Jim Graham Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 he irons the website? doesnt that damage the screen? He's very old fashioned that way. He'll have to go. He's always burning his ear if the phone rings while he's ironing. I only keep him because his family have been serving mine since the Restoration. I am sure you have the same problem at Melthebell Towers. You just can't get the staff these days can you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddycoffee Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 The only really good quality news source is the BBC news website.. I dissagree. BBC is not an unbiased news source, and it uses its position to advance its own politics, and especially its mythical agenda of being "unbiased". They very often put all their focus on some unimportant london-centric event, while ignoring more important events. Recently they pulled all the stops out and gave extremely detailed reporting of the American Presidential Primaries. A political event which really should be of only passing interest to the average brit. The BBC is run by a cohort of people from a certain class and is rife with nepotism. I prefer to read across a selection of news sources (including the BBC). It is important when possible to take in some foreign ones if you can, to get a more balanced world view. You can often get more accurate news of british events from american or spanish press as they do not worry about upsetting the political class in the UK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rabitter Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 muddy coffee good point, in future i will try the foreign press probably not as slanted as ours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 he irons the website? doesnt that damage the screen? No ya daft bat, he irons the paper copy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John1954 Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 The subscription of £8.66/month covers The Times and The Sunday Times. The iPad version includes every word and picture of the print version plus additional interactive stuff. It is excellent value for money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Graham Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 I dissagree. BBC is not an unbiased news source, and it uses its position to advance its own politics, and especially its mythical agenda of being "unbiased". The BBC is run by a cohort of people from a certain class and is rife with nepotism. Actually the BBC is run by upper class lefties. And guess who is in charge of choosing the next BBC Director General? Why, it's our very own communist in chief "Sir (lol) Bob Kerslake. Only commies need apply eh Sir Bob? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muddycoffee Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Actually the BBC is run by upper class lefties. And guess who is in charge of choosing the next BBC Director General? Why, it's our very own communist in chief "Sir (lol) Bob Kerslake. Only commies need apply eh Sir Bob? I completely agree. Another thing that really gets on my wick about BBC news and current affairs is that they are so heavily biased toward "arts" reporting and the "arts world", that anything technical, science based or mathematical is extremely minority, and often too difficult for any established presenters and journalists to cover. In the real world this is more like 50% of the interest of the average male population. To talk about money issues they have to wheel out a "specialist" like Robert Peston or Martin Lewis. In my view they should have a far more balanced roster of presenters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 I dont pay for The Times online because i would never give Murdoch the money. I pay for The FT online and i would happily pay for The Telegraph or Guardian online but fortunately both are free. At some point in the future print will become obsolete and good journalism will have to be paid for. I wish Private Eye was online in a better format, i honestly think they would triple their subscribers overnight. I find BBC News slower to react and given the amounts of revenues they have compared to say SKY they look amateurish. I dont believe the BBC are either left or right, but they do splash out government propaganda far too often and they let themselves down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stereolab Posted June 5, 2012 Share Posted June 5, 2012 Actually the BBC is run by upper class lefties. And guess who is in charge of choosing the next BBC Director General? Why, it's our very own communist in chief "Sir (lol) Bob Kerslake. Only commies need apply eh Sir Bob? The BBC is biased - in favour of the right. The top political jobs are held by right wingers like Andrew Neil, or fawning Establishment conservatives like Marr and Paxman. Take this weekend for example - its been sickening pro Royalist, with only sneering references to republicanism or anti-royalism. Radio 5 live is like listening to someone read out the comments from a the Daily Mail site, while BBC 1 heavily promotes Christianity, as does Radio 4. BBC News often quotes the Taxpayer Alliance and Immigration Watch as if they were official bodies rather than right wing (Tory funded) pressure groups. Its coverage of the Murdoch scandal has been pathetic - far worse even than Sky News! The real issue is that it feels the need to over compensate for the 'left wing' bias myth to the extent that it has become more and more right wing than ever before. http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2009/08/mehdi-hasan-bbc-wing-bias-corporation http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/15/leftwing-bias-bbc-myth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ampersand Posted June 6, 2012 Share Posted June 6, 2012 I subscribe to Times online - mainly so I can read it at work with fewer people knowing I'm doing it - I can pretend I'm doing "research" - the big paper all over my desk used to be a giveaway But I much prefer the paper version - I find online that I tend to only look at what I'm interested in, whereas with the paper I find myself reading things I wouldn't have looked for online just because it catches my eye as I flip through the paper I'm also old fashioned in that I much prefer to have paper in my hand rather than a lump of plastic (even though I end up with grubby fingers) - same reason I still read books rather than a kindle (or whatever it's called) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.