-
-
Latest Discussions
-
Don't be ridiculous, he's not a troll! But he is proving himself to be a bully, who's incapable of debating without resorting to angry outbursts, personal insults and name-calling. -
I still say “morally reprehensible” is too extreme unless you are talking about Trump. And what he did that day. And what the income was. And him pardoning the criminals that is clearly morally reprehensible and in no way comparable to the bbc edit Ow if you want to say all edits like that should be better flagged to a viewer, if you want to compare the edit to the outcome, if you want to talk about better workflows to prevent in future. Sure. Why not. but it’s pretty repugnant to call that edit morally reprehensible in light of events and not call that monster out? Nah -
Firstly, the Panorama DID go through proper clearance - nothing is aired without legal and editorial policy review. The whole point about the edit is that it was designed to go under the radar, which is why no one realised at the time what was going on. Any honest producer would have put a flash frame or a fade in, to show that two pieces of sync were spliced together. That isn't an opinion, it's a code of conduct. So Trump does have a case, whether you like it or not. Secondly, the BBC isn't meant to be centrist - it's meant to be impartial, there's a difference. The fact that you don't seem to know the difference says it all, really. And finally, the reason this whole thing is such a tragedy is precisely because the BBC is an amazing global resource and soft power, which is held to a higher standard than any other broadcaster in the world. That's why what the producers did was morally reprehensible - because they are giving ammunition to the people who want to see it disbanded (not because Trump's feelings are hurt). If you want to protect the BBC, you make sure you are above reproach and don't make editorial judgements that will bring the walls crashing down around you and ruin thousands of colleagues' livelihoods.
-
The key aim of this and future budget will be cuts to government spending.- not more taxation. The chancellor could start with drastically reducing the cost of the ever expanding Motability scheme. Motability has grown as use of the scheme has exploded by a third since 2017, with people qualifying for new cars for conditions including tennis elbow, ADHD and anxiety. (Probably some one with ADHD should not be driving a car!) Motability's has 860,000 users!!. They are also exempt from paying VAT or insurance premium tax on their leased vehicles. The cost to the tax payer is £3.1 Billion. Some Motability users get their cars totally free and the balance are subsidised. For a little extra, a user can opt for a BMW, Mercedes, Jaguar or anything else they fancy. Time to reign it in.
-
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now