Why is this a BBC top story? (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Wisbech Eagle  Truro Cornwall 23 Feb 20 7.47pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Badger11
From another source the boy is alive however I still agree with Midland poorly written article or is that poorly edited as the one below appears to be very similar but more detailed. As the same report appeared almost word for word in quite a few places it was obviously a syndicated piece which was just picked up by others, including the BBC. That though didn't stop "Midland" blaming the BBC for it's journalism as well as completely misrepresenting what it actually said.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
| Stirlingsays 23 Feb 20 7.56pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
WE 'I'm not an elitist' spends his time doing little else but defending elitist institutions. I regard the original criticisms of this article as valid. If this boy had died that is of primary importance and so should be early on in the piece. It's poor journalism but it's not major as poor journalism is very common in all modern day media. Then again, the BBC steals 150 odd quid from people who dislike it every year.....So if people want to complain about stuff....large or small....they have paid for the privilege.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 23 Feb 20 8.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
The "original criticism", if SS bothered to check, was that the article waited until the end to tell us that the boy HAD died. Not that the fact that he COULD have died was so important that it ought to have been at the top of the article. It's hardly "elitist" to point out the truth, is it? It's also someone ironic suggesting that I am defending something I ought not to, when he is defending someone who has made a clear error but doesn't apparently have any intention of admitting it. Thick as thieves seems to cover it!
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| dannyboy1978 23 Feb 20 10.09pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Is this a joke?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Tom-the-eagle Croydon 23 Feb 20 10.24pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by dannyboy1978
Is this a joke? Either step down or get chucked out. Thick as sh@t. Token politician.
"It feels much better than it ever did, much more sensitive." John Wayne Bobbit |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 23 Feb 20 10.42pm |
|
|---|---|
|
None of WE's observations make any sense. Perhaps he's losing it.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 23 Feb 20 10.47pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Tom-the-eagle
Either step down or get chucked out. Thick as sh@t. Token politician. At least with the Tories you know that the front bench are there on merit. With Labour you know that merit comes further down the list.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 23 Feb 20 10.52pm |
|
|---|---|
|
My observations will make perfect sense to anyone prepared to read both the article and my comments on it with an objective and open mind. They won't to anyone with a determination to only see what they want to see. It's all there, in plain sight, to those prepared to see it.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 23 Feb 20 11.01pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Ok, you wrote this: 'The "original criticism", if SS bothered to check, was that the article waited until the end to tell us that the boy HAD died. Not that the fact that he COULD have died was so important that it ought to have been at the top of the article.' Right, the only reason it's important to state at the top of the article that the boy died is because it's obviously extremely relevant to the context of the whole situation. Why else would ME even care? Where on earth does 'could' even come into it? What the feck are you waffling about? Edited by Stirlingsays (23 Feb 2020 11.03pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Teddy Eagle  23 Feb 20 11.05pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by dannyboy1978
Is this a joke? Wants to spend more time with her abacus and attending her putting your shoes on the correct feet classes.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 23 Feb 20 11.06pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle
Wants to spend more time with her abacus and attending her putting your shoes on the correct feet classes. Best meme of the election....laugh out loud funny.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Teddy Eagle 23 Feb 20 11.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Best meme of the election....laugh out loud funny. Well you know how it goes with these binary choices.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.