Strikes me as odd that it could be anywhere near the %’s stated. the influenza vaccine is around 48% isn’t it last time I checked anyway ? seems like more bollix
If we want life to get back to "normal" anytime soon, we better all have a shot ASAP. Otherwise it simply isn't going to happen.
Now, I'm by no means an expert on Broadcast media but I would be very surprised if Journalists were involved in the production of Strictly or Bake Off, although I am enough of an expert to know that Bake Off is on Channel 4 these days.
After witnessing snatches of normal after restrictions had been eased, personally I think there's a lot to be said for a permanent lockdown, just a thought.
I don't watch BBC ever. But surely that woman Mary something is warbling on about cooking some crap on their channels?
Why not? The BBC have news presenters, who tell a narrative and very few actual journos who to be clear report the facts, not present a spin version of events. These BBC news crews are not reporters who give the facts and allow the viewers to decide. Surely these largely public school educated folks could just as easily give a view about steak and kidney pies or bread, as they do about any other topic they are given?
Now who's making up facts to suit their narrative? There is not a journalist in the world that doesn't put their reporting into context, the BBC are one of the better organisations when compared to News International, Russia Today or most of the UK Print Media. How do you know they are largely public school educated? What relevance does that have anyway? Edit to add If i've missed the joke...whooosh.
You could easily check the well known information on the numbers of BBC news presenters -and management- who are public school educated as opposed to state education. Then compare those numbers with how many kids actually attend private schools and you will realise that a very small social group control a very large amount of media. The BBC admit and acknowledge this is a problem https://www.radiotimes.com/news/201...come-from-a-privileged-background-bbc-admits/ BTW, well researched news in context from the BBC? How do you reconcile this picture with that claim? https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/bbc-staff-twice-as-likely-to-be-privately-educated-z8lbpcg77
Off on a tangent here a little, but who on earth do you vote for now? In my lifetime I’ve never known politics be so bad. There doesn’t really seem to be a healthy opposition currently either. It’s just slightly different flavours of sh*t but mostly the same sh*t. can’t vote for Labour. Can’t vote Conservative.
Off on a tangent here a little, but who on earth do you vote for now? In my lifetime I’ve never known politics be so bad. There doesn’t really seem to be a healthy opposition currently either. It’s just slightly different flavours of sh*t but mostly the same sh*t. can’t vote for Labour. Can’t vote Conservative. . hmm.
Get involved yourself. Choose the party that most closely aligns with your ideals and join them, any one of the main four English parties (Labour, Conservatives, Lib Dems, Greens) would welcome a potential candidate, particularly at local level. If you're not prepared to stand yourself they would still welcome your support campaigning, delivering whatever. Just sitting there complaining it's the worst you've ever seen and not doing anything to change it just means it will stay the same. If you don't want to get involved with a party look at local issues that affect you and yours and lobby on that, it may be something as simple as school crossings or parking charges at your local hospital but do something about something rather than moan and do nothing.
ok. for those that are strugaling with the bbc and their oparandus modi. from a scottish perspective, is that ok? read to the bottom, check out the links in it. for every article they present thats factual, i can produce another 10 that aint. https://talkingupscotlandtwo.com/20...th-paid-by-us-but-working-against-our-safety/
I didn't use the phrease well researched, you did. Basing an argument on one out of context image is hardly evidence, also Emily Maitliss? How very dare you!
Showing blatantly misleading, unsupported by facts imagery depicting the leader of the opposition as a Russian spy/collaborator throughout a primetime program on an election is certainly evidence. Maitliss? Here's what she has to say about it... And as regards your question re joke; well it would be funny if it wasn't both true and awful...
