Does anyone agree that there is a need for forum space to mention all those things that are of interest in the short term but, would not necessarily sustain a half a dozen or a dozen comments.
For example: Yesterday was the last day of the Six Nations rugby competition. Only of interest perhaps, to few on these Forums. I’d like to have placed a reminder but couldn’t find the last Six Nations subject, so didn’t bother.
Another example: Lord Neuburger, President of the Supreme Court mentioned that it was desirable that people should not be prevented from venting their often frustrated opinions on contentious issues for fear of condemnation. He thought that commentators who were opposed, were inhibited by the prospect of disapproval, from discussing rascism, homosexuality, ordination of females etc.
My Six Nations snippet was that it was a generally good result. Ireland won (by points difference) the Six Nations title from England. England won the Triple Crown and France was beaten ! Result.
By: John Green - 8th March 2016 at 17:19
Why do we listen to the drivel from these show biz freaks ? They are actors and actresses mouthing other peoples words. They are vastly overpaid, so therefore, their perception is that life is ‘coming up roses’ and therefore they have to indulge their ‘guilt kick’.
On a ratio of worth, their value is:
One bin man equals one hundred champagne gulpers
One doctor equals five hundred ” “
One neurologist equals one thousand ” “
And so on. One could write a book on comparative values. Why do we give media space to these experts in the art of execrable waffle ? All of those mentioned in #626 present an immediate caricature of ‘man in the street’ soundbites, delivered with all the solemnity of Mickey Mouse Productions Ltd.
By: MrBlueSky - 8th March 2016 at 15:14
Hi Matt..
“Asked if she would be prepared to house a Syrian family, Yvette Cooper told Sky News: “If that’s what it took and that’s what was needed, of course. Lots of people would be.“
This is all fabrication then…
http://www.channel4.com/news/sturgeon-and-labour-candidates-would-take-refugees
http://www.channel4.com/news/finnish-pm-refugees-can-stay-at-my-home
Ferrari to Cooper
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruGq6bDfqfM
http://news.sky.com/story/1547710/politicians-offer-to-house-syrian-refugees
Geldof…
By: Beermat - 8th March 2016 at 13:52
Hi Stu
To be fair, Cooper never did say she would. She said, when asked at the time ‘um.. if it came to it a lot of people would’, which I took as meaning ‘No’.
So what we have is a combination of incompetence and Daily Mail ‘Journalism’ (not to be confused with real journalism). The story has been made up – but it’s a bit like kicking a puppy, she is an idiot and probably couldn’t remember what she’d said before.
Anyone worthy of her position would have said during the Ferrari interview ‘this is made up as I didn’t say that’. Instead she has allowed the Telegraph, the Mail. the Spectator and the usual suspects join in the braying and baying about her going back on this promise (that she never in fact made) as if it was fact.
A sad indictment all round – we have both the politicians, and the press, that we deserve!
By: MrBlueSky - 8th March 2016 at 12:08
Hi JD.
It was said in one of the comments that she wouldn’t be appearing on ‘Question Time’ any time soon!
I hope the media give no quarter to likes of Yvette Cooper, Nicola Sturgeon, Bob Geldof and Emma Thompson to name a few that offered to house Syrian refugees and urged people to do the same and now seem to be very quite on the subject.
Emma Thompson on Climate Change and Refugees on BBC Newsnight…
By: John Green - 8th March 2016 at 10:19
How very typical of typical ‘champagne socialists’. Don’t do as I do; do as I tell you !
By: MrBlueSky - 8th March 2016 at 09:50
Remember this…
How’s Yvette’s offer of taking a family of refugees into one of her two homes going…
:rolleyes:
By: Beermat - 2nd March 2016 at 16:31
Clarkson?
By: trekbuster - 2nd March 2016 at 15:48
Jeremy Hunt? Really??
He is even less trustworthy than Gideon
By: John Green - 2nd March 2016 at 11:02
We should instead place our trust in Jeremy.
By: trekbuster - 1st March 2016 at 20:48
It looks as if Gideon has been economical with the actualite, again
By: John Green - 29th February 2016 at 21:27
On your recommendation, I’ll find a copy. It’s an intriguing title.
By: Beermat - 29th February 2016 at 10:27
I don’t understand how ‘RP’ is ‘speaking properly’. It is an accent, and a lot of the mangled vowels you hear in pre-war broadcasting are a legacy of an attempt to ape the curious speech patterns of the English upper aristocracy among the aspirant middle classes. The accent thus ‘received’ by generations of public school kids (I don’t think it still is taught)? is in fact heavily German-influenced, overlaid on Norman French, if you care to go back far enough. But then so many of our regional accents are, as John pointed out with the example of Geordie.
I think the BBC edict, both on accents and the airing of alternative political viewpoints, was an attempt to do the ‘All in it together’ ‘call me Dave’ thing, to head off rumblings of being led into total war by our upper classes – which were gathering momentum. I am sure there were elements who feared some kind of uprising. Now, wasn’t this the department George Orwell was working in at the time? Interesting stuff.
Edit – no, I checked – Orwell joined the Eastern Service, but with a similar remit in that the aim was to prevent the colonies taking the opportunity to rise against Empire.
He was also writing “The Lion and the Unicorn: Socialism and the English Genius” at the time – I haven’t read it, but I suspect you’d love it, JG.
By: John Green - 28th February 2016 at 19:14
No confusion between ‘accent’ and ‘dialect’.
Anglicised in that context meant reflective of current usage in the South.
Tyneside English is/was as far removed from your Hampshire English as the content of Countryfile and StarTrek !
By: trekbuster - 28th February 2016 at 14:49
Yes, of course I accept your clarification and stand corrected on that element, although are you confusing accent and dialect?
Although “anglicised” is a strange expression as the last time I looked, Tyneside was in England and therefore that accent is as English as mine, which is, for want of a better phrase, “home counties” overlaid with a small amount of Hampshire burr.
I therefore find it surprising that you used the terms I outlined in #614.
I think the following link from the British library is quite informative and shows how acceptance of regional accents has changed in the past 50 years.
http://www.bl.uk/learning/langlit/sounds/find-out-more/received-pronunciation/
By: John Green - 28th February 2016 at 14:27
Here’s one of my ‘prejudices’ !
My mother was a Geordie – from Tyneside. Her family spoke Tyneside English thought to be related to Hamburg German.
“Are you going home to-night?” emerged as: “Are yuh gannin haem (pronounced yem) tae nicht ?” All spoken with an inflection. My mother having travelled “doon sooth” quickly became anglicized and she lost her – for me – delightful but opaque, Geordie accent.
Having established my regional accent credentials, are you happy for me to be admitted to the regional accent thick but not stupid club ?
By: trekbuster - 28th February 2016 at 13:52
Unnacented English?
Less intelligent …. “It just sounded if they weren’t” “Taught to speak properly”
Every person speaks with an accent. RP is an accent. You must try harder to hide your own prejudices about regional accents.
By: John Green - 28th February 2016 at 11:31
You rose quickly to take the bait. The answer is in the phrase ‘class antagonisms’. The excellence of the BBC, as it then was, the unaccented English its announcers used was, in the minds of the critics, not acceptable to some strands of society. Some obviously thought that the proper pronunciation of vowel sounds resulting in clear speech – much like to-day (I jest) might interfere with the conduct of the World War raging about their ears.
I don’t know whether – your quote – ‘they’ were less intelligent or not, it just sounded as tho’ they weren’t. It does make some sense to imagine that if they hadn’t been taught to speak properly or, failed to absorb the lessons if they had then, perhaps ‘they’ weren’t paying attention when taught to read and write and add up.
So, in this respect Trekkie you might be right. ‘They’ were less intelligent.
By: trekbuster - 27th February 2016 at 15:46
How is using announcers and reporters with regional accents dumbing down?
Are you implying that anyone who doesn’t use RP is less intelligent?
As to giving more air time to left wing speakers, presumably this was tacitly acknowledging that up to that point a right wing bias was prevalent, as is still the case to day in the media generally.
By: John Green - 26th February 2016 at 10:32
Mrs. G is visiting kin so, it is an opportunity for me to catch up on my reading, currently; Richard Overy’s magnificent opus “The Bombing War” – more about that when I’ve finished it.
This short extract produced a wry smile – there’s little that’s new under the sun ! Page 173. The author refers to the social impact of the Blitz and in particular the actions of the Home Affairs Emergency Committee. They are concerned with the possible existence of ‘class antagonisms’ being fostered and exacerbated by the air raids and suggest replacing the ‘cultured tones of the BBC with more local dialects and giving radio air time to left wing speakers’.
Isn’t that sweet! So the practice of ‘dumbing down’ began rather earlier than perhaps many of us thought. 1941 to be precise. So, this is also the beginning of the leftist domination of the BBC’s Question Time. Quite a provenance !
By: Meddle - 25th February 2016 at 17:41
It seems that the railway equivalent of ‘The Naughty Field’ is to simply wander onto the tracks when a noteworthy locomotive approaches:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-35661445
Sign In
March 16, 2014 at 1:27 pm