He stopped eating as he would feel sick when he woke up knowing what he would be dealing with when he got to work. He also neatly lost it with a grandad who had abused a toddler he was looking after for his daughter. Realised he was out of his depth bless him.
I didn’t mention the BBC. I am commenting on the general lack of protests about the greater number of deaths in Sudan and Nigeria with far more kids starving in Sudan. Maybe because all the anti Israel protestors are Muslims or lefties who are anti semitic and ignore Muslims killing or starving each other or Christians.
Or maybe its because Israel is an ally politically entwined with us and the US, and Jamaica was part of the British empire, and more closely tied to the UK as a result. There's loads of **** in the world, they can't show it all
They shouldn’t ignore the largest humanitarian disasters. The language of Nigeria is English as Nigeria was part of the British Empire. Previously it was the biggest slave country in Africa. The northern, Muslim dominated half didn’t outlaw slavery until 1936. Funny how their are no demands for reparations from them.
They probably shouldn't ignore them, but it's very rare that anything from the majority of Asia, South America or Africa makes the BBC1 news unfortunately. I'd assume the World Service devotes more coverage to it, but I don't have the inclination to watch it.
Just watched the BBC news tonight. About 10 secs devoted to the poor guy, Wayne Broadhurst, who got stabbed to death whilst walking his dog at 5pm in the afternoon, and the other bloke and 14 y.o. kid who thankfully escaped attempted murder, by the Afghan asylum seeker in Uxbridge. Several minutes found though to report on the reappearance of a spider, complete with videos and interviews. And yes, it's appalling that disasters happening in places like Nigeria and Sudan aren't getting reported on. I wouldn't expect reports every night, even though there are daily reports for other areas (like Gaza, Ukraine, etc), but at least with some regularity to keep the country informed about what's happening around the world. Of course there's a reason; some people still need to wake t f up. ...... ... but that said, a lot of people are simply so blissfully unaware, in a large part because so much is (being deliberately) kept from them. Even in my relatively small circle, I'm often amazed time & again by how little some people actually know or realize about what is really going on in this country and across the world. Ignorance is not really bliss, and is very dangerous.
I find local BBC to be quite good and their report of us being in Nat Geo was broadcast on BBC breakfast the other day, however the main news never seems to balance well does it from any perspective? I prefer updates from Sky news.
I don't know, but I've been told, it's the master plan of the Fabian Society. George Orwells 1984 is to become reality... Don't shoot the messenger
BBC has an agenda, which of course it shouldn't, and it permeates through an awful lot of what they do imho.
BBC news isn't just what pops up on tv. If they reported all the crap going on around the world people would just turn it off, I mean who wants to go to bed feeling suicidal because they've seen clips of rape, murder, et al on the news, and it isn't even news, it goes on all the time. If we really want to be informed about world events and conditions I'm afraid we have to try a bit harder than just watching news at 10. And it isn't even hard these days, we can google just about anything and find reports, both reliable and questionable, about almost everything. The BBC is a publicly funded body, it must be in it's brief to appeal to the public, so it must broadcast both unpleasant news and feelgood, frivolous stuff.
In fairness nows he's been charged the case is sub judice, so reporting on such cases is always brief. Once it comes to trial the coverage will be extensive.
In defence of the beeb .. lots of people are happy to slag it off, ask why should we pay the licence fee, I never watch it, they are biased to tories/labour (depending on their political leanings) … but the same people are quite happy to pay Netflix/Sky etc even more than the licence fee to watch endless reruns of programs that the BBC made, using the money generated from us all paying the £15/month licence fee
So, yeah Ive had a couple of beers, feel free to refuse to pay the licence fee as long as you can say, hand on heart, you’ve never watched a BBC made program on any other platform
I actually find it strange that anybody would watch the "News" on TV on any channel and think it was unbiased
I agree NT, but of all of the media and print outlets available the BBC are, in my opinion, the least biased. Yes they have to toe the line of whoever is in power, otherwise they risk having their licence fee mandate removed, but they aren’t at the behest of the owners/advertisers who push an editorial line that fits in with their own agenda. God forbid we end up like the USA ‘news stations’ that simply say what their sponsors demand
