This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Visit the current forum | Forum Rules
|
Originally posted by nhp61
Have you never noticed that when the BBC interview the man (or woman) in the street they always seem to aim for the most stupid looking ones
|
|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
Have you never noticed that when the BBC interview the man (or woman) in the street they always seem to aim for the most stupid looking ones I heard they used to linger outside the backdoor for the Jeremy Kyle show. Unfortunately could just be the average representation for people in street however.
Now Zaha's got a bit of green grass ahead of him here... and finds Ambrose... not a bad effort!!!! |
|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
Have you never noticed that when the BBC interview the man (or woman) in the street they always seem to aim for the most stupid looking ones I've noticed this as well but by pollsters. Amnesty international, Planned Parenthood Etc always seem to target youngsters nearly always sporting piercings & multiple hair colouring
Pro USA & Israel |
|
|
Originally posted by Jimenez
I've noticed this as well but by pollsters. Amnesty international, Planned Parenthood Etc always seem to target youngsters nearly always sporting piercings & multiple hair colouring Antifa light
|
|
|
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle
Have you never noticed that when the BBC interview the man (or woman) in the street they always seem to aim for the most stupid looking ones Yes, and they never challenge any of their comments. Yesterday, for example, a whole string of people in some high street in England all saying that nurses should be paid a lot more. Not one challenge such as "how much should they be paid?" or "how would that be funded?" or "would you be happy to pay a couple of hundred more in tax a month to make it happen, then a couple of hundred more for the train drivers, teachers etc etc?"
Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes) |
|
|
Originally posted by YT
Yes, and they never challenge any of their comments. Yesterday, for example, a whole string of people in some high street in England all saying that nurses should be paid a lot more. Not one challenge such as "how much should they be paid?" or "how would that be funded?" or "would you be happy to pay a couple of hundred more in tax a month to make it happen, then a couple of hundred more for the train drivers, teachers etc etc?" Or they could ask if people want their kids taught by monkeys or by professionals? Or if the train companies could have used profits to pay workers, instead of paying dividends? Or if they could sack a whole layer of management in the NHS and no one would notice? It goes both ways - they're not quite on the side you may think. They still need the licence fee.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
|
Originally posted by YT
And another thing.... In its World Cup coverage, why does the BBC show bias towards one team in its choice of pundits? Today for example, 2 former Wales players and a Welsh presenter plus a German. No Iranian. Belgium v Canada - a Belgian (V Kompany), no Canadian etc It annoys me when they're only balanced for the England games. No doubt Megan Rapinhoe tonight on duty for the England game.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
|
Originally posted by YT
And another thing.... In its World Cup coverage, why does the BBC show bias towards one team in its choice of pundits? Today for example, 2 former Wales players and a Welsh presenter plus a German. No Iranian. Belgium v Canada - a Belgian (V Kompany), no Canadian etc the Serbia team are mostly straight white men. That's like Kryptonite to the BBC. Probably something similar with Canada and so Vincent Kompany was more acceptable. And if the Poland team starts winning all their games ? just watch the BBC clambering around to find a female LGBT pundit from Krakow. its amazing how our license fee is paying for an overtly racist/misanthropist organisation.
Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford |
|
|
Originally posted by ASCPFC
Or they could ask if people want their kids taught by monkeys or by professionals? Or if the train companies could have used profits to pay workers, instead of paying dividends? Or if they could sack a whole layer of management in the NHS and no one would notice? It goes both ways - they're not quite on the side you may think. They still need the licence fee. Indeed. My point, of course, was to agree with Midlands in saying that they always ask the thickest looking people they can find, and then to point out that they ask a hopelessly one-dimensional question.
Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes) |
|
|
Originally posted by ASCPFC
It annoys me when they're only balanced for the England games. No doubt Megan Rapinhoe tonight on duty for the England game. Is she the straight one?
Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes) |
|
|
Originally posted by YT
Is she the straight one? The least straight one.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
|
Originally posted by YT
they always ask the thickest looking people they can find, and then to point out that they ask a hopelessly one-dimensional question. the thicks from the bbc will interview the thicks in the street ? birds of a feather....
Kayla did Anfield & Old Trafford |
|
|
I have to think I probably look a bit thick. Probably totally thick. I know someone is thinking of a reply right now.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
Apparently BBC staff are demanding an inquiry into racism at the corporation. Odd that such a left wing organisation is beset with discrimination claims on such a regular basis. Progressivism has a strong taste of the Salem witch trials about it. As in that case, the madness never truly ends until the powerful get affected. It serves a useful purpose until eyes are directed at them.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Progressivism has a strong taste of the Salem witch trials about it. As in that case, the madness never truly ends until the powerful get affected. It serves a useful purpose until eyes are directed at them. I do not believe the BBC is anything like what these complainers say it is. However it is an open door with deep pockets so these people smell money / jobs and promotion. There was a TV presenter who complained about pay discrimination and got a huge pay out. It went something like this: Presenter I have never heard of who hosted a show I never heard of in the early mornings (circa 6am) when nobody is watching wins claims against BBC because another presenter I have never heard of who also presented a show I had never heard of which nobody watches was paid more than her. Where the BBC is at fault is that he has allowed too many staff to claim that they are exceptional and so should be paid outside of the pay structure. This has then lead to a free for all where people are paid based on how good their agent is. In the example above what the BBC should have done is told these people that they are not stars and plenty of people can do their job so they will be paid within the salary structure. There are probably only a handful of people that actually are big enough to circumvent the pay structure.
One more point |
|
|
Originally posted by YT
they never challenge any of their comments. Yesterday, for example, a whole string of people in some high street in England all saying that nurses should be paid a lot more. Not one challenge such as "how much should they be paid?" or "how would that be funded?" A couple of days ago the Beeb had an interview with a nurse on their website saying that he was happy to go on strike as the pay was far too low. Apparently he had been a nurse for just one year but the Beeb never commented on the fact that he had obviously entered the profession knowing that pay levels were low for newly qualified nurses
|
|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Progressivism has a strong taste of the Salem witch trials about it. As in that case, the madness never truly ends until the powerful get affected. It serves a useful purpose until eyes are directed at them. Not suggesting a bromance here but I agree this post entirely.
|
|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Progressivism has a strong taste of the Salem witch trials about it. As in that case, the madness never truly ends until the powerful get affected. It serves a useful purpose until eyes are directed at them. Agreed. All those trendy woke warriors of today perhaps in 30 years time will find themselves on the wrong end of the argument and shamed and scorned by the youth of the future. I must admit to an element of schadenfreude when I see some feminists de platformed and derided by people using the same tactics that those feminists used in the past against the male pale and the stale. They rightly complain, but in some cases they are getting a taste of their own medicine.
One more point |
|
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2025 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.