Friday 27 August 2010

:p According to Sky News, Katie Price is also going to the MacTaggart Lecture
https://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/MacTaggart-Lecture-Live-From-The-Edinburgh-Festival-BBC-Head-Mark-Thompson-To-Tackle-Critics/Article/201008415705746?lpos=UK_News_Third_Home_Page_Feature_Teaser_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15705746_MacTaggart_Lecture_Live_From_The_Edinburgh_Festival%3A_BBC_Head_Mark_Thompson_To_Tackle_Critics

Nuff said.

Wot no gangophone again, perhaps he is on his holidays but better still if he has been excommunicated ?

#1 Isn't about time we dropped all the celebrity crap Mistress? I'm sure you would agree with me, it's the perfect medicine to keep the plebs down and slumbering! ; )

#2 Yes blissful isn't it brossenn not to see her/his name in the first dozen posts?! ; )

#53

Are you happy, 169? Have your requests been fulfilled?

#1

I wonder, Mistress 76uk, which critics is the BBC DG going to address? It seems to me that re-addressing certain matters that have been going on at the organisation might be a good idea. I'd be quite happy to supply a list myself. I'm quite sure he knows my details and how to contact me .

mim

"49. At 10:59am on 27 Aug 2010, mimpromptu wrote:
#;45

Who do you get paid for, tb 01? Or are you hoping to make fat bucks out of your blogging and whatever else you might be up to?"

It may be very hard for you to believe, but I belong to an ever more bewildered generation which was educated at a time that we largely saw the merits of public SERVICE. It wasn't the money that mattered. Money was just a necessary evil. We went into professions where we thought we were contributing to society as a big family. I'm not joking. These were the days when most of the services you see today were in public ownership. I seem to recall that your roots are in Poland. I really don't know what was so unattractive about life in the Eastern bloc for you. Many of my generation thought that what Thatcher and her colleague-in-arms Reagan began accelerated with a vengeance after 1979 was the slow brining beginning of the end. I feel very sorry for those in Eastern Europe/Russia today as they appear to have been induced to abandon family life for short-term selfishness, and their dwindling populations are evidence of this as many have said before. The same, sadly, is now happening in our rural areas if you look at the projections. Just search for projections on populations and see how they are ageing (i.e the birth-rate is falling). How is that good? Whilst no doubt you'll find something to make some unpleasant snide remark about in the above, I have no idea why you bother as it's true.

As I see it, The Third Sector (charities etc) has been cynically created to draw Public Sector people away from the Public Sector (think of the ex CEO of the Prison Service now heading Barnados) into another sector which serves as a half-way house to the Private Sector. The strategy is just to erode the Public Sector and reduce costs (especially pensions) and fragment everything in terms of regulation, i.e denationalise. Those moving can say to themselves that they are doing good till they are blue in the face, but I don't think they are. Nor do I think that the Charities Commission is resourced to cope with this mushrooming Third Sector, any more than regulators (like the FSA) could cope with the proliferation of financial services.

51. At 11:56am on 27 Aug 2010, jauntycyclist wrote:

"the govt has no society building science. they have no models. their only model is some kind of market fundamentalist anarchy and allowing extremists like the EU set national policy."

Yes, but do you fully appreciate that this is their intention, e.g. by proposing The Big Society (aka 'do it yourself?). They just don't do Big Government (nation-building). So why do you keep saying that they should? If one wants that, one wants socialism, and none of the parties are ever going to give us that, as quite clearly, they regard socialism is very bad (essentially bad for banks etc). If one stands back and takes on board what has gone before one can see what's going on like a train wreck in slow motion. Ceasing to dismiss everyone with an education in these matters as mere parrots might be a first step to seeing this in full relief (unpleasant thought it is), Grasping that if one doesn't find something immediately obvious often means that one has something substantive to learn is worth wrestling with too I find. Alas, post 16 most people don't bother. I reckon that's why populist democracy is doomed to self-destruct in liberalism/anarchism. What do you think?.


"54. At 1:39pm on 27 Aug 2010, ecolizzy wrote:
#51 Very well said JC, you have said it all in a nutshell.

I feel sorry for the million young people here who will never get an opportunity for work, they are supposed to be the future of britain, a non working britain it appears."

Do a Google search on population change in our rural areas. Try Devon.

Many Local Authorities provide charts and graphs of how the population pyramid is now stacked. It is top heavy. That is, soon to start shrinking once the oldies die off. Then what? Without immigration the population will fall. I fear you don't understand the economics of this.

Immigration is a necessary evil to compensate for an even greater evil, a dying population. What we should be asking is why has it come to this?

What is it about our way of life which has put people off having kids.
Is that natural?

6. At 3:12pm on 27 Aug 2010, mimpromptu wrote:

"I wonder, Mistress 76uk, which critics is the BBC DG going to address?
It seems to me that re-addressing certain matters that have been going on at the organisation might be a good idea. I'd be quite happy to supply a list myself."

Your contributions to this blog appear to be of that genre often described as 'female bitchiness'. If you're not posting unpleasant remarks about others, you appear to be posting material which implies that lots of people are out to cause you harm. I wonder whether these are related? That is, if one gratuitously unpleasant towards others, might one simultaneously fears others punishing one? If one doesn't do the former, perhaps the latter will go away too? Is that helpful? Whilst I suspect nobody means you any harm, I do fear that many will find your posts a rather disconcerting testament to your own well-being and self-image...

#7.

Margaret Thatcher & Ronald Reagan were not keen on communism but what they really did was to help the Poles in particular what they/we were so desperate to abolish, that is poverty, empty shelves, unacceptable restriction of basic freedoms, hidden lies journalistically unreportable because of fearful state control of all the media, etc, etc.

You probably wouldn't have survived the system unless you 'served' as one of the apparatchiks spying and reporting on ordinary people and enjoying to control them which is exactly what you seem to be doing in this country.

As for Russia, well it's been such a tormented country for such a long time it make them a few more generations to recover normality and establish free democracy. This is not to say that there aren't lots of lovely, interesting and tolerant Russians.

As for myself, although towards the end of my life in Poland I was doing very well financially thanks to teaching English in a school and giving private lessons, including to the kids of a renowned and excellent journalist, I felt suffocated by the political and social system.

In fact, I'm in touch with the son of the journalist I've mentioned above. He followed his father's footsteps work wise. You'd probably dismiss him as a 'celeb'.

#9 What is it about our way of life which has put people off having kids.

Generally I find tab01 is that young people who have been sensible and bought property, and even saved money, can't afford to have a family, partly because of the price of houses.

Although I must say just about every young person I know, seems to be pregnant at the moment. It might mean that is because of the age of my own children, but there's definately going to be a spike in the birthrate around here, in a not so rural Kent.

I'll check your Devon stats out later.

#7 tab01 I totally agree with your sentiment here! I must agree that people appear to be happier with a loose structure, as long as it's not too regimented.

I'd like to hear what you think the reason is for our low birthrate, selfishness, greediness, laziness or lack of dual income? Or fear of what the future might hold?

"11. At 4:55pm on 27 Aug 2010, mimpromptu wrote:
#7.

Margaret Thatcher & Ronald Reagan were not keen on communism but what they really did was to help the Poles in particular what they/we were so desperate to abolish, that is poverty, empty shelves, unacceptable restriction of basic freedoms, hidden lies journalistically unreportable because of fearful state control of all the media, etc, etc."

Paranoia? Is it at all possible that some people who went West talk this way about Poland etc because they imagined things which were not true (or exaggerated the problems)? Is that perhaps what you are doing? There have been programmes on the BBC about East Germans who now miss the stability of socialist times..There may only have been 3 types of cheese, one said, and only one of them was tasty, but so what? What we have had developing here in the liberal-democracies is more drunkenness, obesity, liver disease, STIs, disrespect, corruption, rising crime and mental illness. Somehow, the Eastern bloc is beginning to look like a lost paradise to some.

"13. At 5:08pm on 27 Aug 2010, ecolizzy wrote:
#7 tab01 I totally agree with your sentiment here! I must agree that people appear to be happier with a loose structure, as long as it's not too regimented.

I'd like to hear what you think the reason is for our low birthrate, selfishness, greediness, laziness or lack of dual income? Or fear of what the future might hold?"

I suspect you've put your finger on a good part of it, but I suspect it's UNCERTAINTY THROUGH CHURN. For decades everything has seemed to be in flux. How does one teach kids stable values, right from wrong, to plan ahead, etc when everything is in flux? If it isn't that, we are constantly told we are under threat from terrorists, some type of killer flu, global warming, economic meltdown or something else. Who would want to bring kids into that, except the selfish and irresponsible? Hardly anyone seems to listen to each another anymore too, and as for caring about others, it's made out to be a mug's game.

#10

Oh, I'm happy enough with my image, tb01. I know I'm not a long legged blonde but I'm afraid there's a lot of jealousy going on due to the combination of attributes that I seem to be very lucky to have. And 'excuse me' but i'm only bitchy if you want with control freaks, despots and deliberate liars, if you know what I mean.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

people who tend to constantly drag forward posts from other threads to spam/troll the new threads tend to prove themselves unhinged. do they fear they will be ignored if they post responses on the correct thread? How sad.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/paul-johnston-knight/an-open-letter-to-charities-working-with-cobra-group-and-associated-companies/141953572506528

DID JAMES GORDON NOT SAVE THE WORLD AFTER ALL?

If QE turns out to be BS, how will Brown be received on his lecture tour of America?

Anyone seen McCavity?

Not sure I'm on the correct blog but this is my response to Mark Thompson's speech as reported on this evenings Newsnight programme.

As a lience fee payer I expect you (Mr Thompson) to display a professional appearance if you are to attract an annual salary in excess of £800,000.

An open necked shirt at a major media event is not trendy, it's just a BIG mistake! What does it take to make you see it!

A few cheap shots at the Mudoch Empire,(which I deplore), will gain you no sympathy as most members of the general public will be subsequently influenced in another direction within 24 hours. Read tomorrows SUN.

Slagging off the press must be the least effective form of propoganda immaginable for such a high profile organisation. What do you pay for PR?
Sack them tomorow.


You're current use of over £3.2 billion pounds of public funding cannot possibly be justified by constant reference to the (undoubted) excellence of David Attenborough's natural history programmes.

I am a regular viewer to News 24 but regret the way in this, in recent month, has become little less that a 15 minute rolling format.

Plodding is the only adjective I can find to describe the current state of the BBC.

I think £3.2 billion is rather a high price for the public to pay for a plod.

#14 Yes tab01 I agree with your theory of churn, a good way of putting it.

Another thought on birthrate, we are constantly told in the media that the world is too crowded, and that would be my view as well. Lack of resources is going to happen, whether it's oil, minerals or food and water.

I think a lot of young people in europe hear this message and think I'll only have one child like China, or I won't have any.

People from simpler economies don't hear this constant message that our young people hear, and want a lot of children. It increases the families wealth, they have many workers and someone to look after them and keep them in their old age.

The consequence, poor people have many children, rich ones don't, eventually that leads to a slide in living standards for all. And as resources get lower and lower, fighting over them will begin.

FOOL OR KNAVE AT THE BBC - 'INFORM EDUCATE ENTERTAIN' (#20)

Surreal to hear Mark Thompson talk, airily, of the broadcasting excellence of the BBC. Nowadays, PM and Newsnight treat INFORMATION as a vehicle for 'edgy fun' with son-et-lumiere trimmings. EDUCATION, all too often, is padded docudrama, while science is constantly 'behind the curve', bowing to outdated paradigms; challenging nothing. As for ENTERTAINMENT it can be described in one word: BULLYING.

I am prepared to see all of the above as a consequence of bright young things with media degrees 'being different' for the sake of difference. But where Mark Thompsom falls, on the Fool-Knave spectrum, I am at a loss to fathom. Millions might approve BBC output (over foreign muck) but then millions read the Sun in Britain's GM-green unpleasant land.

He's paid an awful lot of money to preside over the above disgrace.

GETTING THE MESSAGE - PROCREATION INTOXICATION ASPHYXIATION (#21)

Ho Ecolizzy! I am not so sure our 'educated' indigenes hear the word (of world overpopulation) and stem the tide (of kids). If our emerging adults were getting ANY messages, they must surely stop drinking industrial solvent and inhaling smoke from chemically enhanced vegetable matter?

I am inclined to think we are in the grip of one or more Dawkins memes (cultural norms) whereby young women KNOW they should rise in a career and in monetary worth, rather than be a stupid mothering drudge. It makes sense when you consider that: for a fertile woman to eschew procreation is hardly more bizarre than taking up 'socially required' destruction of ones organs.

I'll get me coat. (:o)

Well Barrie and EBAHGUM I agree with both of you, especially the dumbing down of the BBC. When younger I learnt a lot watching TV it stretched one's mind, now it's such dross I barely watch it. Barrie's right the edgyness and the flippin' screens moving the whole time behind NN presenters drives me crazy, I turn off. I would add that I love the Proms broadcasts though, a bright exception.

Oh and another little thing that drives me barmy as well, the constantly revolving scene behind Andrew Marr and quests on his show Sunday mornings. I watch the same white vans cross the bridge over the Thames and the same train running along on the right of screen over and over again, probably a 100 times each programme. They don't even change the film between the seasons, it seems to have been adjusted by medja types to show an inbetween indeterminate season! : (

How about going back to cheap blank walls it wouldn't worry me in the slightest, and help me to concentrate on what's being said, instead of watching the "movie" behind them.

#24

It's dumbed down so much, Ecolizzy, I dc not bother watching it any more. I know who the main culprit is as well. If he's allowed to carry on, I shall not bother for a long time to come. 'Outclevering' himself, that's what it boils down to.

mim

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

#18

Is it anything to do with the 'cobra project' set up by 'Machiavelli', brush?

Why only complain about immigrants? Many of us are not only very successful but also great contributors to the UK, as is the case with the amazing architect Zaha Hadid. I've learned about her on one of the Polish websites, i.e. onet.pl whereby there are photo examples of her wonderful architectural designs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaha_Hadid

mim

NOW HEARD SOME MORE OF MARK THOMPSON'S TAKE ON 'OUR' BBC

He either can't or won't take note of the quality of much of the output.

I suggest he takes a percentage cut in salary, commensurate with the percentage of BBC output that is carp. That might focus the mind.

Gravitas not gravy-farce.

AH - HA! A lady on 'Today' has just lauded the arrival of senior figures from the COMMERCIAL sector. Might this explain the decline (and the salaries?)

I can't see the Liberals ever being voted for again!

https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/196069/Vince-Cable-demands-no-limit-on-immigration

Going back to their Whig roots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_%28British_political_party%29 it appears.

When they were the toffs, the aristocracy, and the Torys were the equivalent of the Labour party.

I hope this coalition breaks up soon, it's an utter mess, one espousing a cap on immigration the other wants a completely open door?!

#23 PROCREATION INTOXICATION ASPHYXIATION

I'll get me coat.

A pity they don't actually put the "coat" on, there might not be so many unplanned babies around, caused by the bold word above! ; )

IF I WERE MARRIED TO AN ESKIMO, I MIGHT WANT THE UK ICED OVER (#31 link)

(Not sure about that 'pose' Vince is holding in the photo Liz!)

Nick didn't fix it, did he!

Incidentally: have they closed any bars in Westminster yet? Or is it just the proles who must be weaned of industrial solvent?

So how will Mr Thompson respond? Stephen Smith will be watching.

As have others.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/7968709/The-BBC-still-hasnt-got-the-message.html

https://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/27/bbc-mark-thompson-murdoch-mactaggart

Now, in turn, who will 'we' be told is most worth listening to?

Answers on...

Just not sure holding up the odd Attenborough doco in a kind of Blazing Saddlesesque 'Or the bunny (as in rabbit) gets it' deal to swallow pay, pensions, perks (and a few other 'things') is quite going to ally some feelings of unease over force-funded opinion over information in certain quarters.

Unique.

Ah that tony blair is such a nice socialist man....,

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/tony-blair/7968858/Blair-home-number-nine-1m-house-for-student-daughter.html

....buying homes for all his family! ; )

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

ULTIMATELY - PERSONALITY ENGENDERS POLICY

What does Mark Thompson intend we should 'take away' from the 'EFFETE FUZZ EXPERIENCE' that is his facial (or a similar word?) hair?

Just as the BBC seems to have lost its grip on a worthwhile raison d'etre, the facial hair of Mr Thompson seems set on pointing up the folly.

Too much fuzzy thinking at the Beeb?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

23. At 00:04am on 28 Aug 2010, barriesingleton wrote

"I am inclined to think we are in the grip of one or more Dawkins memes (cultural norms) whereby young women KNOW they should rise in a career and in monetary worth, rather than be a stupid mothering drudge. It makes sense when you consider that: for a fertile woman to eschew procreation is hardly more bizarre than taking up 'socially required' destruction of ones organs."

Yes.

Might things be changing? Since late 2007, has what's been driving our self-destruction started to sink in, and is that why the economy is stalling/changing? If so, it won't be pleasant for some time to come, but it's got to be better than continuing as we were given the all too poorly perceived consequences?

Your analysis of the BBC seems to be on the button. But as this seems to have been induced to self-destruct like the rest of our publicly funded services this doesn't bode well, and on the face of it stands as evidence AGAINST what I say in the first paragraph.

It's hard to tell, as these processes are slow moving, but I reckon we saw something destructive finally burst in 2007, and that was good. The difficult thing now is whether we can replace our old ways with ones which are more sustainable, and I'm not talking about wind-farms etc, I'm talking about how we behave towards one another. If we stop designating those who didn't like our old ways as terrorists or subversives it might help.

"31. At 09:33am on 28 Aug 2010, ecolizzy wrote:
I can't see the Liberals ever being voted for again!"

Just to be clear ecolizzy, when I say it's an economics necessity, I'm only stating how it's seen within our current liberal-democratic system.

I'm not saying it SHOULD be this way, I'm just being descriptive and realistic. I think it's more of a problem than a solution as it will just increase the number of low-skilled people in the end, and that makes for more uncritical consumers, something in turn which further erodes public services whilst making the retail sector even more predatory. It's a desperate attempt to deal with a problem which is, I think, populist and hedonistic liberal-democracy itself.

THATS'S A LOT MORE MASONRY TO SHOVE THROUGH A NEEDLE'S EYE (#35)

Blair's conversion to Catholicism begins to make sense. I guess the Vatican has a 'waiver' regarding worldly goods.

NEVER FORGET: THE WESTMINSTER ETHOS, AND PARTY POLITICS, PERMITTED THE BLAIR PHENOMENON TO GROW PROSPER. If we do not dismantle Westminster more will follow. We have already got ourselves ANOTHER ONE.

SPOILPARTYGAMES

#39 as it will just increase the number of low-skilled people in the end, and that makes for more uncritical consumers

I'm not so sure about the consuming tab01. I think poverty is going to hit so hard, utilities, rent and food are going to go up so much and peoples wages stay low, that they will stop consuming as they haven't the money to do so.

That's where I think our economy is going to fail, everything made abroad and imported poor people, but us too poor to buy the things the poor people make. The rich might yet lose out on everything, but then where does it leave us, a conundrum.

#34

no, the 'bunny' ain't getting it, junk

#39

'old' terrorist days, eh? how would you classify the supposed'conversion, tbo1?

BBC

Tommo seemed rattled. Gavin was right to use the word defensive.

As for 'BBC in the market place'. That is just nonsense. Executive speak for don't touch my pay and pensions. It seems the bbc is in the market place when there is a boom in pay then suddenly a public service when the market is on its knees. Yentob came across as everything that is bad about the BBC. Imperial and delusional attitudes are not public service.

BBC staff going on strike over their goldplated pensions? Reminds me of the FBU. If the BBC went off air no one would miss it and it would just demonstrate the vast choice people have to get their news and sport and entertainment.

The BBC is a 1930s creation. Who willingly chooses a 1930s technology solution these days except hobbyists? Its like those who dress up in wigs and gowns. Role gaming is a british vice when it traps the uk population in historical straitjackets.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11117940

Come on, male bloggers, which ones/one of you sre/is also trapped? If you are, it's bound to be your own fault.

mim

Much of this movie seems to agree with a lot of what tn01 posts!

https://vimeo.com/13770061

#45 ...in very poor taste :o(

"41. At 11:03am on 28 Aug 2010, ecolizzy wrote:

"I'm not so sure about the consuming tab01. I think poverty is going to hit so hard, utilities, rent and food are going to go up so much and peoples wages stay low, that they will stop consuming as they haven't the money to do so."

But have you not noticed how we all pay for fuel, food, and, in time, as the welfare state ever more recedes, everything else? What I am saying is that the cogs in the machine don't think too far ahead if they think at all. Think of trading in the markets, it's very short term in most cases. It didn't start out that way, futures were supposed to ensure that farmers etc could be sure of a market for their goods, now it's a different game where short term profit is just gambling, often with other people's money too. The neo-liberal system has to have consumers, it has to have punters. The less discerning the more debt, the more debt, the more interest based profit.

Take IDS and his ideas for a replacement for the welfare state. It sounds very much like Charles Murray's 'IN OUR HANDS' idea of giving everyone over 21 in the USA $10,000 every year for life. Can you see what might be wrong with that? As a parent I'm sure you'll have been through the agonising stage where you've felt mean because you didn't give your kids everything they wanted, but limited what they could have because you knew they'd just squander it, i.e become easy prey to vultures. What businesses (including utility companies) want ever more these days, are people who squander. They have no morality except not wishing to kill off their consumers/markets, hence their assertion that immigration is good for THEIR economy (and the less skilled the better, especially if they could get banks to lend money to them where the risk was securitized away). Honestly, I don't think the neo-liberal system knows any alternative. That's the real problem. It's all based on pushing problems further and further into the future where nobody faces the consequences. It popped in 2007, but the private sector will lobby to start it again for want of knowing any alternative (without revolutionary socialist change), and at present, they are doing their best to ensure that the alternative doesn't happen as it's based for business/profit, it's as simple as that..

#47

is it now?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

the Beebs energy has been sucked dry, just like other 'public' bodies, to prepare it for eventual assimilation into the commercial sector. Viz the influx of over-paid managers, who claim this money by pointing at the colossal inequality in the private sector and wanted it for themselves as well. No doubt the murdoch's fear of the "chilling" effect of the Beebs media footprint would be quickly forgotten were sky to be able to purchase the Beeb lock, stock and barrel.

more chilling is of course the growth of the parasite Sky/fox. But that is unmentionable now we have a Tory govt - poor Beeb, under attack from all directions.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

#48: TN, your analysis put the whole "double dip" question into its proper perspective.

how can there be proper economic growth (not ridiculous casinomics), when all available funds are being swallowed by the banks and tax-haven based multi-nats?

the neo-lib model is nothing except feudalism returned, and feudalism had/has a TERRIBLE history of creating economic growth - but a great one for building castles, and having armies of sullen peasants who have no chance of improving their lot.

i fear for the future of this country.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Alan Yentob mentioned (twice) that Thompson took a 25% pay cut. Save it Alan. Its the no-talents such as Yentob who tossed the license fee money about like it was confetti, but sits before us giving lessons, the nerve of the man. If you want to know whats wrong with the BBC, its the expensive idiots who sit on expensive chairs sitting in expensive offices giving it the big-un day in day out, then dine out in expensive restaurants talking about a new arts project with an egalitarian bent. These BBC folk have never lived in the real world and wouldn't stand a chance in it either. Watching this slow unfolding spectacle of 'survival' from this elite group - of which there are many - to the many overpaid presenters etc, leaves the rest of us raging. The corporation is bloated and the more it wheels out the defenders the more chance the BBC will be left with nowt other than a bloke with a camcorder, a torch and a haggered looking overworked Kirsty wark...and we don't want that do we!.
Peter Shiff. Finally NN gets someone on who understands economic issues, one of the few who predicted the crash. The same could not be said of the Obama economics advisor, miss Tyson couldn't see a train coming but she advises the president, very scary stuff this economics advisor in a skirt wouldn't you agree. Why was she picked for her job? She's a yes mouth piece with a Marxist outlook...she's perfect for this Obama administration. Peter Shiff talks inescapable basic logic, tyson talks spin. Its not really hard to spot the difference eh, unless of course your an idiot, then you might struggle some.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/debts-lawsuits-and-internal-feuding-cast-doubt-on-future-of-bnp-2064009.html

Debts, lawsuits & internal feuding. How unfortunate.

At least, for some, if one deems one out three acceptable.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1306941/GMB-union-boss-threatens-withdraw-Labour-funding-unless-Ed-Miliband-elected-party-leader.html?ITO=socialnet-twitter-mailonline

There does seem a solution at hand, if not one that inspires much faith in 'the system'.

there is a national disorder, and that is simply not telling the truth. How can the Public hold the politicians to account when the media, even the decent ones like the NN crew, cannot, or will not, say openly the things they clearly say in private?

paul mason knows the "double-dip recession" is just a fictional casinomics 'talking heads worry', like wondering if that night's salmon will be properly cooked after the Titanic has already hit the iceberg. But talking openly and honestly about what we are *really* facing seems impossible for this Nation to face up to, no-one is willing to be the first to stand up and pop the bubble, and take the inevitable music that will follow. Its like we are all trapped within a 'Reality TV' show, but no-one wants to break the 'magic' and openly speak about it, - even though such silence MUST lead to disaster for all. Perhaps if we all just keep quiet, and never mention Reality, eventually it will go away, and we can all just carry on as 'normal'?

look at the state of the world around us, look at the state of the UK, look at the state of England. Would a bit more honesty towards each other have made things worse? Where is this moral cowardice coming from?

who is pushing it, who is saying "do not speak about these things"? Who is it that will punish people if they speak openly and truthfully?

who is sapping our energy as free, independent, confident people, and turning us into low-energy, implicitly untruthful people who spend more time watching our own backs in case we get knifed rather than forward looking to create better futures? Who is preventing the truth from being spoken openly?

who benefits from this culture of back-stabbing, craven-faced huddling?

certainly we as a nation and individuals do not, and after all this is part of the 'Divide and Conquer' strategy, not only an interpersonal psychological technique for maladjusteds to control those around them, but also a long-used technique against entire populations - MI6/CIA used it in Iraq, so who would be using it *within* the UK?


why is it that people are not willing, or able, to talk openly about what they see is happening to the specific people involved? Where IS this cowardice and implicit dishonesty coming from?


paul, my apologies for using you as an example, you are actually one of the few who do your level best to be accurate and honest, it just so happened yours was the example from above.

#54

'cause you're a 'drama queen'

#57: ed millipede, the 'Savior of the Left'?????


ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!! lol lol lol

next thing i'll be hearing how B'Liar was also really a Lefty-Savior, along with Obama Christ.


there is a *really* easy way to judge the authenticity of these candidates - how much money have hey been given in large donations?

the millipedes lead - by a LONG way.

who could seriously imagine that whichever of these 2 gets elected 'Most High Leader' (see: 'Lord Meddlesome'), that the *other* wouldn't be in the Cabinet?

i wouldn't buy a used curry from either of those two, and those unions have supported nuLabour from the get-go; all that has changed is the rhetoric, there is not a fingernail of distinction between the millipedes and camoron's tories.

#57

What do you mean by deeming 'three acceptable', junk?

#56: the Beeb has its issues - but the very organisations (murdochracy and the tories) that are leading this attack on the Beeb BOTH have even worse records of doing what they are accusing the Beeb of doing!

when we hear a sky manager criticisng the Beeb, we should demand the *truth* about Murdoch's tax affairs, and how much his executive goons recieve in payment. The Tories hate the Beeb because even though it largely bends over backwards not to offend the Govt, it sometimes offers an actual true account of what is happening - something that NEVER would happen on Sky, if it crossed something the murdoch's didn't want saying.

THAT is the difference between the Beeb and the for-profit corporations - the Beeb occasionally will stand up to its employer, Sky employees never would.

yes, there has been gravy-training, just as across the whole private media world, and yes, exec renumeration has to be slashed to decent levels. But we have a baby the size of an elephant in that bath, and we should not allow deliberate, frankly evil media-campaigns by self-interested parties to undermine our support for the Beeb.

think about what murdoch Jr said about the Beeb last year - that it was trying to 'corner the market, chillingly', or words to that effect etc etc. WHO could doubt that is actually a perfect description of the *Murdoch Empire*?

https://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2010/03/pilger-australia-murdoch-media

the tories seem to have passed the 'Schools Privatisation Act', they are working on the 'Health Privatisation Act', and the Royal Mail is to be flogged off to other countries corporations - doesn't take a genius to see what is next on the list.

what can we do about it?

#56

I like Alan Yentob, kevsey, from what I've seen him with Paxo in the studio and at the BBC in Regent Street here in the capital. I haven't 'studied' his work in detail but from what I've heard him say, he sounds like a reasonable man and I like his 'mannerisms'.

mim

40. At 10:13am on 28 Aug 2010, barriesingleton wrote:

"If we do not dismantle Westminster more will follow. "

But that's what they HAVE been doing Barrie, and for decades too. Do you not see that? We have been encouraged to make governance less and less effective, less and less 'commanding'. Our liberal politics has devolved governance or regulation more and more to market anarchism. That's the nature of neo-liberalism. We are just doing its bidding when writing the way that we do demanding change as parliament has been busy undermining the old mixed economy status quo. The so-called Expenses Scandal just helped further this, for if we lose faith in MPs integrity (or they are induced to behave corruptly) it is easier to dispense with national governance and devolve it to say Brussels or you and I which is anarchism. It's being far more cleverly done than many of us appreciate, I suggest..

"41. At 11:03am on 28 Aug 2010, ecolizzy wrote:

"I'm not so sure about the consuming tab01. I think poverty is going to hit so hard, utilities, rent and food are going to go up so much and peoples wages stay low, that they will stop consuming as they haven't the money to do so."

But have you not noticed how we all pay for fuel, food, and, in time, as the welfare state ever more recedes, everything else? What I am saying is that the cogs in the machine don't think too far ahead if they think at all. Think of trading in the markets, it's very short term in most cases. It didn't start out that way, futures were supposed to ensure that farmers etc could be sure of a market for their goods, now it's a different game where short term profit is just gambling, often with other people's money too. The neo-liberal system has to have consumers, it has to have punters. The less discerning the more debt, the more debt, the more interest based profit.

Take IDS and his ideas for a replacement for the welfare state. It sounds very much like Charles Murray's 'IN OUR HANDS' idea of giving everyone over 21 in the USA $10,000 every year for life. Can you see what might be wrong with that? As a parent I'm sure you'll have been through the agonising stage where you've felt mean because you didn't give your kids everything they wanted, but limited what they could have because you knew they'd just squander it, i.e become easy prey to vultures. What businesses (including utility companies) want ever more these days, are people who squander. They have no morality except not wishing to kill off their consumers/markets, hence their assertion that immigration is good for THEIR economy (and the less skilled the better, especially if they could get banks to lend money to them where the risk was securitized away). Honestly, I don't think the neo-liberal system knows any alternative. That's the real problem. It's all based on pushing problems further and further into the future where nobody faces the consequences. It popped in 2007, but the private sector will lobby to start it again for want of knowing any alternative (without revolutionary socialist change), and at present, they are doing their best to ensure that the alternative doesn't happen as it's based for business/profit, it's as simple as that..

"56. At 2:17pm on 28 Aug 2010, kevseywevsey wrote:
"..If you want to know whats wrong with the BBC, its the expensive idiots who sit on expensive chairs sitting in expensive offices giving it the big-un day in day out, then dine out in expensive restaurants talking about a new arts project with an egalitarian bent. These BBC folk have never lived in the real world and wouldn't stand a chance in it either. Watching this slow unfolding spectacle of 'survival' from this elite group - of which there are many - to the many overpaid presenters etc, leaves the rest of us raging.

Whilst I'm sure there's some truth to what you say, the problem is that 'the real world' was where the problems grew and grew like Topsey was it not? How will bringing the BBC to its knees and more like 'the real world' help matters as that is where the problems come from is it not?
Not only that, but the public is being forced to sacrifice in order to bail them out! The same is happening with the BBC which was part of the Public Sector. I think you're looking at a corrupt-it--in-order-to-remove-it strategy just as we see the likes of well meaning Barriesingleton above being seduced into challenging the Parliamentary system, as it will just lead to further deregulation/lack of governance, presumably the opposite of what is intended?. The same has been done throughout Public Services. Think of Social Services in recent times, or Academies/Free Schools where Head Teachers are highlighted as getting very high salaries. This is corruption in order to get rid of old institutions I suggest, and it's all in pursuit of short-term greed. It's not sustainable, it's just destructive.

62. At 3:04pm on 28 Aug 2010, Mindys_Housemate wrote:

"what can we do about it?"

One thing that one can do is encourage others to radically question whether there might be something duplicitous going on with Orwellian headlines like these:

https://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE67R1AK20100828

As until more people can see through this subterfuge, little will change.

Does anyone really think that these thugs are sponsored by Libertarian bodies like the American Enterprise Institute? There is some very devious public opinion shaping going on here, which is also known as politics. Few will grasp this.

i feel i have a lot to say,and that i am on the right site to say it.

Rugby Leage this Aft Damn Fine
The Proms Now Damn Fine

Top Tip for 2day Marry A close cousin, your children will really not be as Retarded as You/mayB/sometimez

#64 Be careful tab01 you are repeating yourself from an earlier post to me at #48! ; )

I spoke to my sister about why our birthrate is in such decline, her comments are slightly different to mine and include other thoughts...

I also think people don't have kids 'cos they are frightened. When you had yours people just did the best job they could. Now everything has to be so politically correct. You're not allowed to say how you feel about things in case the kids repeat it at school. You have to be superwoman, and have a really good career (not just a job) AND look after the kid. And if they bang their head or break their arm, heaven help you, you will be accused of beating them up. So it is probably easier not to bother, plus all these celebrities knock them out at 45years old so everyone thinks they will do the same.

I agree with her that the celebrity culture has a lot of influence, lately I've noticed a lot of the younger ones are pregnant. Is that influencing the higher birthrate I've noticed around me as I mentioned in an earlier post. And she's dead right about women thinking they can have a baby until they're almost 50!

68. 8 Aug 2010, ecolizzy

Yes, sorry about the repeat.

It's the more educated women who are having small families or none at all. And guess what, we are encouraging more to spend longer in education and pursue a career, and it was people like Harriet Harman who were saying that was a good thing too! Why? Only because in the short term that equality rot meant that by going out to work they increased the number of consumers for retailers and property sellers etc! That isn't going to change so long as women heave cash in their pockets and shops to spend it in. Like men, they like the freedom, and I don't blame them. But there is a cost, and they don't see it till far too late.

Those making money out of this don't care of course, for the reasons I gave before. Sad if we have to destroy our entire system in order to drive that message home, but I reckon it's got to happen. I don't think celebrities should be taken as a gauge of anything though as they're the most self-centred people in our system!

https://www.uncommonwisdomdaily.com/5657492-to-create-a-single-job-has-washington-lost-its-mind-9913?FIELD9=1

The segragation just goes on and on and on....

https://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2010/aug/28/halal-holidays-turkey-muslim-women

It'll be apartheid soon.

Dad your A Disgustet Looser..Yes Dear remind me Yesterday

#69

tb01

Please could you explain to us who you consider as 'celebrities'? All known journalists, the members of the Royalty, the PM and his Deputy, all politicians, in fact? How about the world famour opera singers as well?

Perhaps we should ban all the media just to satisfy your hate of those who become known, and contribute to the culture and the overall climate of the times, thanks to them?

#73 addendum

Has a new STAR been born or shall we 'ban' him before he becomes a 'celeb'?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-11114711

Something to ponder on, although my impression is that, alas, some people are immune to getting true and viable messages.

Isn't it self-deception to the highest degree to be using all kinds of 'celebrities' to promote oneself and then 'spit' at them?

mim

73. At 05:34am on 29 Aug 2010, mimpromptu wrote:

"Please could you explain to us who you consider as 'celebrities'?"

I'll try.

You can take your pick, as the media tells one who it considers a celebrity. To start with, many who it attribute great qualities to, in reality, only perform (or 'present') what is other people's work, so why are THEY credited? This requires some thought I suggest.

What's important here is the adverse consequences of a culture of celebritism and of false attribution based on image/representation, i.e. of lies and self-deception as those who participate collude. The irrational nature of this cult of deception is revealed by the costs of this pathological obsession with IMAGE at the expense of reality.

Pursuit of the COSMETICS of fame and fortune can now also be seen in the effective purchase of academic and other honours, or 'bigging oneself up' at a job interview, 'saying the right thing', even if it is not true. Such pretence is de facto, but not de jure, criminal behaviour, as it's not proscribed by the statute books, yet if you think about it, it IS a means of obtaining by deception, so it's fraud. People are now actively enticed to pretend to be what they are not in order to advance themselves (think of the cosmetic surgery as another example, but the cosmetic industry itself is part of this). The adverse consequences of image over reality should be obvious, as can be seen by all sorts of economic/health indices of our sick society.

Youth in China forget how to write!
https://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.74f06613ea91a1f1041b96c96477427f.561&show_article=1

FOSTERS DON'T DO IRONY - BUT IF THEY DID . . . (#74 link)

As government (once again) disingenuously purports to grapple with the British alcoholic obsession, how droll that Scotland combines a prestigious humour-event, with the highest de-facto award for egregious alcohol misuse.

"How many bars in Holyrood - four score and ten?
In Westminster we've one-and-nine but no one counts - ye ken?"

....and now this.....Fidel Castro states that Bin Laden is a US spy!
https://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/27/fidel-castro-osama-bin-laden-us-spy

WESTERN CLEVER IMPACTING EASTERN WISE - AGAIN?

As Chinese characters are based on pictures, the brain probably stores and processes them in a very different way 76. This could well relate, directly, to the deep cultural/philosophical/religious differences that held sway for so long. What is described in the link, appears to be the coup de grace of our impact on that part of the word.

As an American squaddie might whoop: "We won."

#76

Well, thank you for your reply, tb01, but let's take Paxo as an example. Do you consider him a 'celeb' caring only about his own image and does he present 'only' what other people have 'prepared' for him or does he actually contribute to the programmes when he is on any particular evening? How about his books? Have all of them been written by other people and his name simply appears on the covers and he gets credit for them for 'nothing' and then earns money once they sell? He admitted right from the beginning, in fact in the Acknowledgement of the book, that he had had help from 'the young Irish sriter, Neil Hegarty, as well as mentioning all kinds of other people who took part in the film and book project, including the ladies serving the custard in the BBC canteen.

#79

There are all kinds of porkys 'flying' around, including on this website, Mistress76uk.

#81 addendum

Besides, tb01, do you really think that celebrities or rather famous people have it all that easy being constantly in the spotlight, never knowing who to trust and who's there for all kinds of false reasons, like make pots of money out of them, for instance? Do I need to quote any examples of how many great contributors have been either damaged or put under unwelcome, to say the least, stress by 'pushers', as sings Nina Simone in her song 'The Pusher'? How about Michael Jackson, Marilyn Monroe, Maria Callas, to mention just a few? And of course there are also those 'celebs' who are uncomfortable politically to faceless 'string pullers'.

81. At 10:34am on 29 Aug 2010, mimpromptu

I'm answering your question as best I can by suggesting that one should try to focus on the message, not on the messenger.

The entertainment industry plays on our suspending normal judgement in that respect. Actors pretend. These days, many presenters, perform. In current affairs, it's the programme/media content which should be critically appraised/evaluated, not the presenter..To focus upon the latter is a failure/blurring/exploitation of discrimination/intelligence. I'm sure that if you give this a little thought, you'll see that it's true, and you'll see why I say that you're asking the wrong questions and focusing on the wrong things.

#84

Why are you avoiding talking straight about Jeremy, may I ask, and are you suggesting that he lacks intelligence and is simply into exploitation?

And, what 'things' do you 'believe' that I should be focusing on? And, to be awfully pedantic semantically, why are you talking about 'things' rather than feelings, emotions, verbal.expressions and ideas?

#68/#69: lizzy, RN01, falling birth rates are desirable, they will cause economic dislocation for a while (especially because of the post-war boomer gen), but they are ultimately beneficial.

the 'gen gap' problem ("not enough young 'uns to pay the bills") would not have been a problem if we had had a Govt that has NOT allowed pension funds to be raided for the benefit of the ultra-rich. Alas, we did (and do), and that is a major headache that WILL need addressing quite soon. But having an ever-increasing population is not the only solution - and certainly not the best solution.

----------

#70: brossen: imagine how many jobs could have been created in the UK with that £1.5Tn handed to the banks.

the whole 'stimulus' garbage is just about handing money to the casinomics financial services, not about creating jobs or anything worthwhile.

far better had we created clean-sheet mutuals, with that money as their reserves, and let the private banks fall.


NN recently hinted at this (bless them!), by asking pointedly if any future 'hand-outs' would instead go to small and medium business directly.

the answer is, clearly, "no". Neither in the UK, nor in the US.

--------

#71: for gods sake!!

no, i agree with you, i think that UK women's refuges should also be seen as segregationist, and that they should allow leering men and alcohol into them, to prove they are 'mainstream culture'. Right?

...no?

how is this different from how our great-grandparents used to behave, during the Victorian era? Apart from the fact that some of these women actually sunbathe topless!!

c'mon lizzy! xx

----------

#77: mistress, my handwriting has also become terrible!!


--ponders-- oh, but then it always was... But bloody technology eh? ^_^

------------

#79: mistress, he is almost certainly correct. (fidel about bin laden).

-------------


#59: :blushes: :p

#85. addendum

Do you want that I call for getting rid of democracy in Poland, for example, and 'try' to put you in charge there? I have a feeling that they would lynch me if I came up with such an 'ideal' and ban me' from ever returning to the land I was born, brought up and loved, which I still am, by the way.

And do you want me to stop taking interest in what Paxo's up to? It's not a secret after all. 'Should' I stop reading his books and watch the programmes he is in and 'should' I give up my membership with the Media Society at which I'm likely to meet more 'celebs?

there are 'celebs' because they actually have talents, and then there are 'celebs' because they are 'celebs'.

but being a 'celeb' does not mean a person is an instant 'font of wisdom', i wouldn't ask paxo's opinion on a long-distance running regime (although actually for him he might very well have good advice!), nor would i ask a multi-millionaire media-whore for advice on how to bring up my kids (in general).

personally, i don't think people are as stupid as the media try to make out, but its also true that the media push celebrity as a placebo-effect. I think people are crying out for sources of good advice, and the mainstream media are using that desire for their own ends.

#88

Funny you should talk about running, housey, as I'm about to glide a d twirl to Edith Piaf's 'Padam' where she 'mentions' this particular activity and also I've written an essay on wisdom of being able to accept and appreciate multifarious perceptions which from what I've read of Paxo's books a d articles, as well as having listened to several interviews with him, he 'fits the bill' on this score.

#89. addendum

Why should you be expecting getting advice from Jeremy about running, especially long-distance, running anyway, housey?

#90: i dunno, seemed like a 'random thought' at the time! :/

https://www.infowars.com/the-great-collapse-of-the-chicago-climate-exchange//

@44 jauntycylist
As for 'BBC in the market place'. That is just nonsense. Executive speak for don't touch my pay and pensions. It seems the bbc is in the market place when there is a boom in pay then suddenly a public service when the market is on its knees. Yentob came across as everything that is bad about the BBC. Imperial and delusional attitudes are not public service.
-------------------
Brilliant post.

How I wish I could have come up with that before you did.

Snoughts in troughs at all levels of management and not a jot of conscience.

Over £3billion of taxpayers money guaranteed annually and no real accountability - who wouldn't line their pockets?

The disposition of the BBC's cash is a national disgrace.

How does the salary of a typical regional newsgatherer, who actually provides meaningful information, compare to the Director General who's job has become little less that a PR defense against indefensible profligacy?

I hope the new gonerment has the b**ls to take them on at the next licence review - but I will not be holding my breath.

#92

Are you talking of chicken, brush?

#90 addendum

It went quite well with Edith, housey, considering that there were a few others on ice. And with a few other tunes as well.

Why did God create economists?
To make weathermen look good.

What do you get when you cross an economist with the Godfather?
You get an offer you can't understand.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

#96: kevsey:

"Why did God create economists?
To make weathermen look good."


Why did the Devil create economists?

Hubris.

This is from Nov. The risk assessment that justifies the agenda of the 2005G8 climate change an Africa. It predicts flood events of magnitude involving 10s millions

https://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2009/11/wednesday_4_november_2009.html

This is from 20th Nov identifying a meander in the jet stream as a factor in the Cumbria flooding.

The same cause as the Pakistan floods.

If they had done a proper investigation into Cumbria the the world community would have been better prepared.

Remember on the NN blog we knew about the Cumbria flooding the day before it happened.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2009/11/thursday_17_november_2009.html

@post 97:

aww c'mon mods, let me slander Sky! Its not like i'm anywhere near their top list of favourite people, is it? :D