Discussion:
OT: I TRIED TO WATCH 'DOCTORS'. OK IT WAS A BAD MISTAKE
Add Reply
williamwright
2021-09-16 15:40:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
It was an omnibus edition of wokery. There was no redeeming feature.

There was a portrayal of a man who was a totally ridiculous caricature
of a racist, but it turned out his son had a secret black granny, so he
got sickle cell. This was to show the irrationality of Dad's beliefs. He
was thoroughly exposed and dragged through the coals. His wife made a
long speech decrying racism. Is this what they call entertainment? Even
though the cause is right it seemed more like very heavy-handed
brainwashing to me. I don't like being preached at when I watch what
should be a light-hearted drama.

Then there was a meeting called by a senior partner, in which she held
up cards of different colours. Apparently each colour represents a
particular sexual preference. There was a long drawn out discussion
about the meanings of (made up) words like bisexual, pansexual, and
polysexual, Everyone in the practice was told they had to learn these
colours. Then a lecture about how people with abnormal sexuality (of
course that's not how they put it) should be treated. The answer seemed
to be, 'Better than anyone else'. This all went on for ages; far longer
than had any dramatic credence. Drone drone drone. I should think people
turned off in droves.

Next there was a round-table discussion about what pronouns to use when
assembling a sports team.

Then the Asian doctor made a fairly hackneyed speech to the idiot
receptionist about how she just wanted to be judged as a person and not
by the colour of her skin.

Since the doctors and nurses and receptionists spent almost the whole
programme sitting around talking about gayness and pronouns and
'diversity' I hope it wasn't meant to be realistic, because I thought
the idea of a GP practice was to see patients now and then.

Bill
JNugent
2021-09-16 15:54:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by williamwright
It was an omnibus edition of wokery. There was no redeeming feature.
There was a portrayal of a man who was a totally ridiculous caricature
of a racist, but it turned out his son had a secret black granny, so he
got sickle cell. This was to show the irrationality of Dad's beliefs. He
was thoroughly exposed and dragged through the coals. His wife made a
long speech decrying racism. Is this what they call entertainment? Even
though the cause is right it seemed more like very heavy-handed
brainwashing to me. I don't like being preached at when I watch what
should be a light-hearted drama.
Then there was a meeting called by a senior partner, in which she held
up cards of different colours. Apparently each colour represents a
particular sexual preference.  There was a long drawn out discussion
about the meanings of (made up) words like bisexual, pansexual, and
polysexual,  Everyone in the practice was told they had to learn these
colours. Then a lecture about how people with abnormal sexuality (of
course that's not how they put it) should be treated. The answer seemed
to be, 'Better than anyone else'. This all went on for ages; far longer
than had any dramatic credence. Drone drone drone. I should think people
turned off in droves.
Next there was a round-table discussion about what pronouns to use when
assembling a sports team.
Then the Asian doctor made a fairly hackneyed speech to the idiot
receptionist about how she just wanted to be judged as a person and not
by the colour of her skin.
Since the doctors and nurses and receptionists spent almost the whole
programme sitting around talking about gayness and pronouns and
'diversity' I hope it wasn't meant to be realistic, because I thought
the idea of a GP practice was to see patients now and then.
I take it that this is a BBC programme?

It is just how every BBC medical "drama" has been for thirty years (or
more), albeit with focus shifting from trendy obsession to trendy obsession.
nightjar
2021-09-16 16:57:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by williamwright
It was an omnibus edition of wokery. There was no redeeming feature.
There was a portrayal of a man who was a totally ridiculous caricature
of a racist, but it turned out his son had a secret black granny, so he
got sickle cell. This was to show the irrationality of Dad's beliefs. He
was thoroughly exposed and dragged through the coals. His wife made a
long speech decrying racism. Is this what they call entertainment? Even
though the cause is right it seemed more like very heavy-handed
brainwashing to me. I don't like being preached at when I watch what
should be a light-hearted drama.
Then there was a meeting called by a senior partner, in which she held
up cards of different colours. Apparently each colour represents a
particular sexual preference.  There was a long drawn out discussion
about the meanings of (made up) words like bisexual, pansexual, and
polysexual,  Everyone in the practice was told they had to learn these
colours. Then a lecture about how people with abnormal sexuality (of
course that's not how they put it) should be treated. The answer seemed
to be, 'Better than anyone else'. This all went on for ages; far longer
than had any dramatic credence. Drone drone drone. I should think people
turned off in droves.
It gets good viewing figures for daytime TV, which is why it is still
running after more than 20 years. It has also won awards for tackling
difficult issues.
Post by williamwright
Next there was a round-table discussion about what pronouns to use when
assembling a sports team.
Then the Asian doctor made a fairly hackneyed speech to the idiot
receptionist about how she just wanted to be judged as a person and not
by the colour of her skin.
Since the doctors and nurses and receptionists spent almost the whole
programme sitting around talking about gayness and pronouns and
'diversity' I hope it wasn't meant to be realistic, because I thought
the idea of a GP practice was to see patients now and then.
It is a soap opera. A realistic soap opera would be far too boring for
anybody to watch.
--
Colin Bignell
williamwright
2021-09-17 00:45:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by nightjar
It is a soap opera. A realistic soap opera would be far too boring for
anybody to watch.
You are deliberately missing the point.

Bill
nightjar
2021-09-17 10:52:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by williamwright
Post by nightjar
It is a soap opera. A realistic soap opera would be far too boring for
anybody to watch.
You are deliberately missing the point.
What? That the programme has been praised for tackling difficult and
even taboo subjects?
--
Colin Bignell
williamwright
2021-09-17 15:39:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by nightjar
Post by williamwright
Post by nightjar
It is a soap opera. A realistic soap opera would be far too boring
for anybody to watch.
You are deliberately missing the point.
What? That the programme has been praised for tackling difficult and
even taboo subjects?
No the fact that they overdo it to the extent that they spoil it, and
that it is always a woke message.

Bill
Dave Plowman (News)
2021-09-18 11:49:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by williamwright
Post by nightjar
It is a soap opera. A realistic soap opera would be far too boring for
anybody to watch.
You are deliberately missing the point.
Do wonder if you are related to Mary Whitehouse. Out of all the choices on
TV these days, you choose to avidly watch a program you hate.
--
*Sherlock Holmes never said "Elementary, my dear Watson" *

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
williamwright
2021-09-18 23:41:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Do wonder if you are related to Mary Whitehouse. Out of all the choices on
TV these days, you choose to avidly watch a program you hate.
I don't watch it avidly. I watch it now and again when it comes on.

Bill
Brian Gaff (Sofa)
2021-09-17 07:38:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
That part is obviously true of course, most real lives are pretty boring
most of the time. Incidentally, you missed out autosexual.

If I lived in many of the soap operas districts, I'd need to have been paid
danger money, a bit like the number of murders in Midsummer Murders.
Brian
--
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
***@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
Post by nightjar
Post by williamwright
It was an omnibus edition of wokery. There was no redeeming feature.
There was a portrayal of a man who was a totally ridiculous caricature of
a racist, but it turned out his son had a secret black granny, so he got
sickle cell. This was to show the irrationality of Dad's beliefs. He was
thoroughly exposed and dragged through the coals. His wife made a long
speech decrying racism. Is this what they call entertainment? Even though
the cause is right it seemed more like very heavy-handed brainwashing to
me. I don't like being preached at when I watch what should be a
light-hearted drama.
Then there was a meeting called by a senior partner, in which she held up
cards of different colours. Apparently each colour represents a
particular sexual preference. There was a long drawn out discussion about
the meanings of (made up) words like bisexual, pansexual, and polysexual,
Everyone in the practice was told they had to learn these colours. Then a
lecture about how people with abnormal sexuality (of course that's not
how they put it) should be treated. The answer seemed to be, 'Better than
anyone else'. This all went on for ages; far longer than had any dramatic
credence. Drone drone drone. I should think people turned off in droves.
It gets good viewing figures for daytime TV, which is why it is still
running after more than 20 years. It has also won awards for tackling
difficult issues.
Post by williamwright
Next there was a round-table discussion about what pronouns to use when
assembling a sports team.
Then the Asian doctor made a fairly hackneyed speech to the idiot
receptionist about how she just wanted to be judged as a person and not
by the colour of her skin.
Since the doctors and nurses and receptionists spent almost the whole
programme sitting around talking about gayness and pronouns and
'diversity' I hope it wasn't meant to be realistic, because I thought the
idea of a GP practice was to see patients now and then.
It is a soap opera. A realistic soap opera would be far too boring for
anybody to watch.
--
Colin Bignell
Indy Jess John
2021-09-17 06:45:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by williamwright
It was an omnibus edition of wokery. There was no redeeming feature.
I used to watch Doctors when it was a programme dealing with medical
matters. About 3 years ago the script writers decided to focus a lot
more on their characters' personal circumstances, and they lost me as a
viewer.

A similar thing happened with Silent Witness. It used to be interesting
watching a jigsaw puzzle of forensic discoveries come together to a
final conclusion. Then they started inventing personal dilemmas to
colour the behaviour of the main characters, and I abandoned that series
too.

I now have a Youview box that lets me watch past broadcasts up to a week
before, and I wait for the critics' analysis of any new series and then
decide if it is going to be watchable or not. Most of them fall into
the "or not" category these days, unfortunately.

Jim
Brian Gaff (Sofa)
2021-09-17 07:34:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I never saw it, but some of those well meaning programmes tend to be to
within an inch of their lives and the whole thing becomes bland to the point
of laughability.
I find some of the more recent USA series are even worse than what you
describe.

Still nobody forced you to watch it.
Brian
--
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
***@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
Post by williamwright
It was an omnibus edition of wokery. There was no redeeming feature.
There was a portrayal of a man who was a totally ridiculous caricature of
a racist, but it turned out his son had a secret black granny, so he got
sickle cell. This was to show the irrationality of Dad's beliefs. He was
thoroughly exposed and dragged through the coals. His wife made a long
speech decrying racism. Is this what they call entertainment? Even though
the cause is right it seemed more like very heavy-handed brainwashing to
me. I don't like being preached at when I watch what should be a
light-hearted drama.
Then there was a meeting called by a senior partner, in which she held up
cards of different colours. Apparently each colour represents a particular
sexual preference. There was a long drawn out discussion about the
meanings of (made up) words like bisexual, pansexual, and polysexual,
Everyone in the practice was told they had to learn these colours. Then a
lecture about how people with abnormal sexuality (of course that's not how
they put it) should be treated. The answer seemed to be, 'Better than
anyone else'. This all went on for ages; far longer than had any dramatic
credence. Drone drone drone. I should think people turned off in droves.
Next there was a round-table discussion about what pronouns to use when
assembling a sports team.
Then the Asian doctor made a fairly hackneyed speech to the idiot
receptionist about how she just wanted to be judged as a person and not by
the colour of her skin.
Since the doctors and nurses and receptionists spent almost the whole
programme sitting around talking about gayness and pronouns and
'diversity' I hope it wasn't meant to be realistic, because I thought the
idea of a GP practice was to see patients now and then.
Bill
alan_m
2021-09-17 08:18:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Brian Gaff (Sofa)
I never saw it, but some of those well meaning programmes tend to be to
within an inch of their lives and the whole thing becomes bland to the point
of laughability.
I find some of the more recent USA series are even worse than what you
describe.
Still nobody forced you to watch it.
Brian
Blake's 7 is back on the box (Forces TV). Another high quality program
rescued from the past ;)

Bad acting, plot line so full of holes that you could drive a bus
through, strange editing that misses out how the plot gets from A to B
but strangely includes pointless scenes to add drama (or not), bad sets
where you can seen the sticky tape holding together the pretend metal
plates etc.

It's so bad its almost worth watching ;)

In the dim and distant past I seem to remember that they had a box that
was meant to be some kind of super computer but so obviously made from
random parts from the Radio Spares catalogue (in the days before they
rebranded themselves as RS).
--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk
Brian Gaff (Sofa)
2021-09-17 09:21:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Yes I remember that. Orac looked like a Perspex box with leds flashing on it
if I recall. Most of the series was without blake of course as he had a
better offer to act elsewhere but came back neear the end so he could hget
blown away with most of the others and many of the bad guys as well in a
very naff laser gun fight.
Brian
--
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
***@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
Post by alan_m
Post by Brian Gaff (Sofa)
I never saw it, but some of those well meaning programmes tend to be to
within an inch of their lives and the whole thing becomes bland to the point
of laughability.
I find some of the more recent USA series are even worse than what you
describe.
Still nobody forced you to watch it.
Brian
Blake's 7 is back on the box (Forces TV). Another high quality program
rescued from the past ;)
Bad acting, plot line so full of holes that you could drive a bus through,
strange editing that misses out how the plot gets from A to B but
strangely includes pointless scenes to add drama (or not), bad sets where
you can seen the sticky tape holding together the pretend metal plates
etc.
It's so bad its almost worth watching ;)
In the dim and distant past I seem to remember that they had a box that
was meant to be some kind of super computer but so obviously made from
random parts from the Radio Spares catalogue (in the days before they
rebranded themselves as RS).
--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk
JNugent
2021-09-17 10:02:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Brian Gaff (Sofa)
Yes I remember that. Orac looked like a Perspex box with leds flashing on it
if I recall. Most of the series was without blake of course as he had a
better offer to act elsewhere but came back neear the end so he could hget
blown away with most of the others and many of the bad guys as well in a
very naff laser gun fight.
Brian
Gareth Thomas played Blake in the first two seasons (1978 and 1979,
January to March) and returned for the last episodes of Seasons 3 and 4.
He was thus in 28 of the 52 episodes made.

He joined the RSC for the 1979 season at Stratford, much to the
annoyance of B7 writer Chris Boucher, who had to change the plotlines
and introduce new characters.

I saw GT playing Montano in "Othello" at the RST that year. Others in
the production included John McEnery as Rodrigo and Donald Sinden as the
title character.

One evening, we were in a Stratford Chinese restaurant when Gareth
Thomas and Ben Kingsley (not as famous then as he later became) came in
and sat at a nearby table. Gareth was wearing one of those over the
shoulder "man bags" (so fashionable among some at the time).
Robin
2021-09-17 09:22:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by alan_m
In the dim and distant past I seem to remember that they had a box that
was meant to be some kind of super computer but so obviously made from
random parts from the Radio Spares catalogue (in the days before they
rebranded themselves as RS).
Super computer? Pah! As Ensor (Orac's creator) said, Orac is a /brain/ -
and one with great (if strangely intermittently used) abilities
(broadcasting included).
--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid
JNugent
2021-09-17 09:47:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by alan_m
Post by Brian Gaff (Sofa)
I never saw it, but some of those well meaning programmes tend to be to
within an inch of their lives and the whole thing becomes bland to the point
of laughability.
  I find some of the more recent USA series are even worse than what you
describe.
Still nobody forced you to watch it.
  Brian
Blake's 7 is back on the box (Forces TV). Another high quality program
rescued from the past ;)
Bad acting, plot line so full of holes that you could drive a bus
through, strange editing that misses out how the plot gets from A to B
but strangely includes pointless scenes to add drama (or not), bad sets
where you can seen the sticky tape holding together the pretend metal
plates etc.
Is Forces TV showing the episodes in full without trimming for the slot
plus advert breaks?
Post by alan_m
It's so bad its almost worth watching ;)
I bought the DVD box-set some years ago. The whole fifty-two episodes
are also currently available (uncut) on Britbox.
Post by alan_m
In the dim and distant past I seem to remember that they had a box that
was meant to be some kind of super computer but so obviously made from
random parts from the Radio Spares catalogue (in the days before they
rebranded themselves as RS).
Orac. Not until the end of Season 1.
Andy Burns
2021-09-17 12:11:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Is Forces TV showing the episodes in full without trimming for the slot
plus advert breaks?
They've all been on youtube or years ...
nightjar
2021-09-17 11:45:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by alan_m
Post by Brian Gaff (Sofa)
I never saw it, but some of those well meaning programmes tend to be to
within an inch of their lives and the whole thing becomes bland to the point
of laughability.
  I find some of the more recent USA series are even worse than what you
describe.
Still nobody forced you to watch it.
  Brian
Blake's 7 is back on the box (Forces TV). Another high quality program
rescued from the past ;)
Bad acting, plot line so full of holes that you could drive a bus
through, strange editing that misses out how the plot gets from A to B
but strangely includes pointless scenes to add drama (or not), bad sets
where you can seen the sticky tape holding together the pretend metal
plates etc.
It was written by Terry Nation, inventor of the universe's least
probable aliens, the Daleks.
Post by alan_m
It's so bad its almost worth watching ;)
I watched it for Servelan :-)
Post by alan_m
In the dim and distant past I seem to remember that they had a box that
was meant to be some kind of super computer but so obviously made from
random parts from the Radio Spares catalogue (in the days before they
rebranded themselves as RS).
https://blakes7.fandom.com/wiki/Orac
--
Colin Bignell
williamwright
2021-09-17 15:41:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Brian Gaff (Sofa)
Still nobody forced you to watch it.
No but they forced me to pay for it.

Bill
Dave Plowman (News)
2021-09-18 11:46:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by williamwright
Post by Brian Gaff (Sofa)
Still nobody forced you to watch it.
No but they forced me to pay for it.
In a civilised country, you do tend to have to pay for things you may
never use.

But you do seem to watch an awful lot of BBC stuff that you claim you
don't want - or rather don't want to pay for.
--
*Arkansas State Motto: Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Laugh.

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
williamwright
2021-09-18 23:43:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by williamwright
Post by Brian Gaff (Sofa)
Still nobody forced you to watch it.
No but they forced me to pay for it.
In a civilised country, you do tend to have to pay for things you may
never use >
But you do seem to watch an awful lot of BBC stuff that you claim you
don't want - or rather don't want to pay for.
I don't watch much at all on the BBC. Very little. I find most of the
BBC's output unwatchable because of the bias. I don't like being lied to.

Bill
Dave Plowman (News)
2021-09-19 11:06:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by williamwright
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by williamwright
Post by Brian Gaff (Sofa)
Still nobody forced you to watch it.
No but they forced me to pay for it.
In a civilised country, you do tend to have to pay for things you may
never use >
But you do seem to watch an awful lot of BBC stuff that you claim you
don't want - or rather don't want to pay for.
I don't watch much at all on the BBC. Very little. I find most of the
BBC's output unwatchable because of the bias. I don't like being lied to.
You want GB News, then Bill. I'm sure you'd be very happy with that.
--
*Men are from Earth, women are from Earth. Deal with it.

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
williamwright
2021-09-20 16:10:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by williamwright
I don't watch much at all on the BBC. Very little. I find most of the
BBC's output unwatchable because of the bias. I don't like being lied to.
You want GB News, then Bill. I'm sure you'd be very happy with that.
It can be refreshing to see things on GB News that would never, ever, be
on the main channels. It does make me realise how the main channels bias
what they show by omission.

However there are things on GB News that demonstrate bias.

Bill
Dave Plowman (News)
2021-09-21 10:27:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by williamwright
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by williamwright
I don't watch much at all on the BBC. Very little. I find most of the
BBC's output unwatchable because of the bias. I don't like being lied to.
You want GB News, then Bill. I'm sure you'd be very happy with that.
It can be refreshing to see things on GB News that would never, ever, be
on the main channels. It does make me realise how the main channels bias
what they show by omission.
I'd be utterly amazed if you can find time to see all the news and current
affairs progs on the main channels. With a basic news bulletin, time
constrains means of course some things are omitted. How important those
are depends on the individual viewer.
Post by williamwright
However there are things on GB News that demonstrate bias.
It was set up to satisfy Express etc readers. So of course it's biased.
Post by williamwright
Bill
--
*Happiness is seeing your mother-in-law on a milk carton

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
williamwright
2021-09-21 14:32:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by williamwright
It can be refreshing to see things on GB News that would never, ever, be
on the main channels. It does make me realise how the main channels bias
what they show by omission.
I'd be utterly amazed if you can find time to see all the news and current
affairs progs on the main channels.
Have you heard of sampling?
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
With a basic news bulletin, time
constrains means of course some things are omitted. How important those
are depends on the individual viewer.
But they always seem to omit things that go against their agenda.

Bill
Dave Plowman (News)
2021-09-21 20:42:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by williamwright
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by williamwright
It can be refreshing to see things on GB News that would never, ever,
be on the main channels. It does make me realise how the main
channels bias what they show by omission.
I'd be utterly amazed if you can find time to see all the news and
current affairs progs on the main channels.
Have you heard of sampling?
Like you did with Doctors?
Post by williamwright
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
With a basic news bulletin, time constrains means of course some
things are omitted. How important those are depends on the individual
viewer.
But they always seem to omit things that go against their agenda.
As opposed with going with yours?
Post by williamwright
Bill
--
*A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory.

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
alan_m
2021-09-21 16:45:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
I'd be utterly amazed if you can find time to see all the news and current
affairs progs on the main channels. With a basic news bulletin, time
constrains means of course some things are omitted. How important those
are depends on the individual viewer.
But they always seem to find time for the multiple dead donkey items
--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk
Dave Plowman (News)
2021-09-22 15:40:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by alan_m
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
I'd be utterly amazed if you can find time to see all the news and current
affairs progs on the main channels. With a basic news bulletin, time
constrains means of course some things are omitted. How important those
are depends on the individual viewer.
But they always seem to find time for the multiple dead donkey items
Perhaps you need to start a good honest news channel, then? Everything
serious, and everything to your liking.

Problem is, as GB News has found out, very few watch it.
--
*There are 3 kinds of people: those who can count & those who can't.

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
JNugent
2021-09-22 17:04:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by alan_m
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
I'd be utterly amazed if you can find time to see all the news and current
affairs progs on the main channels. With a basic news bulletin, time
constrains means of course some things are omitted. How important those
are depends on the individual viewer.
But they always seem to find time for the multiple dead donkey items
Perhaps you need to start a good honest news channel, then? Everything
serious, and everything to your liking.
Problem is, as GB News has found out, very few watch it.
It is gratifying to learn that you too see GB News as the only
UK-available honest news channel on non-subscription TV.
JNugent
2021-09-23 17:47:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by alan_m
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
I'd be utterly amazed if you can find time to see all the news and current
affairs progs on the main channels. With a basic news bulletin, time
constrains means of course some things are omitted. How important those
are depends on the individual viewer.
But they always seem to find time for the multiple dead donkey items
Perhaps you need to start a good honest news channel, then? Everything
serious, and everything to your liking.
Problem is, as GB News has found out, very few watch it.
It is gratifying to learn that you too see GB News as the only
UK-available honest news channel on non-subscription TV.
Irony totally goes over your head, then?
If you had meant it ironically, you presumably would have said something
untrue with the claimed irony making that clear.

But it isn't untrue. For all its faults, GB News *is* the only honest
news channel available free on Freeview.

The channel has a clear mission statement which is made public. Other
channels have theirs too, but they never make them clear, usually
claiming to be unbiased (as ridiculous as that is in the case of BBC
News and C4 News). Others are essentially controlled by foreign
governments (Al Jazeera, RT, etc, in order that their viewpoints are
presented).

And whilst Channel Four News isn't a news channel as such, it too seems
to have an unspoken mission statement to present "news" entirely from a
liberal / left perspective, often referred to these days as "woke". No
doubt some would argue that it has no such aims. If it hasn't, it's
making a *terrible* job of achieving whatever those aims are.

There are criticisms one could levy against GB News, but the basic and
systematic dishonesty of BBC News and Channel Four News are not amongst
them.

Even you must recognise and acknowledge that.
Even Neil has finally admitted it's a load of rubbish. Although just how
he - with such a vast experience of the meja - expected it to be a success
without being as bigoted as Fox News, gawd knows.
His disputes with GBN are obviously real, but whether he regards the
channel as anywhere near as dishonest as (say) Channel Four News is
another matter. None of us have any reason to suspect that.

Roll on C4 privatisation and the scrapping of the so-called "TV Licence".
Dave Plowman (News)
2021-09-24 10:06:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by JNugent
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by alan_m
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
I'd be utterly amazed if you can find time to see all the news and current
affairs progs on the main channels. With a basic news bulletin, time
constrains means of course some things are omitted. How important those
are depends on the individual viewer.
But they always seem to find time for the multiple dead donkey items
Perhaps you need to start a good honest news channel, then? Everything
serious, and everything to your liking.
Problem is, as GB News has found out, very few watch it.
It is gratifying to learn that you too see GB News as the only
UK-available honest news channel on non-subscription TV.
Irony totally goes over your head, then?
If you had meant it ironically, you presumably would have said something
untrue with the claimed irony making that clear.
But it isn't untrue. For all its faults, GB News *is* the only honest
news channel available free on Freeview.
The channel has a clear mission statement which is made public. Other
channels have theirs too, but they never make them clear, usually
claiming to be unbiased (as ridiculous as that is in the case of BBC
News and C4 News). Others are essentially controlled by foreign
governments (Al Jazeera, RT, etc, in order that their viewpoints are
presented).
Such a clear mission statement that their chairman and flagship presenter
left after only a few weeks.
--
*Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't*

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
JNugent
2021-09-24 14:58:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by JNugent
Post by JNugent
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by alan_m
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
I'd be utterly amazed if you can find time to see all the news and current
affairs progs on the main channels. With a basic news bulletin, time
constrains means of course some things are omitted. How important those
are depends on the individual viewer.
But they always seem to find time for the multiple dead donkey items
Perhaps you need to start a good honest news channel, then? Everything
serious, and everything to your liking.
Problem is, as GB News has found out, very few watch it.
It is gratifying to learn that you too see GB News as the only
UK-available honest news channel on non-subscription TV.
Irony totally goes over your head, then?
If you had meant it ironically, you presumably would have said something
untrue with the claimed irony making that clear.
But it isn't untrue. For all its faults, GB News *is* the only honest
news channel available free on Freeview.
The channel has a clear mission statement which is made public. Other
channels have theirs too, but they never make them clear, usually
claiming to be unbiased (as ridiculous as that is in the case of BBC
News and C4 News). Others are essentially controlled by foreign
governments (Al Jazeera, RT, etc, in order that their viewpoints are
presented).
Such a clear mission statement that their chairman and flagship presenter
left after only a few weeks.
Snipping was easier than making an effort to address the issues, wasn't
it? ;=)
williamwright
2021-09-24 18:20:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Snipping was easier than making an effort to address the issues, wasn't
it? ;=)
Classic Dave. I gave up some time ago. It's like arguing with a woman.

Bill
Dave Plowman (News)
2021-09-26 13:31:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by williamwright
Post by JNugent
Snipping was easier than making an effort to address the issues,
wasn't it? ;=)
Classic Dave. I gave up some time ago. It's like arguing with a woman.
Wonder what that makes you, Bill? Polluting a DIY group with your
political rants?
--
*If a mute swears, does his mother wash his hands with soap?

Dave Plowman ***@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
R Souls
2021-09-26 09:42:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by JNugent
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
Post by alan_m
Post by Dave Plowman (News)
I'd be utterly amazed if you can find time to see all the news and current
affairs progs on the main channels. With a basic news bulletin, time
constrains means of course some things are omitted. How important those
are depends on the individual viewer.
But they always seem to find time for the multiple dead donkey items
Perhaps you need to start a good honest news channel, then? Everything
serious, and everything to your liking.
Problem is, as GB News has found out, very few watch it.
It is gratifying to learn that you too see GB News as the only
UK-available honest news channel on non-subscription TV.
Irony totally goes over your head, then?
If you had meant it ironically, you presumably would have said something
untrue with the claimed irony making that clear.
But it isn't untrue. For all its faults, GB News *is* the only honest
news channel available free on Freeview.
The channel has a clear mission statement which is made public. Other
channels have theirs too, but they never make them clear, usually
claiming to be unbiased (as ridiculous as that is in the case of BBC
News and C4 News). Others are essentially controlled by foreign
governments (Al Jazeera, RT, etc, in order that their viewpoints are
presented).
And whilst Channel Four News isn't a news channel as such, it too seems
to have an unspoken mission statement to present "news" entirely from a
liberal / left perspective, often referred to these days as "woke". No
doubt some would argue that it has no such aims. If it hasn't, it's
making a *terrible* job of achieving whatever those aims are.
Dear oh bloody dear! You rabid swivel-eyed right whingers would claim
left wing bias in the weather forecast.
Post by JNugent
There are criticisms one could levy against GB News, but the basic and
systematic dishonesty of BBC News and Channel Four News are not amongst
them.
Even you must recognise and acknowledge that.
Even Neil has finally admitted it's a load of rubbish. Although just how
he - with such a vast experience of the meja - expected it to be a success
without being as bigoted as Fox News, gawd knows.
His disputes with GBN are obviously real, but whether he regards the
channel as anywhere near as dishonest as (say) Channel Four News is
another matter. None of us have any reason to suspect that.
Roll on C4 privatisation and the scrapping of the so-called "TV Licence".
JNugent
2021-09-26 22:38:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
[ ... ]
Post by R Souls
...For all its faults, GB News *is* the only honest
news channel available free on Freeview.
The channel has a clear mission statement which is made public. Other
channels have theirs too, but they never make them clear, usually
claiming to be unbiased (as ridiculous as that is in the case of BBC
News and C4 News). Others are essentially controlled by foreign
governments (Al Jazeera, RT, etc, in order that their viewpoints are
presented).
And whilst Channel Four News isn't a news channel as such, it too seems
to have an unspoken mission statement to present "news" entirely from a
liberal / left perspective, often referred to these days as "woke". No
doubt some would argue that it has no such aims. If it hasn't, it's
making a *terrible* job of achieving whatever those aims are.
Dear oh bloody dear! You rabid swivel-eyed right whingers would claim
left wing bias in the weather forecast.
Your screen name is very well-chosen.

Or did you acquire it at school?
Cursitor Doom
2021-09-26 23:34:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JNugent
[ ... ]
Post by R Souls
...For all its faults, GB News *is* the only honest
news channel available free on Freeview.
The channel has a clear mission statement which is made public. Other
channels have theirs too, but they never make them clear, usually
claiming to be unbiased (as ridiculous as that is in the case of BBC
News and C4 News). Others are essentially controlled by foreign
governments (Al Jazeera, RT, etc, in order that their viewpoints are
presented).
And whilst Channel Four News isn't a news channel as such, it too seems
to have an unspoken mission statement to present "news" entirely from a
liberal / left perspective, often referred to these days as "woke". No
doubt some would argue that it has no such aims. If it hasn't, it's
making a *terrible* job of achieving whatever those aims are.
Dear oh bloody dear! You rabid swivel-eyed right whingers would claim
left wing bias in the weather forecast.
Your screen name is very well-chosen.
Or did you acquire it at school?
I believe it's Dave Plowman's sock puppet. He resorts to it every time
he loses an argument (one notices these things after a while).
--
"You must therefore confess that by 'individual' you mean no other person
than the bourgeois; than the middle-class owner of property. This person
must indeed be swept out of the way, and made impossible."

- Marx & Engels, The Communist Manifesto
R Souls
2021-09-27 09:22:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Cursitor Doom
Post by JNugent
[ ... ]
Post by R Souls
...For all its faults, GB News *is* the only honest
news channel available free on Freeview.
The channel has a clear mission statement which is made public. Other
channels have theirs too, but they never make them clear, usually
claiming to be unbiased (as ridiculous as that is in the case of BBC
News and C4 News). Others are essentially controlled by foreign
governments (Al Jazeera, RT, etc, in order that their viewpoints are
presented).
And whilst Channel Four News isn't a news channel as such, it too seems
to have an unspoken mission statement to present "news" entirely from a
liberal / left perspective, often referred to these days as "woke". No
doubt some would argue that it has no such aims. If it hasn't, it's
making a *terrible* job of achieving whatever those aims are.
Dear oh bloody dear! You rabid swivel-eyed right whingers would claim
left wing bias in the weather forecast.
Your screen name is very well-chosen.
Or did you acquire it at school?
I believe it's Dave Plowman's sock puppet.
Wrong, as always.
Post by Cursitor Doom
He resorts to it every time
he loses an argument (one notices these things after a while).
Loading...