Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Were you up for Boris Johnson? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,161
edited January 2022 in General
imageWere you up for Boris Johnson? – politicalbetting.com

His constituency might be why Boris Johnson resigns as PM before the next election

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Guilty LOL at final para.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    IshmaelZ said:

    Guilty LOL at final para.

    Fpt do you have a link to the FAC (or any) report on the Afghan animal evacuation.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    The announcement of the exit poll at 10pm in 2017 was the biggest election night surprise of my life
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Guilty LOL at final para.

    Innocent face.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    TOPPING said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Guilty LOL at final para.

    Fpt do you have a link to the FAC (or any) report on the Afghan animal evacuation.
    FAC not reported yet, I watched a lot of the proceedings live and read the Raphael Marshall statement
  • Are the boundary changes likely to affect this or is there no change planned in this constituency?
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,660
    Dear BBC looks like splicing a recording of Boris on Remembrance Day 2016 into the 2019 live coverage to launder his reputation really paid off.

    Good riddance
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,630
    edited January 2022

    Are the boundary changes likely to affect this or is there no change planned in this constituency?

    Makes it safer, majority goes up to 8,758 (theoretically any way)
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    Can't help but feel that between them Lord Binface and Count Buckethead were splitting a certain class of vote in Uxbridge and South Ruislip there.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Guilty LOL at final para.

    Fpt do you have a link to the FAC (or any) report on the Afghan animal evacuation.
    FAC not reported yet, I watched a lot of the proceedings live and read the Raphael Marshall statement
    Do you have a link to that pls.
  • IshmaelZ said:

    The announcement of the exit poll at 10pm in 2017 was the biggest election night surprise of my life

    And it was pretty accurate IIRC.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    TOPPING said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Guilty LOL at final para.

    Fpt do you have a link to the FAC (or any) report on the Afghan animal evacuation.
    FAC not reported yet, I watched a lot of the proceedings live and read the Raphael Marshall statement
    Do you have a link to that pls.
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/41257/pdf/&ved=2ahUKEwj68q6Iwbb1AhUNQEEAHQfKCN0QFnoECBEQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3ietelkTL-hJwVpd4rlBBu
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,931

    Can't help but feel that between them Lord Binface and Count Buckethead were splitting a certain class of vote in Uxbridge and South Ruislip there.

    Lord Buckethead, Count Binface, Boris Johnson. How do you tell the difference?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    edited January 2022
    TSE is such a lightweight; I’ve been up for election results since 1974.

    Johnson won’t stand in Uxbridge next time, and indeed will probably never again contest a parliamentary election.

    His political career is finished, and the question is simply what £$€¥ he can extract from his retirement, as a figure of fun.
  • IanB2 said:

    TSE is such a lightweight; I’ve been up for election results since 1974.

    Johnson won’t stand in Uxbridge next time, and indeed will probably never again contest a parliamentary election.

    1974 is four years before I was born.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705

    Can't help but feel that between them Lord Binface and Count Buckethead were splitting a certain class of vote in Uxbridge and South Ruislip there.

    Lord Buckethead, Count Binface, Boris Johnson. How do you tell the difference?
    Only two of them are serious candidates?
  • IanB2 said:

    TSE is such a lightweight; I’ve been up for election results since 1974.

    Johnson won’t stand in Uxbridge next time, and indeed will probably never again contest a parliamentary election.

    1974 is four years before I was born.
    You ARE a lightweight - it was only ONE year before I was born :lol:
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859

    IanB2 said:

    TSE is such a lightweight; I’ve been up for election results since 1974.

    Johnson won’t stand in Uxbridge next time, and indeed will probably never again contest a parliamentary election.

    1974 is four years before I was born.
    And your excuse is?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Chicken run to safe constituency - a. He has to find one (n Shropshire?) b. He has to find one where the local party will have him
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,400
    If the polls stay similar there are going to be some brutal selection battles amongst sitting MP's.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,647
    Energetic Hong Kong demonstration in the UK's finest city.
  • Zoe shows Omicron cases disappearing fast all over the U.K. except NEast

    https://twitter.com/timspector/status/1482712498616868873
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    Sigh.

    Laters.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368

    IanB2 said:

    TSE is such a lightweight; I’ve been up for election results since 1974.

    Johnson won’t stand in Uxbridge next time, and indeed will probably never again contest a parliamentary election.

    1974 is four years before I was born.
    Questionable commitment!
  • DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,630
    edited January 2022
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,957
    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    TOPPING said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Guilty LOL at final para.

    Fpt do you have a link to the FAC (or any) report on the Afghan animal evacuation.
    FAC not reported yet, I watched a lot of the proceedings live and read the Raphael Marshall statement
    Do you have a link to that pls.
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/41257/pdf/&ved=2ahUKEwj68q6Iwbb1AhUNQEEAHQfKCN0QFnoECBEQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3ietelkTL-hJwVpd4rlBBu
    tyvm
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"
  • glwglw Posts: 9,906
    FPT:
    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021). The BBC funded by the licence fee is a minnow in the TV world. Saving the licence fee will not save the BBC, further inaction will ultimately kill the BBC. If the BBC wants to be a major player in the streaming world, which is what TV is in the 21st century, things do have to change.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,802
    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,828
    Farooq said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    Poor, defenceless, blameless Boris.
    Nothing in the news today? Never mind, there is always tomorrow. Certainly on past experience.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,812
    Farooq said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    Poor, defenceless, blameless Boris.
    He may be poor in relative terms but he is neither defenceless or blameless as many of his opponents over time have found out. I am exasperated by his lying but the more of this we see the more I want him survive.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    edited January 2022
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    Considering the tar and feathering Johnsonites were happy to give Mrs May over a very long period of time, it is no less than he deserves, and it is entirely his own doing. Unless he resigns it has barely started yet. Mrs May by the way, will still be MP for Maidenhead when Johnson is presenting his fifth series of Supermarket Sweep.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,839
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    The criticisms won't stop because they are legitimate. Besides, as we know, they're not exclusively from the opposition. Expressions of displeasure and eruptions of outright revolt have been witnessed across his own party.
  • Are the boundary changes likely to affect this or is there no change planned in this constituency?

    Makes it safer, majority goes up to 8,758 (theoretically any way)
    Ta.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,802
    glw said:

    FPT:

    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021). The BBC funded by the licence fee is a minnow in the TV world. Saving the licence fee will not save the BBC, further inaction will ultimately kill the BBC. If the BBC wants to be a major player in the streaming world, which is what TV is in the 21st century, things do have to change.
    Indeed. The lack of understanding about the global media landscape when our MPs and other numpties talk about the BBC and why it should or shouldn't keep the licence fee is laughable. The BBC pretence that £3.7bn per year or a number in that region is enough is also ridiculous. A media organisation today needs £12-15bn in revenue just to feed the media investment beast to create enough output for the following year. The BBC is uniquely placed as the major UK media organisation to take advantage of our huge TV and movie production capability and the dominance of English language media globally, but it has clung onto the licence model for 5 years too long instead of gambling on being a global streaming player.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,828
    edited January 2022
    pigeon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    The criticisms won't stop because they are legitimate. Besides, as we know, they're not exclusively from the opposition. Expressions of displeasure and eruptions of outright revolt have been witnessed across his own party.
    Indeed. Even the Scottish Conservatives are joining in this partisan rubbish directed at Mr Johnson, ad libitum. Except the MPs for Scottish constituencies, IIRC?

    PS Serious point, though: are the Tory MPs for Scotland revolting? I've lost track.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,376
    glw said:

    FPT:

    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021). The BBC funded by the licence fee is a minnow in the TV world. Saving the licence fee will not save the BBC, further inaction will ultimately kill the BBC. If the BBC wants to be a major player in the streaming world, which is what TV is in the 21st century, things do have to change.
    The bizarre thing about his is there is so much TV now made in his country And the big streamers are investing in new production facilities for even more content to come from the UK.

    The BBC should be partnering with them and harnessing it. Co productions with the BBC having initial UK screening rights is something they should do more of.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,802
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    Four Lions is still the most surprising movie to have been made. Don't think Channel 4 would approve it today.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    In today’s Sunday Times

    Sue Gray approved an honour for disgraced financier Lex Greensill after pressure from superiors

    In email she said: “Grr…but okay”

    Qs about her independence come as sources warn report no longer likely to land this week, prolonging Boris purgatory


    https://twitter.com/Gabriel_Pogrund/status/1482730903981993994?s=20
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,828

    Apropos of not much... I was indeed 'up for Portillo'. In fact I was there, at the count, acting as an observer for the Edmonton count (neighbouring constituency, all counted together with Enfield North at Pickett's Lock).

    I remember the shellshocked look on Stephen Twigg's face. As I was told it at the time, he had a nice little number of a job lined up and had never expected to win Enfield Southgate. He obviously made the best of it, but it clearly came as a complete surprise.

    As I recall, Mr Portillo was pretty dignified about it. More so than some are in that situation.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    Uxbridge: Only the Lib Dems can split the vote win here!
  • Yes I have difficulty envisaging a sitting PM actually losing their seat, it's why I can't see Raab becoming PM either. Even Hunt is not completely safe.

    I find the overall demographics of his seat still quite hard to read even though Labour would surely win it if they get 300+ seats nationally or in a by election. I was surprised Labour got over 40% there in 2017 but the Tories completed thrashed Labour in the Hillingdon Council elections in 2018.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Someone’s not telling the truth:

    NEW - No10 source says that it is “not true to suggest he was warned in advance”.

    In response to questions about whether the PM was aware of concerns expressed by people within No10 ahead of the May 20 event.


    https://twitter.com/robpowellnews/status/1482725335024250887?s=21
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,802
    Taz said:

    glw said:

    FPT:

    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021). The BBC funded by the licence fee is a minnow in the TV world. Saving the licence fee will not save the BBC, further inaction will ultimately kill the BBC. If the BBC wants to be a major player in the streaming world, which is what TV is in the 21st century, things do have to change.
    The bizarre thing about his is there is so much TV now made in his country And the big streamers are investing in new production facilities for even more content to come from the UK.

    The BBC should be partnering with them and harnessing it. Co productions with the BBC having initial UK screening rights is something they should do more of.
    They tried that but ultimately the licence fee is far too limiting. I'll use Sony as the best example here, they have no streaming service and yet they are the global number one media production company for streaming services. Sony has invested something like $9bn over the last two years buying production companies and building up their own production capabilities. The BBC can't compete with them and when Bad Wolf came up for sale, Sony blew them out of the water despite the founders preferring the BBC as their long te partner.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    It is irregular verb time.

    I offer insightful political analysis, you are a partisan shill.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,175
    Carnyx said:

    Apropos of not much... I was indeed 'up for Portillo'. In fact I was there, at the count, acting as an observer for the Edmonton count (neighbouring constituency, all counted together with Enfield North at Pickett's Lock).

    I remember the shellshocked look on Stephen Twigg's face. As I was told it at the time, he had a nice little number of a job lined up and had never expected to win Enfield Southgate. He obviously made the best of it, but it clearly came as a complete surprise.

    As I recall, Mr Portillo was pretty dignified about it. More so than some are in that situation.
    He says that he knew he'd lost when the exit poll came out, but when interviewed by the BBC early on that night, he wasn't asked about his prospects in his own seat.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    Saw this online, always liked these 'Europe with areas of equal population' maps, as usually the borders are a bit dodgy and the names are usually nonsense

  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    Just a couple of months late for the Newcastle job.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    Early contender for silliest post of 2022!
  • tlg86 said:

    Carnyx said:

    Apropos of not much... I was indeed 'up for Portillo'. In fact I was there, at the count, acting as an observer for the Edmonton count (neighbouring constituency, all counted together with Enfield North at Pickett's Lock).

    I remember the shellshocked look on Stephen Twigg's face. As I was told it at the time, he had a nice little number of a job lined up and had never expected to win Enfield Southgate. He obviously made the best of it, but it clearly came as a complete surprise.

    As I recall, Mr Portillo was pretty dignified about it. More so than some are in that situation.
    He says that he knew he'd lost when the exit poll came out, but when interviewed by the BBC early on that night, he wasn't asked about his prospects in his own seat.
    I seem to remember David Dimbleby saying, 'Michael Portillo has now left us. He looked a little queasy.'
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    Carnyx said:

    Apropos of not much... I was indeed 'up for Portillo'. In fact I was there, at the count, acting as an observer for the Edmonton count (neighbouring constituency, all counted together with Enfield North at Pickett's Lock).

    I remember the shellshocked look on Stephen Twigg's face. As I was told it at the time, he had a nice little number of a job lined up and had never expected to win Enfield Southgate. He obviously made the best of it, but it clearly came as a complete surprise.

    As I recall, Mr Portillo was pretty dignified about it. More so than some are in that situation.
    Same night as Mellor. The contrast in dignity was palpable.
  • Having listened to Trevor Phillips and Sophie Raworth this morning on playback, and I have to say Trevor Phillips is outstanding and had a very sad personal story to tell about the time of Prince Philip's funeral, I am beginning to think that Boris may well yet remain in post for a while

    Boris lost me over the Paterson debacle and partygate, but I think he will survive the Sue Gray report and the May elections will now be the moment of greatest danger for him, which by that time we should be in an endemic and hopefully calmer waters to replace him

    I could be wrong, but I am far from convinced he will go quickly and today's newspapers really had nothing further to add or provided the silver bullet
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083

    Can't help but feel that between them Lord Binface and Count Buckethead were splitting a certain class of vote in Uxbridge and South Ruislip there.

    That's because Count Binface had previously stood as Lord Buckethead but the rights holder decided to enforce their rights IIRC, so he needed a new character.

    A sad tale indeed.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,839
    Carnyx said:

    pigeon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    The criticisms won't stop because they are legitimate. Besides, as we know, they're not exclusively from the opposition. Expressions of displeasure and eruptions of outright revolt have been witnessed across his own party.
    Indeed. Even the Scottish Conservatives are joining in this partisan rubbish directed at Mr Johnson, ad libitum. Except the MPs for Scottish constituencies, IIRC?

    PS Serious point, though: are the Tory MPs for Scotland revolting? I've lost track.
    Someone has summarised the position of that tiny band:

    https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/politics/scottish-politics/3846792/heres-what-all-6-scottish-tory-mps-say-about-boris-johnsons-lockdown-party-scandal/
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    Carnyx said:

    Apropos of not much... I was indeed 'up for Portillo'. In fact I was there, at the count, acting as an observer for the Edmonton count (neighbouring constituency, all counted together with Enfield North at Pickett's Lock).

    I remember the shellshocked look on Stephen Twigg's face. As I was told it at the time, he had a nice little number of a job lined up and had never expected to win Enfield Southgate. He obviously made the best of it, but it clearly came as a complete surprise.

    As I recall, Mr Portillo was pretty dignified about it. More so than some are in that situation.
    Alex Salmond going down, was undoubtedly the highlight of an otherwise very crap night in 2017.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,375
    edited January 2022
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    I confess, I'm surprised at your posts about Boris, because I've always thought your comments on various matters showed great integrity and principle, even when I haven't agreed with them.

    You reference to "partisan rubbish" is what I struggle with. I don't think it's partisan to point out that having a PM who is a congenital liar and prone to bouts of corruption or, at best, dodgy dealings is partisan. Yes, I'm a Labour chap. But I would never have directed similar attacks at, for example, Theresa May, as I think she was basically honest and decent. Boris isn't, simple as that.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    edited January 2022
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    In historical dramas we readily accept actors having different hair colour, accents, languages and physical proportions than the figures they are representing, but we still have a problem with different skin colours. That’s, to use a phrase many on here hate, white privilege.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    edited January 2022
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    You don't need to be shocking, offensive or even unwoke to be funny of course, but you are limiting your opportunities to be so considerably if you completely rule all three out.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    We have a sighting of the silent but palpable "Good Old" prefix. A rarer bird now but not yet in danger of extinction.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,828
    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    Apropos of not much... I was indeed 'up for Portillo'. In fact I was there, at the count, acting as an observer for the Edmonton count (neighbouring constituency, all counted together with Enfield North at Pickett's Lock).

    I remember the shellshocked look on Stephen Twigg's face. As I was told it at the time, he had a nice little number of a job lined up and had never expected to win Enfield Southgate. He obviously made the best of it, but it clearly came as a complete surprise.

    As I recall, Mr Portillo was pretty dignified about it. More so than some are in that situation.
    Alex Salmond going down, was undoubtedly the highlight of an otherwise very crap night in 2017.
    It was certainly a notable event, as was Douglas Alexander's defenestration in 2015.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,906
    MaxPB said:

    glw said:

    FPT:

    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021). The BBC funded by the licence fee is a minnow in the TV world. Saving the licence fee will not save the BBC, further inaction will ultimately kill the BBC. If the BBC wants to be a major player in the streaming world, which is what TV is in the 21st century, things do have to change.
    Indeed. The lack of understanding about the global media landscape when our MPs and other numpties talk about the BBC and why it should or shouldn't keep the licence fee is laughable. The BBC pretence that £3.7bn per year or a number in that region is enough is also ridiculous. A media organisation today needs £12-15bn in revenue just to feed the media investment beast to create enough output for the following year. The BBC is uniquely placed as the major UK media organisation to take advantage of our huge TV and movie production capability and the dominance of English language media globally, but it has clung onto the licence model for 5 years too long instead of gambling on being a global streaming player.
    You only have to recall the snooty dismissive comments when Clarkson et al. went to Amazon to see how many people do not get it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    MaxPB said:

    glw said:

    FPT:

    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021). The BBC funded by the licence fee is a minnow in the TV world. Saving the licence fee will not save the BBC, further inaction will ultimately kill the BBC. If the BBC wants to be a major player in the streaming world, which is what TV is in the 21st century, things do have to change.
    Indeed. The lack of understanding about the global media landscape when our MPs and other numpties talk about the BBC and why it should or shouldn't keep the licence fee is laughable. The BBC pretence that £3.7bn per year or a number in that region is enough is also ridiculous. A media organisation today needs £12-15bn in revenue just to feed the media investment beast to create enough output for the following year. The BBC is uniquely placed as the major UK media organisation to take advantage of our huge TV and movie production capability and the dominance of English language media globally, but it has clung onto the licence model for 5 years too long instead of gambling on being a global streaming player.
    The BBC are a day late and a dollar short, when it comes to the modern media landscape.

    They’ve probably got about another year, before the window of opportunity closes completely as the market consolidates to a few big players. Dusting off the massive back catalogue, and licensing it to everyone around the world, would be a great start.

    (As an aside, trying to explain the concept of the licence fee to most foreigners, is even more weird than trying to explain the concept of the NHS).
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,828
    pigeon said:

    Carnyx said:

    pigeon said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    The criticisms won't stop because they are legitimate. Besides, as we know, they're not exclusively from the opposition. Expressions of displeasure and eruptions of outright revolt have been witnessed across his own party.
    Indeed. Even the Scottish Conservatives are joining in this partisan rubbish directed at Mr Johnson, ad libitum. Except the MPs for Scottish constituencies, IIRC?

    PS Serious point, though: are the Tory MPs for Scotland revolting? I've lost track.
    Someone has summarised the position of that tiny band:

    https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/politics/scottish-politics/3846792/heres-what-all-6-scottish-tory-mps-say-about-boris-johnsons-lockdown-party-scandal/
    Oh good, thank you. Quite a mix there.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134
    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    You can still get all the classic stuff from the golden age of unwoke on YouTube.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dJswJ2h8N0
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    I historical dramas we readily accept actors having different hair colour, accents, languages and physical proportions than the figures they are representing, but we still have a problem with different skin colours. That’s, to use a phrase many on here hate, white privilege.
    Well it's not about realism (Romans did not speak with British accent, I assume), but verisimilitude. If it doesn't affect the tone of the work the race issue doesn't matter.

    I was a fan of Reign, an unfathomably silly but entertaining take on a young Mary Queen of Scots, but a relative couldn't get into it because rather than attempt fake french accents everyone was British. No accounting for taste

    What was weird about Bridgerton, which in any case is completely fictional, was the show works just fine and I never once questioned there being black aristocrats, but there is like one scene only that seeks to explain it, which seemed needless as it woul djust raise questions where there were none.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874

    Having listened to Trevor Phillips and Sophie Raworth this morning on playback, and I have to say Trevor Phillips is outstanding and had a very sad personal story to tell about the time of Prince Philip's funeral, I am beginning to think that Boris may well yet remain in post for a while

    Boris lost me over the Paterson debacle and partygate, but I think he will survive the Sue Gray report and the May elections will now be the moment of greatest danger for him, which by that time we should be in an endemic and hopefully calmer waters to replace him

    I could be wrong, but I am far from convinced he will go quickly and today's newspapers really had nothing further to add or provided the silver bullet

    I wasn't expecting anything dramatic from "the Sundays". The weekend has been about Conservative MPs "taking soundings" from constituents and their association members. I suspect many will be in no doubt as to the hostility now widely felt toward Boris Johnson.

    The question is whether the coming week sees further revelations as we wait for Sue Gray to report.

    Unlike Theresa May who looked frankly glad to be out of it in 2019, this has been Boris Johnson's life goal and he will be dragged out kicking and screaming by either the Parliamentary party acting out of motivated self-interest or, and this is my preference, a vengeful electorate delivering Johnson and the Conservatives the kind of defeat which will make 1906 and 1997 look like mild setbacks.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,908
    Its all the fault of The Metropolitan Elite The BBC and other cliches by Mick Hume

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10400775/MICK-HUME-think-Boris-BBCs-obsessive-campaign-destroy-disgrace.html

    How do these people hold down a job?. Seriously
  • stodge said:

    Having listened to Trevor Phillips and Sophie Raworth this morning on playback, and I have to say Trevor Phillips is outstanding and had a very sad personal story to tell about the time of Prince Philip's funeral, I am beginning to think that Boris may well yet remain in post for a while

    Boris lost me over the Paterson debacle and partygate, but I think he will survive the Sue Gray report and the May elections will now be the moment of greatest danger for him, which by that time we should be in an endemic and hopefully calmer waters to replace him

    I could be wrong, but I am far from convinced he will go quickly and today's newspapers really had nothing further to add or provided the silver bullet

    I wasn't expecting anything dramatic from "the Sundays". The weekend has been about Conservative MPs "taking soundings" from constituents and their association members. I suspect many will be in no doubt as to the hostility now widely felt toward Boris Johnson.

    The question is whether the coming week sees further revelations as we wait for Sue Gray to report.

    Unlike Theresa May who looked frankly glad to be out of it in 2019, this has been Boris Johnson's life goal and he will be dragged out kicking and screaming by either the Parliamentary party acting out of motivated self-interest or, and this is my preference, a vengeful electorate delivering Johnson and the Conservatives the kind of defeat which will make 1906 and 1997 look like mild setbacks.
    I really do not see him leading into GE 23/24
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    glw said:

    FPT:

    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021).
    I almost hope it is terrible as having sunk so much into it that would be hilarious.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    You can still get all the classic stuff from the golden age of unwoke on YouTube.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dJswJ2h8N0
    Uploaded unchallenged by a guy called Matt Spanner, as opposed to being monetised by the official BBC ITV account. A great example of what’s wrong with UK TV companies in their approach to the internet.
  • Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    glw said:

    FPT:

    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021). The BBC funded by the licence fee is a minnow in the TV world. Saving the licence fee will not save the BBC, further inaction will ultimately kill the BBC. If the BBC wants to be a major player in the streaming world, which is what TV is in the 21st century, things do have to change.
    Indeed. The lack of understanding about the global media landscape when our MPs and other numpties talk about the BBC and why it should or shouldn't keep the licence fee is laughable. The BBC pretence that £3.7bn per year or a number in that region is enough is also ridiculous. A media organisation today needs £12-15bn in revenue just to feed the media investment beast to create enough output for the following year. The BBC is uniquely placed as the major UK media organisation to take advantage of our huge TV and movie production capability and the dominance of English language media globally, but it has clung onto the licence model for 5 years too long instead of gambling on being a global streaming player.
    The BBC also has a GREAT brand. Still. But, as you say, they need to move fast to monetise and scale up, because in 5 years, certainly 10, it will be too late

    If they cling on to their present dwindling fee, which is evermore unsustainable, they are doomed to become one of the irrelevant state broadcasters of old Europe, somewhere between RTE in Ireland and RAI in Italy. Still significant at home but dwarfed globally, and increasingly ignored on any wider stage

    I actively want the BBC to survive, as a great British institution (and brand). But they need to wise up. To be fair I think plenty of people within the BBC know this. As it is so bloody obvious
    It is pretty widely accepted within the BBC that they try too hard to be all things to all people. If they would stick to the knitting they'd be just fine.

    Not sure the management, politicians or public has grasped this yet.
  • Just a couple of months late for the Newcastle job.
    Could still be a month too early for the same job.....
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582

    Just a couple of months late for the Newcastle job.
    Why would he want to be a Championship manager?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    DougSeal said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    In historical dramas we readily accept actors having different hair colour, accents, languages and physical proportions than the figures they are representing, but we still have a problem with different skin colours. That’s, to use a phrase many on here hate, white privilege.
    I have absolutely zero point zero zero problem with black people playing white people, or vice versa - except in cases where the skin colour is crucial to the story - a white man playing Martin Luther King, say, would be jarring and silly. Ditto trans and gays and the rest. Let everyone play everyone. The Woke idea you can only act within your gender, race silo is profoundly corrosive

    Moreover, as an aside, there WERE quite a few black people in 18th century aristo Russia. Not as many as implied in The Great but certainly some. The blue-blooded writer Alexander Pushkin was inordinately proud of his part-African heritage


    https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2017/dec/19/pushkins-pride-how-the-russian-literary-giant-paid-tribute-to-his-african-ancestry
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    edited January 2022
    DavidL said:

    Farooq said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Sigh.

    Laters.

    Why are you sighing?
    Beacuse this sort of partisan rubbish directed at Boris is getting old.
    Poor, defenceless, blameless Boris.
    He may be poor in relative terms but he is neither defenceless or blameless as many of his opponents over time have found out. I am exasperated by his lying but the more of this we see the more I want him survive.
    Johnson will never again contest a parliamentary election, and the only question now is his working out how best to make money from his impending retirement.
  • Roger said:

    Its all the fault of The Metropolitan Elite The BBC and other cliches by Mick Hume

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10400775/MICK-HUME-think-Boris-BBCs-obsessive-campaign-destroy-disgrace.html

    How do these people hold down a job?. Seriously

    Tory PM bashed by conservatives and backed by revolutionary communists would have seemed quite unlikely a decade ago.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,032
    edited January 2022
    Leeds turning Hammers over

    Check - var overturns 4th Leeds goal
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,134
    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    You can still get all the classic stuff from the golden age of unwoke on YouTube.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dJswJ2h8N0
    Uploaded unchallenged by a guy called Matt Spanner, as opposed to being monetised by the official BBC ITV account. A great example of what’s wrong with UK TV companies in their approach to the internet.
    Would 'On The Buses' have much value though? I'd have thought all you could monetize is the threat - "Pay us now or we'll put repeats out!" - and that's probably not legal.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    Carnyx said:

    Apropos of not much... I was indeed 'up for Portillo'. In fact I was there, at the count, acting as an observer for the Edmonton count (neighbouring constituency, all counted together with Enfield North at Pickett's Lock).

    I remember the shellshocked look on Stephen Twigg's face. As I was told it at the time, he had a nice little number of a job lined up and had never expected to win Enfield Southgate. He obviously made the best of it, but it clearly came as a complete surprise.

    As I recall, Mr Portillo was pretty dignified about it. More so than some are in that situation.
    I did a count once in a multi seat ward, it was very close and the counters had messed up so it was taking a long time on a very hot day, and we were really worried the closest loser would request, not entirely unreasonably, an official recount, but in fact the person was just chuffed to have come so close, having not been able to get out campaigning at all.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    edited January 2022
    Sandpit said:

    Just a couple of months late for the Newcastle job.
    Why would he want to be a Championship manager?
    Done it before with the same team.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 9,131
    edited January 2022

    Roger said:

    Its all the fault of The Metropolitan Elite The BBC and other cliches by Mick Hume

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10400775/MICK-HUME-think-Boris-BBCs-obsessive-campaign-destroy-disgrace.html

    How do these people hold down a job?. Seriously

    Tory PM bashed by conservatives and backed by revolutionary communists would have seemed quite unlikely a decade ago.
    The trajectory of that Living Marxism group is one the fascinations of British politics. The thing is, with people like Munira Mirza actually in within the Downing Street operation, they've very bizarrely added an element of revolutionary populism to modern Toryism. Look very carefully at the particular way the culture war is conducted to see the evidence for this.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    edited January 2022

    Leeds turning Hammers over

    Check - var overturns 4th Leeds goal

    Seem to have finally found their shooting boots. Or at least Harrison has.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,582
    kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    You can still get all the classic stuff from the golden age of unwoke on YouTube.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dJswJ2h8N0
    Uploaded unchallenged by a guy called Matt Spanner, as opposed to being monetised by the official BBC ITV account. A great example of what’s wrong with UK TV companies in their approach to the internet.
    Would 'On The Buses' have much value though? I'd have thought all you could monetize is the threat - "Pay us now or we'll put repeats out!" - and that's probably not legal.
    However much money they might make, it would be more than they’re making now.

    Youtube views also come from some very wierd places. My wife knows all sorts of obscure British and American TV shows of past decades, from her previous job of teaching English as a foreign language.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    Anyone started the official "Boris for Everton manager" campaign? No?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    You can still get all the classic stuff from the golden age of unwoke on YouTube.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dJswJ2h8N0
    Uploaded unchallenged by a guy called Matt Spanner, as opposed to being monetised by the official BBC ITV account. A great example of what’s wrong with UK TV companies in their approach to the internet.
    Would 'On The Buses' have much value though? I'd have thought all you could monetize is the threat - "Pay us now or we'll put repeats out!" - and that's probably not legal.
    Getting any value from it doesn't generally stop content holders from pursuing copyright claims.

    The BBC are a bit slow but mass uploads eventually get taken down I think. I know there used to be pretty much the whole backlog of HIGNFY on youtube.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    kle4 said:

    glw said:

    FPT:

    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021).
    I almost hope it is terrible as having sunk so much into it that would be hilarious.
    The streaming companies have so much money it is insane

    Apple TV casually dropped $45 million on one sci fi series, Foundation

    Amazon Prime spent $80 million on the first season of The Wheel of Time. It hasn't done very well, meh, fuck it, make something else

    One season of The Crown costs Netflix about $120 million

    The Marvel series Hawkeye costs $25 million for EACH EPISODE - same as Wandavision and Loki

    How can the BBC hope to compete with this?

  • Roger said:

    Its all the fault of The Metropolitan Elite The BBC and other cliches by Mick Hume

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-10400775/MICK-HUME-think-Boris-BBCs-obsessive-campaign-destroy-disgrace.html

    How do these people hold down a job?. Seriously

    Tory PM bashed by conservatives and backed by revolutionary communists would have seemed quite unlikely a decade ago.
    The trajectory of that Living Marxism gang is one the fascinations of British politics. The thing is, with people like Munira Mirza actually inside the Downing Street operation, they've very bizarrely added an element of revolutionary populism to modern Toryism. Look very carefully at the particular way they conduct the culture war to see.
    I don't actually know enough about revolutionary communism to notice anything beyond how many of them are very close to, and accepted by, this government.
  • Rafa Benitez's name is being chanted around Anfield
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,989
    edited January 2022
    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    Sandpit said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    On the BBC Survival story, and its inability to fight Netflix and Prime etc, there is one slight counter-argument. The big American companies are Woking themselves to death

    Read this remarkable article about diversity and Wokeness in Hollywood and US TV:

    https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/hollywoods-new-rules?fbclid=IwAR1iYqNdMGhl68_fw_otlewrIEmL8YYkjGO9bR1C5_UHjzDA5ZsUu1X90Ao


    If the US streamers just pump out unfunny PC comedy and tediously liberal movies they won't prosper, either. Perhaps the Koreans will take over, because they don't give a shit and they are highly creative. Squid Game

    I can vouch for the paragraphs about the endless hunt for "diversity hires". It is the same in the UK (if not quite as bad). Every job has to go to a Woman or a "BIPOC" (think BAME plus Native Americans)

    What is extraordinary in America is that they now have strict racial quotas for movies that want to be considered for the Oscars:



    "So, in September 2020, the Academy launched its Representation and Inclusion Standards Entry platform (or RAISE). For a movie to qualify for Best Picture, producers not only had to register detailed personal information about everyone involved in the making of that movie, but the movie had to meet two of the Academy’s four diversity standards—touching on everything from on-screen representation to creative leadership. (An Academy spokesperson said “only select staff” would have access to data collected on the platform.)

    "The Academy explained that movies failing to meet these standards would not be barred from qualifying for Best Picture until 2024. But producers are already complying: In 2020, data from 366 productions were submitted to the platform.

    "Meanwhile, CBS mandated that writers’ rooms be at least 40 percent black, indigenous and people of color (or BIPOC) for the 2021-2022 broadcast season and 50 percent for the 2022-2023 season. ABC Entertainment issued a detailed series of “inclusion standards.” (“I guarantee you every studio has something like that,” a longtime writer and director said.)

    A telling remark:

    "How to survive the revolution? By becoming its most ardent supporter. “Best way to defend yourself against the woke is to out-woke everyone, including the woke,” one writer said. Suddenly, every conversation with every agent or head of content started with: Is anyone BIPOC attached to this?"

    Archive 81 on Netflix is great. Not even a hint of workery, just solid TV.
    And, of course, THE GREAT

    The funniest TV show in years, and absolutely non-PC (except they have multiple black actors in 18th century Russia? - but why not, it works). Still amazing it got made
    You can still get all the classic stuff from the golden age of unwoke on YouTube.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dJswJ2h8N0
    Uploaded unchallenged by a guy called Matt Spanner, as opposed to being monetised by the official BBC ITV account. A great example of what’s wrong with UK TV companies in their approach to the internet.
    Would 'On The Buses' have much value though? I'd have thought all you could monetize is the threat - "Pay us now or we'll put repeats out!" - and that's probably not legal.
    However much money they might make, it would be more than they’re making now.

    Youtube views also come from some very wierd places. My wife knows all sorts of obscure British and American TV shows of past decades, from her previous job of teaching English as a foreign language.
    Twitch paid peanuts for the back catalogue of Bob Ross show, the American landscape painter, it got massive viewership.
  • Leeds turning Hammers over

    Check - var overturns 4th Leeds goal

    As long as the Hammers finish above Liverpool at the end of the season, I'll be happy.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    glw said:

    FPT:

    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021).
    I almost hope it is terrible as having sunk so much into it that would be hilarious.
    The streaming companies have so much money it is insane

    Apple TV casually dropped $45 million on one sci fi series, Foundation

    Amazon Prime spent $80 million on the first season of The Wheel of Time. It hasn't done very well, meh, fuck it, make something else

    One season of The Crown costs Netflix about $120 million

    The Marvel series Hawkeye costs $25 million for EACH EPISODE - same as Wandavision and Loki

    How can the BBC hope to compete with this?

    Production values aren't everything of course, plenty of excellently produced garbage out there, but just in terms of profile, slickness of operation and spectacle, it does seem like the areas the BBC and smaller operators can compete will be much reduced.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368

    Having listened to Trevor Phillips and Sophie Raworth this morning on playback, and I have to say Trevor Phillips is outstanding and had a very sad personal story to tell about the time of Prince Philip's funeral, I am beginning to think that Boris may well yet remain in post for a while

    Boris lost me over the Paterson debacle and partygate, but I think he will survive the Sue Gray report and the May elections will now be the moment of greatest danger for him, which by that time we should be in an endemic and hopefully calmer waters to replace him

    I could be wrong, but I am far from convinced he will go quickly and today's newspapers really had nothing further to add or provided the silver bullet

    Ms Gray's report will I suspect be general in its criticism. The culture of Downing Street will be blamed. Reference will be made to Reynolds's email invitation, so he is finished. Despite attending the parties Johnson will consider himself vindicated.

    It is up to Conservative MPs to do the deed. I have written to Cairns demanding he writes to Brady.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    glw said:

    FPT:

    MaxPB said:

    The BBC is materially incapable of investing the same $10-12bn per year that the big three are pumping into TV show production and that's because it is limited by the licence fee and public funding model. The BBC could be a global powerhouse of TV production but it's not. That's because it can't raise the necessary money and invest in production houses, in house production and it can't cut the waste of having 17 replications of duties.

    It may be worth reminding people that the first season of the upcoming Lord of the Rings series on Amazon will cost Amazon more money (£340 M + £182 M for rights) than the entire BBC spends on drama in a year (£289 M for 2021).
    I almost hope it is terrible as having sunk so much into it that would be hilarious.
    The streaming companies have so much money it is insane

    Apple TV casually dropped $45 million on one sci fi series, Foundation

    Amazon Prime spent $80 million on the first season of The Wheel of Time. It hasn't done very well, meh, fuck it, make something else

    One season of The Crown costs Netflix about $120 million

    The Marvel series Hawkeye costs $25 million for EACH EPISODE - same as Wandavision and Loki

    How can the BBC hope to compete with this?

    Production values aren't everything of course, plenty of excellently produced garbage out there, but just in terms of profile, slickness of operation and spectacle, it does seem like the areas the BBC and smaller operators can compete will be much reduced.
    And, of course, in time the extra money does count in quality (above and beyond spectacle and special effects) because you can hire the best writers, directors, actors, producers. So you get absolute top notch TV. Just as a football team CAN spend its way to the UCL cup, if they buy enough great players, and hire the best coaches

  • JBriskin3JBriskin3 Posts: 1,254
    I have also been following general elections since 92 - and I wasn't up for Portillo.

    Salmond 2017 was great but I found it extremely depressing that SNP (or SNP Types if you prefer) managed to keep a majority of Westminster Scottish seats; if only by one.
This discussion has been closed.