other - they know lots of their voters like the BBC and they don't want to be on the end of angry voter letters and e mails. Then there is the current leadership of the Tory party (and Government) who would like nice headlines about stuff they've done or said. I suspect Braverman is in the cabinet as part of some sort of deal from the last leadership thing. I'm sure she's intelligent, but I'm not sure she's very "smart" and this is an example - she's turned focus from where it was wanted to be to something most of the public agree with, which is Lineker's comments and BBC management weakness and apparent lack of independence from the Government. I guess the people at the top of the BBC hope this'll not lead to them having to go and it'll all get forgotten.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â