BBC needs to get a grip

[IC1967]

My piss is really boiling. The Scotch look likely to vote Yes causing a political earthquake off the richter scale. The Middle East is in total meltdown. Russia is invading Ukraine. So what do the BBC decide should be the main news headline? The royals are having another baby!

You couldn't make it up. Such a trivial matter should not even be given any news time. Just goes to show how the establishment are bent on keeping the British public brainwashed into thinking that the royals are incredibly important. Well I've got news for them. The days of sycophancy are over. It is only the incredibly stupid amongst us that think another spongeing royal baby is news.

[RedRover45]

Hold the front page ! For once I'm agreeing with Mick 😱

Nurse ......!!!!!!!

[IC1967]

Haha!

[LongbridgeMGRover]

Great news!! No, not the baby but IC1967's taking a left turn.
Did anyone see that gushing sycophantic mush about Harry the other night by the way?

As the Union came about when a Scottish King also became king of England, maybe the Scots would like to have the Royal Family if they become independant. We could then become a republic with Arthur Scargill as our president.

[donnyguy61]

Sky news exactly the same

[SoundbiteBarmyArmy]

My piss is really boiling. The Scotch look likely to vote Yes causing a political earthquake off the richter scale. The Middle East is in total meltdown. Russia is invading Ukraine. So what do the BBC decide should be the main news headline? The royals are having another baby!

You couldn't make it up. Such a trivial matter should not even be given any news time. Just goes to show how the establishment are bent on keeping the British public brainwashed into thinking that the royals are incredibly important. Well I've got news for them. The days of sycophancy are over. It is only the incredibly stupid amongst us that think another spongeing royal baby is news.

I couldn't agree more, well said!

[LongbridgeMGRover]

A few years ago, the Morning Star heralded a new royal baby with the headline 'another f***ing parasite'.
The rest of our press would reserve a watered down version of that headline for stories about the unemployed and those seeking sanctuary from war and persecution.

[jucyberry]

I love babies, don't care whose it is, Babies are wonderful. 

[RedRover45]

Depends if they're fried or roasted. But jelly ones are the best 😱😉

[Orlandokarla]

My piss is really boiling. The Scotch look likely to vote Yes causing a political earthquake off the richter scale. The Middle East is in total meltdown. Russia is invading Ukraine. So what do the BBC decide should be the main news headline? The royals are having another baby!

You couldn't make it up. Such a trivial matter should not even be given any news time. Just goes to show how the establishment are bent on keeping the British public brainwashed into thinking that the royals are incredibly important. Well I've got news for them. The days of sycophancy are over. It is only the incredibly stupid amongst us that think another spongeing royal baby is news.

There's no point blaming the BBC; they're just feeding peanuts to the monkeys.

[IC1967]

The BBC is the mouthpiece of the establishment. So they must take the majority of the blame for keeping the gullible amongst us pro royal.

[GM-MarkB]

Who are 'The Scotch' ?

As an old friend once told me..." I don't call you Englch do I ?"

[Orlandokarla]

The BBC is the mouthpiece of the establishment. So they must take the majority of the blame for keeping the gullible amongst us pro royal.

The establishment? Does "the man" work for them?

They're in the entertainment business. It's no different to the Kardashians, Big Brother, Survivor, and all that crap. 
As I said, all they're doing is feeding the monkeys the peanuts they ask for. It's not their responsibility to tell people what they should care about, and if people are learning what they should care about from TV, then the blame falls squarely on the shoulders of the parents. Stop worrying about educating pork.

I'm pro-royal in as much as they are a living relic of our past, and I'm a lover of history and tradition. I'd keep them around for that reason alone, and they do make a useful figurehead for the country. Tourists love them, and at least it gives us some sort of identity overseas, in a world where our little island is becoming increasingly insignificant. Besides, it's not as though more than a handful of us can remember an inspiring PM, is it? At least, in my opinion, the Queen gives us some dignity.
As I said, I couldn't give a monkeys about who they are, who they marry/mess about with, and how many kids they have. A 5 second soundbyte upon the child's eventual birth would be sufficient.

[Orlandokarla]

Who are 'The Scotch' ?

As an old friend once told me..." I don't call you Englch do I ?"

I believe the term 'Scotch' was in common usage in the late C18th/early C19th, so it is fitting with many of Mick's political views. 

[IC1967]

I use the term Scotch as much as possible to annoy as many Scots as possible. I'm hoping if I annoy enough of them that they will be more inclined to vote Yes.

[IC1967]

The BBC is the mouthpiece of the establishment. So they must take the majority of the blame for keeping the gullible amongst us pro royal.

The establishment? Does "the man" work for them?

They're in the entertainment business. It's no different to the Kardashians, Big Brother, Survivor, and all that crap. 
As I said, all they're doing is feeding the monkeys the peanuts they ask for. It's not their responsibility to tell people what they should care about, and if people are learning what they should care about from TV, then the blame falls squarely on the shoulders of the parents. Stop worrying about educating pork.

I'm pro-royal in as much as they are a living relic of our past, and I'm a lover of history and tradition. I'd keep them around for that reason alone, and they do make a useful figurehead for the country. Tourists love them, and at least it gives us some sort of identity overseas, in a world where our little island is becoming increasingly insignificant. Besides, it's not as though more than a handful of us can remember an inspiring PM, is it? At least, in my opinion, the Queen gives us some dignity.
As I said, I couldn't give a monkeys about who they are, who they marry/mess about with, and how many kids they have. A 5 second soundbyte upon the child's eventual birth would be sufficient.

The fact that you are pro royal says a lot about you. You are happy that the figurehead of the aristocracy is kept in place so keeping in place the divisive class system that prevails today and which concentrates the vast bulk of the wealth of the country in the hands of a few toffs. This situation arises because the likes of you fall for the claptrap that is associated with keeping this dysfunctional family in place.

If you think that they give this country significance in the world then that is pathetic. I'd much rather be insignificant than be known for a family of dysfunctional, spongeing, misfits.

I do agree with you though that because there are enough people that for some reason unknown to me are actually interested in the goings on of the monarchy a 5 second bulletin at the end of the news is acceptable (much though it grieves me to say this).

[wilts rover]

Mick in agreement with the Morning Star, will wonders never cease comrade.....

[IC1967]

I am my own man and I form my opinions after weighing up all the evidence and opinions of others before deciding I was right all along. At least you hard lefties don't get everything wrong. Just as the hard right don't get everything right. I am the only one that gets everything right. It just so happens most of my views have been adopted by the hard right.

[Orlandokarla]

The BBC is the mouthpiece of the establishment. So they must take the majority of the blame for keeping the gullible amongst us pro royal.

The establishment? Does "the man" work for them?

They're in the entertainment business. It's no different to the Kardashians, Big Brother, Survivor, and all that crap. 
As I said, all they're doing is feeding the monkeys the peanuts they ask for. It's not their responsibility to tell people what they should care about, and if people are learning what they should care about from TV, then the blame falls squarely on the shoulders of the parents. Stop worrying about educating pork.

I'm pro-royal in as much as they are a living relic of our past, and I'm a lover of history and tradition. I'd keep them around for that reason alone, and they do make a useful figurehead for the country. Tourists love them, and at least it gives us some sort of identity overseas, in a world where our little island is becoming increasingly insignificant. Besides, it's not as though more than a handful of us can remember an inspiring PM, is it? At least, in my opinion, the Queen gives us some dignity.
As I said, I couldn't give a monkeys about who they are, who they marry/mess about with, and how many kids they have. A 5 second soundbyte upon the child's eventual birth would be sufficient.

The fact that you are pro royal says a lot about you. You are happy that the figurehead of the aristocracy is kept in place so keeping in place the divisive class system that prevails today and which concentrates the vast bulk of the wealth of the country in the hands of a few toffs. This situation arises because the likes of you fall for the claptrap that is associated with keeping this dysfunctional family in place.

If you think that they give this country significance in the world then that is pathetic. I'd much rather be insignificant than be known for a family of dysfunctional, spongeing, misfits.

I do agree with you though that because there are enough people that for some reason unknown to me are actually interested in the goings on of the monarchy a 5 second bulletin at the end of the news is acceptable (much though it grieves me to say this).

I'd rather have the Queen in place, as impotent as she is, as a nod to the history and traditions of our country, than scrap it completely and essentially cut ties with a significant portion of our culture, heritage, and national identity. I don't 'fall' for anything; they have their place, and they have been firmly put in it (gradually, mind) by the populace over the last 800 years.

So, get rid of the Royal family, and all pretence of class and social standing goes out the window?  Really???

Whatever your opinion of the Royal family, the tourist £££'s they attract are always welcome.

The aristocracy have been pissing and moaning about the upstart merchant classes since the middle ages, and I see little evidence that supports your assertion that the aristocracy are the wealthiest members of society anymore.

[Orlandokarla]

People get on about people on the dole being scroungers,probably getting fifty quid a week,the biggest scroungers never get mentioned,they live in Buck House and fly everywhere,get the best of everything,while everyone else does their best to get by.

I'm sure that goes down well at the pub after a few pints.  The dole scroungers might even club together and get you half a bitter for making them feel better about themselves.

Any abuse aimed at the monarchy should be reserved for those members of the family that deserve it. Whether you approve of the institution or not, the Queen has worked tirelessly her entire life to fulfill the role she was born into, and deserves respect for that. People forget that all she has ever done is what has been expected/demanded of her, and the question of the abolition of monarchy has never been her choice to make. Of course she'd be against it; who'd be in favour in destroying their life's work?

[IC1967]

People forget that all she has ever done is what has been expected/demanded of her, and the question of the abolition of monarchy has never been her choice to make. Of course she'd be against it; who'd be in favour in destroying their life's work?

She has been a prisoner. Her whole life has been planned out by others. I think you are completely wrong in saying she'd be against it. I wouldn't be at all surprised if she would have preferred a normal life where she got to decide how her life panned out. It is reprehensible that people like you think it is acceptable for the royals to live their life in a way that is expected/demanded of them.

I bet 99.99% of people would not like to live their life like they have to.

[River Don]

I love babies, don't care whose it is, Babies are wonderful. 

That's the reason it's news, not just on the Beeb (it's unfair to single out the BBC here) on all the channels and making front pages of the papers.

News editors look at the unremitting diet of grim news at the moment, beheadings, Russians shooting down airliners, the EU steadily collapsing (boring but grim), mass rapes of children in a grim Northern town, the UK falling apart (a bit exciting but still grim)...

And then a chink of light, a good news story. It's irresistible.

[idler]

People get on about people on the dole being scroungers,probably getting fifty quid a week,the biggest scroungers never get mentioned,they live in Buck House and fly everywhere,get the best of everything,while everyone else does their best to get by.

I'm sure that goes down well at the pub after a few pints.  The dole scroungers might even club together and get you half a bitter for making them feel better about themselves.

Any abuse aimed at the monarchy should be reserved for those members of the family that deserve it. Whether you approve of the institution or not, the Queen has worked tirelessly her entire life to fulfill the role she was born into, and deserves respect for that. People forget that all she has ever done is what has been expected/demanded of her, and the question of the abolition of monarchy has never been her choice to make. Of course she'd be against it; who'd be in favour in destroying their life's work?

I Don't drink Orlando so nobody would be buying me any bitter,the government has brainwashed everybody to hate,anybody who doesn't work,there are disabled people unemployed,not all are work shy,as most of the populace seems to think.

The Queen has my respect because she is older than me and she has mucked in when the country has needed her,i have nothing against her,but my point still stands they get paid for attending functions and being well fed,you have your opinion i have mine,that's what forums are for.

I don't hate anybody that doesn't work Sammy but some people just have no intention of working. On some estates you are into a third generation of families that haven't had a job. This minority spoil it for the genuine unemployed who are looking to get a job. The problem is heightened by stupid tv programmes like benefit street where people brag about the life that they lead.

[RedJ]

I love babies, don't care whose it is, Babies are wonderful. 

That's the reason it's news, not just on the Beeb (it's unfair to single out the BBC here) on all the channels and making front pages of the papers.

News editors look at the unremitting diet of grim news at the moment, beheadings, Russians shooting down airliners, the EU steadily collapsing (boring but grim), mass rapes of children in a grim Northern town, the UK falling apart (a bit exciting but still grim)...

And then a chink of light, a good news story. It's irresistible.

Of course it is. But then why would Mick let that get in the way of a dig at a public sector organisation?

[IC1967]

The BBC is far and away the leading organisation providing news in the UK. They lead, others follow. The other organisations are culpable but they are doing their best to compete with the BBC which is a tool of the establishment and which dominates the media. They have to show similar stories to the BBC to get an audience as the BBC have done an excellent job of brainwashing the stupid people in our country into thinking that having a monarchy is normal and desired.

[River Don]

IC

So it's just because the BBC leads the news agenda, is it?

How come it was a lead story in the USA too then?

[IC1967]

Because the USA is full of silly people that for some weird reason love all this toff nonsense.

[Bentley Bullet]

The world is full of 'silly people', not just the USA! Apparently tourist from all over the world visit the UK because of the attraction of our Monarchy, with the Russians, Brazilians and Malaysians being high on the list.

This brings an estimated £500 million to the country.

[IC1967]

I don't care how much they bring in. £500m seems a very convenient rounded up figure by the way that I don't believe for a second. The current royal family can't take the credit for our history. Do these tourists actually expect to meet some of them? Is that why they come? Of course not.

Time to ditch the spongers and cut off the head of the aristocracy that makes it OK for the toffs to have the best of everything in our country because gullible people fall for supporting the royal family.

[River Don]

The world is full of 'silly people', not just the USA! Apparently tourist from all over the world visit the UK because of the attraction of our Monarchy, with the Russians, Brazilians and Malaysians being high on the list.

This brings an estimated £500 million to the country.

It's not really the current royals they come here for though, they visit the tower, have a look at Buckingham Palace and take in the heritage. I suppose it adds a little that it's still a living history but I bet the French do nearly as well out of tourists visiting sites like Vesailles.