INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

Save the BBC!

For news of events, petitions and campaigns that may be of interest to humanists and secularists.
Post Reply
Message
Author
Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Save the BBC!

#41 Post by Nick » July 17th, 2015, 5:23 pm

Latest post of the previous page:

The BBC is governed by a Royal Charter and the current Charter is due to expire at the end of 2016.
So you wouldn't have a review, then Alan?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24048
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#42 Post by Alan H » July 17th, 2015, 6:05 pm

Nick wrote:
The BBC is governed by a Royal Charter and the current Charter is due to expire at the end of 2016.
So you wouldn't have a review, then Alan?
:laughter:
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Save the BBC!

#43 Post by Nick » July 18th, 2015, 10:41 am

Just another emoticon response. :rolleyes:

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24048
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#44 Post by Alan H » July 18th, 2015, 10:46 am

Nick wrote:Just another emoticon response. :rolleyes:
Yes. It's your continued non sequitur responses.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Save the BBC!

#45 Post by Nick » July 18th, 2015, 10:59 am

So you would have a review, then? :shrug:

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24048
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#46 Post by Alan H » July 18th, 2015, 11:01 am

Nick wrote:So you would have a review, then? :shrug:
What's wrong with having a review every now and again? I've certainly never said there shouldn't be, have I?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#47 Post by Dave B » July 18th, 2015, 1:06 pm

Pity we can't review our governmental mehods to see if they are fit for purpose in the 21sr century. I think not.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Save the BBC!

#48 Post by Nick » July 18th, 2015, 2:10 pm

Alan H wrote:
Nick wrote:So you would have a review, then? :shrug:
What's wrong with having a review every now and again? I've certainly never said there shouldn't be, have I?
Oh, I see. Just a cut and paste. Should have guessed. Oh well....

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24048
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#49 Post by Alan H » July 18th, 2015, 2:34 pm

Nick wrote:
Alan H wrote:
Nick wrote:So you would have a review, then? :shrug:
What's wrong with having a review every now and again? I've certainly never said there shouldn't be, have I?
Oh, I see. Just a cut and paste. Should have guessed. Oh well....
Good grief, Nick.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Save the BBC!

#50 Post by Nick » July 19th, 2015, 8:11 am

Alan H wrote:Good grief, Nick.
Ah, yes. The alternative to the emoticon response.

And no more useful.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24048
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#51 Post by Alan H » July 19th, 2015, 10:38 am

Nick, Nick, Nick.

This is a thread about the BBC. I posted a link to the just-announced Government review with just three words:
Here we go...
You quoted a line from the link and immediately jumped to the implied conclusion:
So you wouldn't have a review, then Alan?
Shortly afterwards, you said:
So you would have a review, then?
I replied:
What's wrong with having a review every now and again? I've certainly never said there shouldn't be, have I?
Your response to that:
Oh, I see. Just a cut and paste. Should have guessed. Oh well....
What on earth are you on about, Nick? What did I cut and paste? The link to the Government review? Why the fuck would you object to that? What is your problem?

This is an utterly surreal conversation.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Save the BBC!

#52 Post by Nick » July 21st, 2015, 9:06 am

Alan H wrote:What on earth are you on about, Nick? What did I cut and paste? The link to the Government review? Why the fuck would you object to that? What is your problem?
I'm not objecting to anything, Alan. And of course, it's fine to bring stuff to the attention of fellow posters. But maybe if you gave us some idea of why you are doing so, or more importantly, some clue as to why a response (especially from me) should receive just an emoticon or an expletive, then that might help.

There, that's better than "good grief" or :yahbooh: , wouldn't you say?
This is an utterly surreal conversation.
Well, yes, when I have to guess what you are trying to say.

So, Alan, do you have something to say about the BBC and the review?

User avatar
jaywhat
Posts: 15807
Joined: July 5th, 2007, 5:53 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#53 Post by jaywhat » July 21st, 2015, 9:11 am

perhaps we should have a Nick and Alan thread :smile:

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#54 Post by Dave B » July 21st, 2015, 9:47 am

jaywhat wrote:perhaps we should have a Nick and Alan thread :smile:
:popcorn:
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24048
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#55 Post by Alan H » July 21st, 2015, 10:21 am

Nick wrote:
Alan H wrote:What on earth are you on about, Nick? What did I cut and paste? The link to the Government review? Why the fuck would you object to that? What is your problem?
I'm not objecting to anything, Alan. And of course, it's fine to bring stuff to the attention of fellow posters. But maybe if you gave us some idea of why you are doing so, or more importantly, some clue as to why a response (especially from me) should receive just an emoticon or an expletive, then that might help.

There, that's better than "good grief" or :yahbooh: , wouldn't you say?
This is an utterly surreal conversation.
Well, yes, when I have to guess what you are trying to say.

So, Alan, do you have something to say about the BBC and the review?
:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Nick. I'm not trying to fucking say anything! I posted the original link to the review FOR INFORMATION AND COMMENT. Why is that not clear to you? Do expect me to provide my thoughts on everything when I post a link? Do I need to have a fully thought-out position of the subject before pointing it out to the folks here? Why are we - again - having these facile meta conversations instead of discussing the actual topic?

Now, can we actually discuss the BBC and the Government review???
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

Nick
Posts: 11027
Joined: July 4th, 2007, 10:10 am

Re: Save the BBC!

#56 Post by Nick » July 21st, 2015, 2:57 pm

Alan H wrote: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Nick. I'm not trying to fucking say anything!
I think you've succeeded, Alan :wink:
I posted the original link to the review FOR INFORMATION AND COMMENT.
But when I comment, you very often don't. You just post an emoticon or a dismissive FFS, which, ISTM, rather stalls the thread.
Why is that not clear to you?
It's not only God who works in mysterious ways. :wink:
Do expect me to provide my thoughts on everything when I post a link? Do I need to have a fully thought-out position of the subject before pointing it out to the folks here? Why are we - again - having these facile meta conversations instead of discussing the actual topic?
It's your board- you can do exactly what you like. It does seem a pity though, that it seems to have moved from a humanist site to a socialist one. :sad:
Now, can we actually discuss the BBC and the Government review???
Of course! Now, what did you want to say? :)

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24048
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#57 Post by Alan H » July 21st, 2015, 3:30 pm

Nick wrote:
Alan H wrote: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Nick. I'm not trying to fucking say anything!
I think you've succeeded, Alan :wink:
FFS.
I posted the original link to the review FOR INFORMATION AND COMMENT.
But when I comment, you very often don't. You just post an emoticon or a dismissive FFS, which, ISTM, rather stalls the thread.
Nick, have you looked in a mirror? Your first comment under my posting of a link to the Government review was:
So you wouldn't have a review, then Alan?
Can you see that? How does that move the conversation along? That's what stalled it. Why couldn't you have simply asked a polite relevant question or made a comment on, you know, the actual review? No. You seemed to want to know what I thought, but first jumping to a conclusion about a position I never said I held.
Why is that not clear to you?
It's not only God who works in mysterious ways. :wink:
:sad:
Do expect me to provide my thoughts on everything when I post a link? Do I need to have a fully thought-out position of the subject before pointing it out to the folks here? Why are we - again - having these facile meta conversations instead of discussing the actual topic?
It's your board- you can do exactly what you like. It does seem a pity though, that it seems to have moved from a humanist site to a socialist one. :sad:
WTF? You're doing it again! What has being a humanist (or even socialist - whatever that means) site got to do with views on the Government's review of the BBC? By all means challenge what's said, but at least do it on the basis of what is said, not on what - I suspect - you believe to be a pejorative (and derogatory) all-encompassing description of the forum as a whole.
Now, can we actually discuss the BBC and the Government review???
Of course! Now, what did you want to say? :)
Let me try one more time:

Has anyone got any views on the Government's review of the BBC?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#58 Post by Dave B » July 21st, 2015, 5:56 pm

Perhaps that if the BBC is considered to be a public/social service that it is the ideal target for a political party that is all about the individual being their own support system, not drawing on "the State" nor one another other than through charity.

As Thugee Thatcher saud, "There is no society . . ." Nothing has changed.
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015

User avatar
Altfish
Posts: 1821
Joined: March 26th, 2012, 8:46 am

Re: Save the BBC!

#59 Post by Altfish » July 21st, 2015, 6:36 pm

Whoever is in Government wants to control the BBC, the Tories do it by threatening and culling; Labour by calling its reporting into question. (The Hutton Enquiry and Alistair Campbell)

I find it amazing that the BBC is right wing when the Labour Party is in control and left wing when the Tories are in. In actual fact it is critical of the Government of whichever colour, which is good. The control and fear that the Tories induce in the BBC is like a totalitarian state; but to a lesser degree Labour did it; and for that matter the SNP tried it on during the Independence election last year. They are all at it.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24048
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: Save the BBC!

#60 Post by Alan H » July 21st, 2015, 6:45 pm

Altfish wrote:Whoever is in Government wants to control the BBC, the Tories do it by threatening and culling; Labour by calling its reporting into question. (The Hutton Enquiry and Alistair Campbell)

I find it amazing that the BBC is right wing when the Labour Party is in control and left wing when the Tories are in. In actual fact it is critical of the Government of whichever colour, which is good. The control and fear that the Tories induce in the BBC is like a totalitarian state; but to a lesser degree Labour did it; and for that matter the SNP tried it on during the Independence election last year. They are all at it.
And all the more reason to ensure politicians stop meddling with it.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Altfish
Posts: 1821
Joined: March 26th, 2012, 8:46 am

Re: Save the BBC!

#61 Post by Altfish » July 21st, 2015, 7:35 pm

Alan H wrote:
Altfish wrote:Whoever is in Government wants to control the BBC, the Tories do it by threatening and culling; Labour by calling its reporting into question. (The Hutton Enquiry and Alistair Campbell)

I find it amazing that the BBC is right wing when the Labour Party is in control and left wing when the Tories are in. In actual fact it is critical of the Government of whichever colour, which is good. The control and fear that the Tories induce in the BBC is like a totalitarian state; but to a lesser degree Labour did it; and for that matter the SNP tried it on during the Independence election last year. They are all at it.
And all the more reason to ensure politicians stop meddling with it.
Spot on, exactly what I was getting at

Post Reply