Bbc news and breakfast are so ****ing ****e. They come up with a line like "there has been a 300% rise in blah blah blah" Wtf does that mean without context like what the figure is now and what it was before. ****s do it all the time. Sensationalism at its worst and we're ****in paying for it ffs.
Lefty-Socialist-Wokey twats. When they refer to fishermen as fisher-people you know they've lost the plot!
I only watch ti see if I can get an upskirt of Suzanna Reid, but she's really up and down is Suzanna... You can tell when she's in season and when she let's it go until she can smell her own fanny through the quilt.
I actually have a thing for munchetti... Weird I know but I'd love to taste what she had for her tea yesterday evening
This point applies to all the media outlets now but, for me, it seems to apply more to the BBC. When I watch a "news" programme I expect to hear the "news". What I don't expect and what I don't want is the reporters "opinion". The BBC seem to constantly ask the reporter what his or her or it's opinion is in relation to the "news" topic. I'm not interested. I just want them to give me the "news" and I'll form my own opinion about it.
Certainly. The scaremongering that has taken place during this 'pandemic' has shown the BBC up for what it is, a dangerous mouthpiece. Something like 4-6 people ultimately own all news outlets, aka the mass media, so its just building a world in their vision. Its no different to countries which have state media only, in that its about control of information. The 'pandemic' has been an excellent example of this. Obviously the BBC is largely funded by the licence fee, but they have donors too. They'll have donors such as government departments and probably the EU. I know the Bill Gates Foundation is a donor, hence they follow the pandemic rhetoric. Of course they don't expect anything back for this...honest. The last bit of course shouldn't be the case for obvious reasons, but it does because unscrupulous types like Gates pounce on financial weakness to push their agenda. Gates miraculously was given a lot of air time after his kind donation, even referring to himself as health expert at one stage. No you aren't Bill Sadly though many still see the likes of the BBC as a bastion of impartiality, if its on there its true. I know my mother and gran still cling to the BBC as a font of truth. Its a generational thing in the main I find. I'd defund it tomorrow, but I suspect Bill or another of his ilk would simply step in with a kind donation as its too valuable to them.
. She's so left wing it's untrue. She's almost spitting at Tories and Lib Dems alike when they are on. She also doesn't seem, to me.. to be able to listen to an answer.. so many times a politician has had to tell her they've just answered a question she's repeated... and she just gives them a hacky look. I think that the look of hate at times on her face for some of the folk she interviews is, in my opinion not a good look for a tax payer funded organisation. Rather than put her back in her box, the BBC rate her that highly they are giving her a big pay rise.... and another slot... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...resenter-takes-Emma-Barnett-Radio-5-Live.html But... a short while ago slapped her down for over stepping the mark: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-49825570 I like Dan, Louise and Charlie but can't stand the sight of Munchetty.
There are only two people I listen to media wise in politics.... Andrew Neil - a master of his craft who is so on top of his game I haven't a clue which party he favours. He's a forensic assassin who takes down any politician if he sees BS. The other one is LBC's Iain Dale. A clever and articulate man who, despite being a Tory, shows respect in bucketloads to the individual politician rather than taking into account their party politics.
