https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
Biden may be a bit of a duffer but the idea that he has somehow decided to offend either Unionists or the British is batshit in the extreme.
PB Tories really live in a weird hall of mirrors.
It's all very odd. Unionists are supposed, if anything, to approve of the RUC (in part, the Black and Tans) and the Auxies. So I don't understand how Mr Biden's slip of the tongue is supposed to have offended them.
Why would Unionists approve of the Black & Tans and the Auxies?
That’s claptrap
I'm going to chalk this one up to the same geniuses who tried to argue Gary Lineker was really referring to the Weimar Republic when he tried to draw a comparison between the UK Government and 1930s Germany.
So I asked everyone in Dallas how they liked living in Dallas.
Texas is of course regarded with horror by East Coasters (and indeed British bien pensant opinion).
Everyone - including the Somali lady who drives Ubers - declared that they loved it and could never live anywhere else.
Leon may regard Dallas as dystopian, and I myself would struggle gravely, but revealed preference is an amazing thing.
Not exactly surprising. Usually the vast majority of people in any given place will say that they wouldn't live anywhere else.
Maybe. Nevertheless, it is indeed too easy to dismiss a life that still offers cheap(ish) housing, low taxes, less traffic, etc. Of course it is probably an environmental disaster, but I’m going to put that to one side for the moment.
And a life expectancy of 76, the advanced world's worst infant mortality, worst maternal mortality, no universal healthcare, no paid maternity leave, no holiday pay, severe gun crime, every day mass shootings, hideous homeless shit, terrible opioid problems, and on and on
If people like life in Dallas or Houston, it is either because they are billionaires who can escape half the year and go to Europe, or because they have come from Honduras, Nicaragua or Venezuela, which most of them have
It's like talking to Syrians in Luton
I don’t recognise this picture. I suspect Dallas is one of the wealthier cities in the South, and it’s possible to live a pretty low stress and low tax life in the suburbs.
I would not live there, because I demand culture, good food, and the occasional cloudy sky. But its certainly nothing like dystopia and clearly a magnet for many, including folks from across the US.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
It allows right-wing people to express their views. For you, that's propaganda because you don't agree with it.
I take very short shrift with this.
If it were inciting hatred, violence, or threatening our national security then that'd be different.
It’s propaganda because it peddles a lot of echo-chamber guff. It’s not “News”.
I take short shrift with you for not recognising it for what it is.
I have not watched GB News, nor do I intend to, but as long as it conforms with Ofcom then it has a right to broadcast even if it does not suit your own political views, just as the Guardian is entitled to publish its views which many do not agree with either
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
Yes, Biden has attempted to curry favour with the Irish with one hand and with the other he's pushing through tax and economic reforms that will decimate the Irish economic model.
And, whilst that is probably embarrassing for them to indulge, he's actually seriously upset the NI Unionists and been continually rude about the British. His main objective seems to have been personal indulgence of some rather prejudiced and mildly bigoted views he was no doubt raised upon.
He should never have come.
Who cares, the man's an idiot, and Ireland is meaningless in the greater scheme, and in the end America will align with the UK, because it has to: the Anglosphere is the future for America, combatting China. Hence AUKUS
You can't come over pretending to help the peace process and restore power sharing, like he did, and then shit all over the other side and flick the V to the UK government.
You mean, like the Tory government in the UK did during the Brexit episode, only the other way round and worse? I recall Tory MPs very vocally indignant that the Irish wouldn't just do as they were told, but regarded themselves as of equal status.
Can't say I remember Tory MPs doing that although the UK government just seemed to be in denial about there being a border.
Strangely Casino seems to be displaying the kind of paranoia towards the US president that some celts seem to have for the English.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
It allows right-wing people to express their views. For you, that's propaganda because you don't agree with it.
I take very short shrift with this.
If it were inciting hatred, violence, or threatening our national security then that'd be different.
It’s propaganda because it peddles a lot of echo-chamber guff. It’s not “News”.
I take short shrift with you for not recognising it for what it is.
I have not watched GB News, nor do I intend to, but as long as it conforms with Ofcom then it has a right to broadcast even if it does not suit your own political views, just as the Guardian is entitled to publish its views which many do not agree with
It does not conform with Ofcom, that’s the problem. However Ofcom seems to draw its talent from people who can’t get a job at Ofwat.
There are also different rules for broadcasting versus the press.
Biden may be a bit of a duffer but the idea that he has somehow decided to offend either Unionists or the British is batshit in the extreme.
PB Tories really live in a weird hall of mirrors.
It's all very odd. Unionists are supposed, if anything, to approve of the RUC (in part, the Black and Tans) and the Auxies. So I don't understand how Mr Biden's slip of the tongue is supposed to have offended them.
And the late Queen had a selfie - of sorts - with Gerry Adams, though perhaps Biden looked liked he was enjoying himself too much.
I don’t know what the Palestinian thing refers to.
Palestine thing seems to be somethjing raked up from the past. Nothing to do with the current visit. Jiust added to make him sound worse.
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
Yes, Biden has attempted to curry favour with the Irish with one hand and with the other he's pushing through tax and economic reforms that will decimate the Irish economic model.
And, whilst that is probably embarrassing for them to indulge, he's actually seriously upset the NI Unionists and been continually rude about the British. His main objective seems to have been personal indulgence of some rather prejudiced and mildly bigoted views he was no doubt raised upon.
He should never have come.
Who cares, the man's an idiot, and Ireland is meaningless in the greater scheme, and in the end America will align with the UK, because it has to: the Anglosphere is the future for America, combatting China. Hence AUKUS
You can't come over pretending to help the peace process and restore power sharing, like he did, and then shit all over the other side and flick the V to the UK government.
You mean, like the Tory government in the UK did during the Brexit episode, only the other way round and worse? I recall Tory MPs very vocally indignant that the Irish wouldn't just do as they were told, but regarded themselves as of equal status.
Can't say I remember Tory MPs doing that although the UK government just seemed to be in denial about there being a border.
Strangely Casino seems to be displaying the kind of paranoia towards the US president that some celts seem to have for the English.
It was particularly obvious from the ERG etc at one point during the post-referendum negotiations. Quite shockingly so. That's why I remember it. November 2017, perhaps.
So I asked everyone in Dallas how they liked living in Dallas.
Texas is of course regarded with horror by East Coasters (and indeed British bien pensant opinion).
Everyone - including the Somali lady who drives Ubers - declared that they loved it and could never live anywhere else.
Leon may regard Dallas as dystopian, and I myself would struggle gravely, but revealed preference is an amazing thing.
Not exactly surprising. Usually the vast majority of people in any given place will say that they wouldn't live anywhere else.
Maybe. Nevertheless, it is indeed too easy to dismiss a life that still offers cheap(ish) housing, low taxes, less traffic, etc. Of course it is probably an environmental disaster, but I’m going to put that to one side for the moment.
And a life expectancy of 76, the advanced world's worst infant mortality, worst maternal mortality, no universal healthcare, no paid maternity leave, no holiday pay, severe gun crime, every day mass shootings, hideous homeless shit, terrible opioid problems, and on and on
If people like life in Dallas or Houston, it is either because they are billionaires who can escape half the year and go to Europe, or because they have come from Honduras, Nicaragua or Venezuela, which most of them have
It's like talking to Syrians in Luton
I don’t recognise this picture. I suspect Dallas is one of the wealthier cities in the South, and it’s possible to live a pretty low stress and low tax life in the suburbs.
I would not live there, because I demand culture, good food, and the occasional cloudy sky. But its certainly nothing like dystopia and clearly a magnet for many, including folks from across the US.
Probably better food in Luton than in Dallas, TBH, thanks to the Muslim influx into Luton. Hondurans don't bring great cuisine with them
Weather generally MUCH better in Dallas, but also burning burning summers
Honestly, if you put a gun to my head, and said: where would you rather live, I'd be pushed to answer. Both seem quite shite to me. Dallas is obviously richer, but somehow even bleaker and more dangerous. And at least Luton is just 30 minutes from London and 2 hours from all of western Europe, Dallas is about 2 hours from... Fort Worth, during a bad commute
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
GB News is no more partisan than other news outlets are partisan in the opposite direction IMO.
Have you watched it?
He'd be unusual if he had. According to Wikipedia,
In December 2022, Press Gazette reported that GB News had beaten Sky News in primetime ratings over a 30-day period, with 57,107 viewers to Sky's 52,230.
Those figures are tiny; most Look Out for the Spotlight on the Region Where You Are Today, Tonight shows get a third to half a million.
The conditions that make Fox News work don't really apply here.
The point is not to attract viewership, though, but to create shareable memes for distribution on social media.
So I asked everyone in Dallas how they liked living in Dallas.
Texas is of course regarded with horror by East Coasters (and indeed British bien pensant opinion).
Everyone - including the Somali lady who drives Ubers - declared that they loved it and could never live anywhere else.
Leon may regard Dallas as dystopian, and I myself would struggle gravely, but revealed preference is an amazing thing.
Not exactly surprising. Usually the vast majority of people in any given place will say that they wouldn't live anywhere else.
Maybe. Nevertheless, it is indeed too easy to dismiss a life that still offers cheap(ish) housing, low taxes, less traffic, etc. Of course it is probably an environmental disaster, but I’m going to put that to one side for the moment.
And a life expectancy of 76, the advanced world's worst infant mortality, worst maternal mortality, no universal healthcare, no paid maternity leave, no holiday pay, severe gun crime, every day mass shootings, hideous homeless shit, terrible opioid problems, and on and on
If people like life in Dallas or Houston, it is either because they are billionaires who can escape half the year and go to Europe, or because they have come from Honduras, Nicaragua or Venezuela, which most of them have
It's like talking to Syrians in Luton
I don’t recognise this picture. I suspect Dallas is one of the wealthier cities in the South, and it’s possible to live a pretty low stress and low tax life in the suburbs.
I would not live there, because I demand culture, good food, and the occasional cloudy sky. But its certainly nothing like dystopia and clearly a magnet for many, including folks from across the US.
Probably better food in Luton than in Dallas, TBH, thanks to the Muslim influx into Luton. Hondurans don't bring great cuisine with them
Weather generally MUCH better in Dallas, but also burning burning summers
Honestly, if you put a gun to my head, and said: where would you rather live, I'd be pushed to answer. Both seem quite shite to me. Dallas is obviously richer, but somehow even bleaker and more dangerous. And at least Luton is just 30 minutes from London and 2 hours from all of western Europe, Dallas is about 2 hours from... Fort Worth, during a bad commute
Both are shit
Yes but my point is we are not talking about you, we’re talking about revealed preference.
A lot of Americans wanna live in Dallas.
For an professed right winger, you don’t seem v right wing.
So I asked everyone in Dallas how they liked living in Dallas.
Texas is of course regarded with horror by East Coasters (and indeed British bien pensant opinion).
Everyone - including the Somali lady who drives Ubers - declared that they loved it and could never live anywhere else.
Leon may regard Dallas as dystopian, and I myself would struggle gravely, but revealed preference is an amazing thing.
Not exactly surprising. Usually the vast majority of people in any given place will say that they wouldn't live anywhere else.
Maybe. Nevertheless, it is indeed too easy to dismiss a life that still offers cheap(ish) housing, low taxes, less traffic, etc. Of course it is probably an environmental disaster, but I’m going to put that to one side for the moment.
And a life expectancy of 76, the advanced world's worst infant mortality, worst maternal mortality, no universal healthcare, no paid maternity leave, no holiday pay, severe gun crime, every day mass shootings, hideous homeless shit, terrible opioid problems, and on and on
If people like life in Dallas or Houston, it is either because they are billionaires who can escape half the year and go to Europe, or because they have come from Honduras, Nicaragua or Venezuela, which most of them have
It's like talking to Syrians in Luton
I don’t recognise this picture. I suspect Dallas is one of the wealthier cities in the South, and it’s possible to live a pretty low stress and low tax life in the suburbs.
I would not live there, because I demand culture, good food, and the occasional cloudy sky. But its certainly nothing like dystopia and clearly a magnet for many, including folks from across the US.
Probably better food in Luton than in Dallas, TBH, thanks to the Muslim influx into Luton. Hondurans don't bring great cuisine with them
Weather generally MUCH better in Dallas, but also burning burning summers
Honestly, if you put a gun to my head, and said: where would you rather live, I'd be pushed to answer. Both seem quite shite to me. Dallas is obviously richer, but somehow even bleaker and more dangerous. And at least Luton is just 30 minutes from London and 2 hours from all of western Europe, Dallas is about 2 hours from... Fort Worth, during a bad commute
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
It allows right-wing people to express their views. For you, that's propaganda because you don't agree with it.
I take very short shrift with this.
If it were inciting hatred, violence, or threatening our national security then that'd be different.
It’s propaganda because it peddles a lot of echo-chamber guff. It’s not “News”.
I take short shrift with you for not recognising it for what it is.
I have not watched GB News, nor do I intend to, but as long as it conforms with Ofcom then it has a right to broadcast even if it does not suit your own political views, just as the Guardian is entitled to publish its views which many do not agree with
It does not conform with Ofcom, that’s the problem. However Ofcom seems to draw its talent from people who can’t get a job at Ofwat.
There are also different rules for broadcasting versus the press.
You seem to want to denigrate any organisation that doesn't suit your agenda
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
No, it’s a mixed bag. The opinion stuff is largely a waste of time (which is where the comparison with GB News is not unreasonable), but a fair amount of the reporting is still decent, even on occasion excellent.
Who relies on only one news source these days, anyway ?
Could someone remind me of the question that makes ChatGPT give an incorrect answer? I thought I might try it out myself.
I asked it to name the most significant British figures of the 20th century and the answers were one part expected and one part total batshit (Sting, Greta Thunberg, Elvis Costello).
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
It allows right-wing people to express their views. For you, that's propaganda because you don't agree with it.
I take very short shrift with this.
If it were inciting hatred, violence, or threatening our national security then that'd be different.
It’s propaganda because it peddles a lot of echo-chamber guff. It’s not “News”.
I take short shrift with you for not recognising it for what it is.
I have not watched GB News, nor do I intend to, but as long as it conforms with Ofcom then it has a right to broadcast even if it does not suit your own political views, just as the Guardian is entitled to publish its views which many do not agree with
It does not conform with Ofcom, that’s the problem. However Ofcom seems to draw its talent from people who can’t get a job at Ofwat.
There are also different rules for broadcasting versus the press.
You seem to want to denigrate any organisation that doesn't suit your agenda
No, but I don’t have much time for silly old duffers who don’t have a clue what the rules around broadcast news are supposed to be, nor Ofcom’s role in upholding those rules.
So I asked everyone in Dallas how they liked living in Dallas.
Texas is of course regarded with horror by East Coasters (and indeed British bien pensant opinion).
Everyone - including the Somali lady who drives Ubers - declared that they loved it and could never live anywhere else.
Leon may regard Dallas as dystopian, and I myself would struggle gravely, but revealed preference is an amazing thing.
Not exactly surprising. Usually the vast majority of people in any given place will say that they wouldn't live anywhere else.
Maybe. Nevertheless, it is indeed too easy to dismiss a life that still offers cheap(ish) housing, low taxes, less traffic, etc. Of course it is probably an environmental disaster, but I’m going to put that to one side for the moment.
And a life expectancy of 76, the advanced world's worst infant mortality, worst maternal mortality, no universal healthcare, no paid maternity leave, no holiday pay, severe gun crime, every day mass shootings, hideous homeless shit, terrible opioid problems, and on and on
If people like life in Dallas or Houston, it is either because they are billionaires who can escape half the year and go to Europe, or because they have come from Honduras, Nicaragua or Venezuela, which most of them have
It's like talking to Syrians in Luton
I don’t recognise this picture. I suspect Dallas is one of the wealthier cities in the South, and it’s possible to live a pretty low stress and low tax life in the suburbs.
I would not live there, because I demand culture, good food, and the occasional cloudy sky. But its certainly nothing like dystopia and clearly a magnet for many, including folks from across the US.
I used to have friends there, and Dallas is alright. I did a road trip from there in the years BC* driving a 1970s Oldsmobile to Las Vegas and back. It took 3 weeks. Great scenery, but arriving at Zion and Bryce canyon from the East is a bit weird, having driven for days through similar country, what's the hype? I liked New Mexico best, but all good. Some food great, some appalling, but that's America.
There was a town we stopped in South of Dallas in an area settled by Germans. We went to a German restaurant but were disappointed by the dessert choices. We asked the Waitress for a German dessert, but she apologised that they only had apple strudel or Black Forest cake.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
It allows right-wing people to express their views. For you, that's propaganda because you don't agree with it.
I take very short shrift with this.
If it were inciting hatred, violence, or threatening our national security then that'd be different.
It’s propaganda because it peddles a lot of echo-chamber guff. It’s not “News”.
I take short shrift with you for not recognising it for what it is.
I have not watched GB News, nor do I intend to, but as long as it conforms with Ofcom then it has a right to broadcast even if it does not suit your own political views, just as the Guardian is entitled to publish its views which many do not agree with
It does not conform with Ofcom, that’s the problem. However Ofcom seems to draw its talent from people who can’t get a job at Ofwat.
There are also different rules for broadcasting versus the press.
You seem to want to denigrate any organisation that doesn't suit your agenda
No, but I don’t have much time for silly old duffers who don’t have a clue what the rules around broadcast news are supposed to be, not Ofcom’s role in upholding those rules.
You seem to get pleasure from attempting to belittle comments, but then anyone who extols UK residents to emigrate because you have a particular dislike of the government and Brexit is somewhat sad
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
It allows right-wing people to express their views. For you, that's propaganda because you don't agree with it.
I take very short shrift with this.
If it were inciting hatred, violence, or threatening our national security then that'd be different.
I just watch it for Mark Dolan, he was host on "Balls of Steel" on C4 some 20 years ago
Biden may be a bit of a duffer but the idea that he has somehow decided to offend either Unionists or the British is batshit in the extreme.
PB Tories really live in a weird hall of mirrors.
It's all very odd. Unionists are supposed, if anything, to approve of the RUC (in part, the Black and Tans) and the Auxies. So I don't understand how Mr Biden's slip of the tongue is supposed to have offended them.
Why would Unionists approve of the Black & Tans and the Auxies?
That’s claptrap
The claim was that Unionists would be especially offended by the reference to them.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
It allows right-wing people to express their views. For you, that's propaganda because you don't agree with it.
I take very short shrift with this.
If it were inciting hatred, violence, or threatening our national security then that'd be different.
It’s propaganda because it peddles a lot of echo-chamber guff. It’s not “News”.
I take short shrift with you for not recognising it for what it is.
I have not watched GB News, nor do I intend to, but as long as it conforms with Ofcom then it has a right to broadcast even if it does not suit your own political views, just as the Guardian is entitled to publish its views which many do not agree with
It does not conform with Ofcom, that’s the problem. However Ofcom seems to draw its talent from people who can’t get a job at Ofwat.
There are also different rules for broadcasting versus the press.
You seem to want to denigrate any organisation that doesn't suit your agenda
No, but I don’t have much time for silly old duffers who don’t have a clue what the rules around broadcast news are supposed to be, not Ofcom’s role in upholding those rules.
You seem to get pleasure from attempting to belittle comments, but then anyone who extols UK residents to emigrate because you have a particular dislike of the government and Brexit is somewhat sad
If you are under 45 I think emigration should be a serious option. My own father emigrated from England for NZ in 1975 and while not wealthy, at least owns his own home, which may not have been possible for him had he stayed in the 2-up, 2-down terraces of his working class English youth.
The forecast for the English economy is moribund, and as much essayed on here, the housing situation is a catastrophe, and that doesn’t look like it is going to change soon.
Many people can have a better life than the one the UK economy currently affords them. It’s not the country it was 20 years ago.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
Without a paywall the better writers simply scarper for subscription services to earn more money. Which is something that is hollowing out BBC Radio as they keep losing talent to commercial rivals and the podcasters.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
[snip]
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, AND @SeanT, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
The housing market has been more resilient than I thought possible in recent months. And it appears first time buyers are responsible. Clearly the rental market is in a terrible (insert swear word of choice) state and so buying is still preferable. But how are they affording it?
No prizes for guessing the answer (revealed in the thread): ultra-long mortgage terms.
We'll start seeing inter-generational mortgages - with terms of 50 or more years - being marketed, in London at first, in another five or ten years' time. Watch.
The rich have effectively had such things for decades. When property is so ludicrously unaffordable it makes sense. It makes no sense in any sane world though.
It may be urban myth, but I once heard of a discussion as to whether a loan should be rolled over from the 10th to 11th generation or whether some repayment was due
The slow decimation of the rental sector is simply being swallowed by people buying the properties. To live in.
Given the housing shortage this is inevitable.
Strangely, adding chairs from the bar to the deckchairs hasn’t increased the number of chairs on the Titanic.
Presumably the displacement effect is contributing to the flat-lining/modest drop in house prices over the last six months or so, as well as driving rental prices even higher.
I'm not sure that this was the planned result of politicans setting out to destroy the rental sector, but then politicians never were very good at predicting basic second order effects.
Yarp
Decreasing the number of rental properties, in an under supplied rental market (and overall housing market), drives prices higher. That was completely unforeseeable.
“… but then politicians never were very good at predicting basic second order effects anything.”
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
I once heard a report of a woman in the US who had an aged Father who lived with her and her family, and would become angry on watching Fox. Exasperated by this she bought a new TV and had Fox removed from the channel selection. She explained to her father Fox was no longer available and that her father, sans Fox was considerably less angry. GBNews serves the same, albeit lower key function.
The trouble with this is that there are plenty of angry people on the other side who read the Guardian, watch C4 News or Novara media etc.
The issue isn't the wing of politics. It's the bubble.
We centrists tend to be as zen as f***! I couldn't care less about Meghan, Gary Lineker or Joe Biden.
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
Yes, Biden has attempted to curry favour with the Irish with one hand and with the other he's pushing through tax and economic reforms that will decimate the Irish economic model.
And, whilst that is probably embarrassing for them to indulge, he's actually seriously upset the NI Unionists and been continually rude about the British. His main objective seems to have been personal indulgence of some rather prejudiced and mildly bigoted views he was no doubt raised upon.
He should never have come.
Who cares, the man's an idiot, and Ireland is meaningless in the greater scheme, and in the end America will align with the UK, because it has to: the Anglosphere is the future for America, combatting China. Hence AUKUS
You can't come over pretending to help the peace process and restore power sharing, like he did, and then shit all over the other side and flick the V to the UK government.
Biden is a grown-up politician who has been doing grown-up politics for a long time. He knows that a trip like this plays well with some of his voters back home, and that will help him to win re-election.
He also had a consistent positive message about the American business investment that is poised to enter Northern Ireland if the parties there can get their shit together and form a government.
I reckon that he also trusts that the British government are grown-up enough to recognise that the world doesn't revolve around Britain, and that Britain can be relied upon to recognise what is important - co-operation over Ukraine and Taiwan, etc - and what isn't - absurd photo opportunities.
You really should stop being so insecure about all of this.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
Yes, Biden has attempted to curry favour with the Irish with one hand and with the other he's pushing through tax and economic reforms that will decimate the Irish economic model.
And, whilst that is probably embarrassing for them to indulge, he's actually seriously upset the NI Unionists and been continually rude about the British. His main objective seems to have been personal indulgence of some rather prejudiced and mildly bigoted views he was no doubt raised upon.
He should never have come.
Who cares, the man's an idiot, and Ireland is meaningless in the greater scheme, and in the end America will align with the UK, because it has to: the Anglosphere is the future for America, combatting China. Hence AUKUS
You can't come over pretending to help the peace process and restore power sharing, like he did, and then shit all over the other side and flick the V to the UK government.
The only thing I saw from stateside was the black & tans comment. Embarrassing misstep but meaningless. What else has he done?
Nothing, except that he obviously enjoyed himself more in Dublin with the Irish than he did in Belfast with Sunak.
That’s like saying Oxford is more fun than Rochdale…
Belfast is pretty sodding dreary
And Sunak, who looked excruciatingly awkward, is hardly the life of the party.
Let Biden have his fun. He is very old. But no, there was offence to the British unless one has a serious chip on the shoulder.
He's mentioned the Black and Tans, posed enthusiastically for a selfie with Gerry Adams, mentioned the repression of the British in Palestine, and told a BBC reporter when asked for a comment, "I'm Irish".
It's happened once too often to be mere happenstance. His anti-Britishness is part of his identity, and the chip is his.
No mention for the billions $$$$$ offered to NI then?
You can't bribe people to change when they think that fundamentally you're not on their side.
Biden's failings are ones of basic diplomacy. There's a lot of excusing of him on here today, no doubt because we know Trump would be much worse and we're all desperate for that not to happen again, but that shouldn't give him a free pass.
It's pretty clear to me Biden has prejudicial views against Britain, even if he's sensible enough to by and large not let them affect policy - UK/US trade deal notwithstanding - but it does mean he's not as effective as he could be.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
It allows right-wing people to express their views. For you, that's propaganda because you don't agree with it.
I take very short shrift with this.
If it were inciting hatred, violence, or threatening our national security then that'd be different.
It’s propaganda because it peddles a lot of echo-chamber guff. It’s not “News”.
I take short shrift with you for not recognising it for what it is.
I have not watched GB News, nor do I intend to, but as long as it conforms with Ofcom then it has a right to broadcast even if it does not suit your own political views, just as the Guardian is entitled to publish its views which many do not agree with
It does not conform with Ofcom, that’s the problem. However Ofcom seems to draw its talent from people who can’t get a job at Ofwat.
There are also different rules for broadcasting versus the press.
You seem to want to denigrate any organisation that doesn't suit your agenda
No, but I don’t have much time for silly old duffers who don’t have a clue what the rules around broadcast news are supposed to be, not Ofcom’s role in upholding those rules.
You seem to get pleasure from attempting to belittle comments, but then anyone who extols UK residents to emigrate because you have a particular dislike of the government and Brexit is somewhat sad
If you are under 45 I think emigration should be a serious option. My own father emigrated from England for NZ in 1975 and while not wealthy, at least owns his own home, which may not have been possible for him had he stayed in the 2-up, 2-down terraces of his working class English youth.
The forecast for the English economy is moribund, and as much essayed on here, the housing situation is a catastrophe, and that doesn’t look like it is going to change soon.
Many people can have a better life than the one the UK economy currently affords them. It’s not the country it was 20 years ago.
My eldest emigrated to New Zealand in 2003 when he was 37 with his partner who worked at the BBC and they enjoyed the lifestyle for a while but like anywhere you live there were plusses and minuses. Of course the Christchurch earthquake was a tragedy for so many and led to him losing his job, his relationship, and his beloved dogs
In 2015 he married a Canadian and they live in Vancouver and again there are plusses and minuses
Some may well benefit by emigrating but wherever you live day to day problems are much the same, and you can hardly say the US is a place to emigrate to with Biden and Trump the choices and a dysfunctional country far worse than the UK
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
Without a paywall the better writers simply scarper for subscription services to earn more money. Which is something that is hollowing out BBC Radio as they keep losing talent to commercial rivals and the podcasters.
Yes, absolutely, this is a real thing. See the departure of Emily Maitlis from Newsnight, soon after her Prince Andrew triumph
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Trump would sell us out to North Korea in return for a shiny medal from Kim Jong-un.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
It's weird how American's identify as Irish because their ancestors 200-150 years ago were Irish... 🙄
My great grandfather on my mothers side was Irish and my roots are as recent as the early 20th century but do I think of myself as having any connection to Ireland? No!
It's because you get to identify with a romantically oppressed minority, from this dreamy mythologised homeland, and you can get drunk a lot because it's your culture, and it gives you a rebellious brand, blah de blah, without ever having to cope with living there and the rain, and the boredom
The most amusing are the ones who fly over there for about five days and start crying, like Biden has just done. What a twat
My actual Irish born-in-Ireland friends used to talk about plastic paddies with brutal contempt, I can kinda see why now
Oireland ceased to exist a long time ago, but Irish Americans haven’t realised.
What I've found funny is one of his "cousins", who's actually called Biden and lives in Surrey, sardonically comment that he's just as English as Irish, if not more so.
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
Yes, Biden has attempted to curry favour with the Irish with one hand and with the other he's pushing through tax and economic reforms that will decimate the Irish economic model.
And, whilst that is probably embarrassing for them to indulge, he's actually seriously upset the NI Unionists and been continually rude about the British. His main objective seems to have been personal indulgence of some rather prejudiced and mildly bigoted views he was no doubt raised upon.
He should never have come.
Who cares, the man's an idiot, and Ireland is meaningless in the greater scheme, and in the end America will align with the UK, because it has to: the Anglosphere is the future for America, combatting China. Hence AUKUS
You can't come over pretending to help the peace process and restore power sharing, like he did, and then shit all over the other side and flick the V to the UK government.
The only thing I saw from stateside was the black & tans comment. Embarrassing misstep but meaningless. What else has he done?
Nothing, except that he obviously enjoyed himself more in Dublin with the Irish than he did in Belfast with Sunak.
That’s like saying Oxford is more fun than Rochdale…
Belfast is pretty sodding dreary
And Sunak, who looked excruciatingly awkward, is hardly the life of the party.
Let Biden have his fun. He is very old. But no, there was offence to the British unless one has a serious chip on the shoulder.
He's mentioned the Black and Tans, posed enthusiastically for a selfie with Gerry Adams, mentioned the repression of the British in Palestine, and told a BBC reporter when asked for a comment, "I'm Irish".
It's happened once too often to be mere happenstance. His anti-Britishness is part of his identity, and the chip is his.
No mention for the billions $$$$$ offered to NI then?
You can't bribe people to change when they think that fundamentally you're not on their side.
Biden's failings are ones of basic diplomacy. There's a lot of excusing of him on here today, no doubt because we know Trump would be much worse and we're all desperate for that not to happen again, but that shouldn't give him a free pass.
It's pretty clear to me Biden has prejudicial views against Britain, even if he's sensible enough to by and large not let them affect policy - UK/US trade deal notwithstanding - but it does mean he's not as effective as he could be.
If he is declining mentally that will also manifest itself in these sorts of things coming more to the fore.
We should not listen to the man, or pretend he's our friend.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
I don't think comparing the Spectator with the Guardian has any merit, given the nature of the publications. A more interesting, and valid, comparison would be the Spectator with the New Statesman, surely?
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
There's a great urban myth story that (allegedly) Adrian Chiles shat on a cat's head when he was pissed at a house party. Has he ever written a Guardian column about that?
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
Yes, Biden has attempted to curry favour with the Irish with one hand and with the other he's pushing through tax and economic reforms that will decimate the Irish economic model.
And, whilst that is probably embarrassing for them to indulge, he's actually seriously upset the NI Unionists and been continually rude about the British. His main objective seems to have been personal indulgence of some rather prejudiced and mildly bigoted views he was no doubt raised upon.
He should never have come.
Who cares, the man's an idiot, and Ireland is meaningless in the greater scheme, and in the end America will align with the UK, because it has to: the Anglosphere is the future for America, combatting China. Hence AUKUS
You can't come over pretending to help the peace process and restore power sharing, like he did, and then shit all over the other side and flick the V to the UK government.
The only thing I saw from stateside was the black & tans comment. Embarrassing misstep but meaningless. What else has he done?
Nothing, except that he obviously enjoyed himself more in Dublin with the Irish than he did in Belfast with Sunak.
That’s like saying Oxford is more fun than Rochdale…
Belfast is pretty sodding dreary
And Sunak, who looked excruciatingly awkward, is hardly the life of the party.
Let Biden have his fun. He is very old. But no, there was offence to the British unless one has a serious chip on the shoulder.
He's mentioned the Black and Tans, posed enthusiastically for a selfie with Gerry Adams, mentioned the repression of the British in Palestine, and told a BBC reporter when asked for a comment, "I'm Irish".
It's happened once too often to be mere happenstance. His anti-Britishness is part of his identity, and the chip is his.
No mention for the billions $$$$$ offered to NI then?
You can't bribe people to change when they think that fundamentally you're not on their side.
Biden's failings are ones of basic diplomacy. There's a lot of excusing of him on here today, no doubt because we know Trump would be much worse and we're all desperate for that not to happen again, but that shouldn't give him a free pass.
It's pretty clear to me Biden has prejudicial views against Britain, even if he's sensible enough to by and large not let them affect policy - UK/US trade deal notwithstanding - but it does mean he's not as effective as he could be.
If he is declining mentally that will also manifest itself in these sorts of things coming more to the fore.
We should not listen to the man, or pretend he's our friend.
If it came to a choice between supporting the IRA and the UK, not hard to say which side Biden would be on.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
A lot there I can’t disagree with.
Chiles is perhaps the world’s most boring man. He almost killed me when I inadvertently tuned into him on the car radio and came within an ace of falling asleep before I was able to switch stations.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
I don't think comparing the Spectator with the Guardian has any merit, given the nature of the publications. A more interesting, and valid, comparison would be the Spectator with the New Statesman, surely?
Probably
Maybe it just entertains me that the Spectator (albeit a weekly, but an intellectual and highbrow magazine no doubt) now probably and literally outsells the Guardian's daily (woke, ludicrous, tedious) sales. Spec is somewhere around 120,000. Guardian is about 100,000
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
A lot there I can’t disagree with.
Chiles is perhaps the world’s most boring man. He almost killed me when I inadvertently tuned into him on the car radio and came within an ace of falling asleep before I was able to switch stations.
Shudder.
TBF I think his unique shtick on TV - the everyman's everyman - does actually work. He is affable and mildly amusing, and never offends. He is genial (harder to do than it looks on screen). He's mildly intelligent without being overbearing, he's good, undemanding TV company if you're knackered after a day of work
But exactly what works on early evening TV is quite pitiful in print. No I don't care if you lost your spectacles, Adrian. Nor am I stimulated by the fact you don't like sliced carrots. I want to be entertained, amused and provoked, as much as possible. A terrible editorial decision by Viner. His wife
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
It's weird how American's identify as Irish because their ancestors 200-150 years ago were Irish... 🙄
My great grandfather on my mothers side was Irish and my roots are as recent as the early 20th century but do I think of myself as having any connection to Ireland? No!
It's because you get to identify with a romantically oppressed minority, from this dreamy mythologised homeland, and you can get drunk a lot because it's your culture, and it gives you a rebellious brand, blah de blah, without ever having to cope with living there and the rain, and the boredom
The most amusing are the ones who fly over there for about five days and start crying, like Biden has just done. What a twat
My actual Irish born-in-Ireland friends used to talk about plastic paddies with brutal contempt, I can kinda see why now
Oireland ceased to exist a long time ago, but Irish Americans haven’t realised.
What I've found funny is one of his "cousins", who's actually called Biden and lives in Surrey, sardonically comment that he's just as English as Irish, if not more so.
They're welcome to him as far as I'm concerned.
Two of Biden's ancestors are buried in the churchyard of my local church in West Sussex and his ancestors used to run the local pub. Perhaps he'll come to visit us?
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
Yes, quite so. In the end, who cares. The AUKUS decision showed that Biden was prepared to seriously fuck with a major ally, the French, in favour of an even more important ally, the UK, and the Anglosphere, as represented by Oz
Let him weep in County Clare if he so wishes, and be mildly Anglophobic, he's an old man of wobbly sentiment, He also has a hard edge of realpolitik, or at least he is surrounded by people with that. They know where western interests lie, and they are not centred on Sligo, they are nearer to London, Canberra, and Toronto. Trump would be worse
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
I don't think comparing the Spectator with the Guardian has any merit, given the nature of the publications. A more interesting, and valid, comparison would be the Spectator with the New Statesman, surely?
Probably
Maybe it just entertains me that the Spectator (albeit a weekly, but an intellectual and highbrow magazine no doubt) now probably and literally outsells the Guardian's daily (woke, ludicrous, tedious) sales. Spec is somewhere around 120,000. Guardian is about 100,000
It also outsells BBC One and Facebook, but circulation doesn't matter any more.
The Spectator panders to literal white supremacists with pricks like Taki. Presumably the standard is that talking about books makes you "highbrow".
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
I don't think comparing the Spectator with the Guardian has any merit, given the nature of the publications. A more interesting, and valid, comparison would be the Spectator with the New Statesman, surely?
Probably
Maybe it just entertains me that the Spectator (albeit a weekly, but an intellectual and highbrow magazine no doubt) now probably and literally outsells the Guardian's daily (woke, ludicrous, tedious) sales. Spec is somewhere around 120,000. Guardian is about 100,000
I wouldn’t call the Spectator especially highbrow or intellectual. I’m not even sure such a thing exists on the right wing these days. The global financial crisis basically destroyed the premises upon which today’s deracinated Conservative philosophy still rests.
However, the Spectator is at least mildly entertaining and, despite carrying absolute dreck like Rod Liddle, that doesn’t seem to the actual *point* of the magazine.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
I don't think the UK is declining at such a rate that emigration is a vaguely reasonable response, for most people at least.
What I am seeing quite a bit is people 'emigrating' out of the south east due largely to housing costs. There was a guy I played football with who went to Lincoln, and another bloke in the gym who is moving up to Southport... where 'houses cost £150k'
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
Fucker Carlson has his tongue up Putin’s colon.
The truly worrying thing is we know he, and Fox, are very attuned to giving their audience what they want to hear. That says quite a lot about their attitude to this issue.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Apparently it is. Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Apparently it is. Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
That's the cultural cringe of the Kiwi, talking there
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Apparently it is. Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
That's the cultural cringe of the Kiwi, talking there
No, I’m merely diagnosing the deep emotion underneath Casino’s shit fit.
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
Yes, Biden has attempted to curry favour with the Irish with one hand and with the other he's pushing through tax and economic reforms that will decimate the Irish economic model.
And, whilst that is probably embarrassing for them to indulge, he's actually seriously upset the NI Unionists and been continually rude about the British. His main objective seems to have been personal indulgence of some rather prejudiced and mildly bigoted views he was no doubt raised upon.
He should never have come.
Who cares, the man's an idiot, and Ireland is meaningless in the greater scheme, and in the end America will align with the UK, because it has to: the Anglosphere is the future for America, combatting China. Hence AUKUS
You can't come over pretending to help the peace process and restore power sharing, like he did, and then shit all over the other side and flick the V to the UK government.
The only thing I saw from stateside was the black & tans comment. Embarrassing misstep but meaningless. What else has he done?
Nothing, except that he obviously enjoyed himself more in Dublin with the Irish than he did in Belfast with Sunak.
That’s like saying Oxford is more fun than Rochdale…
Belfast is pretty sodding dreary
And Sunak, who looked excruciatingly awkward, is hardly the life of the party.
Let Biden have his fun. He is very old. But no, there was offence to the British unless one has a serious chip on the shoulder.
He's mentioned the Black and Tans, posed enthusiastically for a selfie with Gerry Adams, mentioned the repression of the British in Palestine, and told a BBC reporter when asked for a comment, "I'm Irish".
It's happened once too often to be mere happenstance. His anti-Britishness is part of his identity, and the chip is his.
No mention for the billions $$$$$ offered to NI then?
You can't bribe people to change when they think that fundamentally you're not on their side.
Biden's failings are ones of basic diplomacy. There's a lot of excusing of him on here today, no doubt because we know Trump would be much worse and we're all desperate for that not to happen again, but that shouldn't give him a free pass.
It's pretty clear to me Biden has prejudicial views against Britain, even if he's sensible enough to by and large not let them affect policy - UK/US trade deal notwithstanding - but it does mean he's not as effective as he could be.
If he is declining mentally that will also manifest itself in these sorts of things coming more to the fore.
We should not listen to the man, or pretend he's our friend.
For all the guff our politician's (or theirs) might spout about a special relationship and the like I've always gotten the impression the top people are pretty clear headed about these things. Our interests will often align, especially as they are by far the stronger, and people obsess over that too much and either make too much of it, or actively wish it was more than it was.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
A lot there I can’t disagree with.
Chiles is perhaps the world’s most boring man. He almost killed me when I inadvertently tuned into him on the car radio and came within an ace of falling asleep before I was able to switch stations.
Shudder.
TBF I think his unique shtick on TV - the everyman's everyman - does actually work. He is affable and mildly amusing, and never offends. He is genial (harder to do than it looks on screen). He's mildly intelligent without being overbearing, he's good, undemanding TV company if you're knackered after a day of work
But exactly what works on early evening TV is quite pitiful in print. No I don't care if you lost your spectacles, Adrian. Nor am I stimulated by the fact you don't like sliced carrots. I want to be entertained, amused and provoked, as much as possible. A terrible editorial decision by Viner. His wife
Most papers have some of that 'mundane whimsy' stuff though. Eg the Times has a ton of it. And usually the author is there through connections rather than talent.
I'm not keen. If there has to be a regular short column give me something like Toby Young's "Sacred Cows" because I prefer to have the little grey cells tickled. But not everyone does. Many people just want a light chuckle and you have to respect that.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
We can get some real cringe on when people genuinely start worrying about things like what order of phone call we got when a new President takes office (or feeling pride/shame over the order).
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Apparently it is. Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
That's the cultural cringe of the Kiwi, talking there
No, I’m merely diagnosing the deep emotion underneath Casino’s shit fit.
Or, perhaps, both? You have spent your entire mental life under the cultural shadow of the UK or the USA, neither of which you have been really able to claim as home, even though you have tried to live in both
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Apparently it is. Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
Sure, but there's definitely plenty of overdoing it. So many comments during the Brexit negotiations about hwo the EU doesn't care or even think about the UK anymore, or how we're a tiny island etc, which if true would just show the EU leaders to be utter cretins, which I don't they are - they would not be so stupid as to be uninterested in what is going on, and their own relations with, a country with a massive population by the standards of most world nations, and a large (if not as large as we'd like) economy, right on their doorstep.
I think most regular people don't feel some anxious pain over the fact we are not as important as we used to be, they are content to be a middling power with some soft power punching above our weight, and there is this really annoying minority of WW2 era/Empire nostalgiasts who are butthurt about it, and another group who love to self-flagellate about our supposed irrelevance.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Apparently it is. Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
That's the cultural cringe of the Kiwi, talking there
No, I’m merely diagnosing the deep emotion underneath Casino’s shit fit.
Or, perhaps, both? You have spent your entire mental life under the cultural shadow of the UK or the USA, neither of which you have been really able to claim as home, even though you have tried to live in both
A Kiwi
It’s a privilege to experience different parts of the world, and it provides a sense of perspective. What do PB Tories know if they only know PB Toryism?
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
It's weird how American's identify as Irish because their ancestors 200-150 years ago were Irish... 🙄
My great grandfather on my mothers side was Irish and my roots are as recent as the early 20th century but do I think of myself as having any connection to Ireland? No!
It's because you get to identify with a romantically oppressed minority, from this dreamy mythologised homeland, and you can get drunk a lot because it's your culture, and it gives you a rebellious brand, blah de blah, without ever having to cope with living there and the rain, and the boredom
The most amusing are the ones who fly over there for about five days and start crying, like Biden has just done. What a twat
My actual Irish born-in-Ireland friends used to talk about plastic paddies with brutal contempt, I can kinda see why now
Oireland ceased to exist a long time ago, but Irish Americans haven’t realised.
What I've found funny is one of his "cousins", who's actually called Biden and lives in Surrey, sardonically comment that he's just as English as Irish, if not more so.
They're welcome to him as far as I'm concerned.
Two of Biden's ancestors are buried in the churchyard of my local church in West Sussex and his ancestors used to run the local pub. Perhaps he'll come to visit us?
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
A lot there I can’t disagree with.
Chiles is perhaps the world’s most boring man. He almost killed me when I inadvertently tuned into him on the car radio and came within an ace of falling asleep before I was able to switch stations.
Shudder.
TBF I think his unique shtick on TV - the everyman's everyman - does actually work. He is affable and mildly amusing, and never offends. He is genial (harder to do than it looks on screen). He's mildly intelligent without being overbearing, he's good, undemanding TV company if you're knackered after a day of work
But exactly what works on early evening TV is quite pitiful in print. No I don't care if you lost your spectacles, Adrian. Nor am I stimulated by the fact you don't like sliced carrots. I want to be entertained, amused and provoked, as much as possible. A terrible editorial decision by Viner. His wife
Doesn’t work for me in any medium.
(Though I have to confess I’ve never actually read any of his stuff; the titles of his pieces are so ridiculously banal that I’d suspect they were a modern take on Diary of a Nobody if I didn’t know who he is.)
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Apparently it is. Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
That's the cultural cringe of the Kiwi, talking there
No, I’m merely diagnosing the deep emotion underneath Casino’s shit fit.
Or, perhaps, both? You have spent your entire mental life under the cultural shadow of the UK or the USA, neither of which you have been really able to claim as home, even though you have tried to live in both
A Kiwi
How does one try to live somewhere? One lives. Or not.
Biden is an absolutely classic Plastic Paddy, isn't he? Possibly the world's greatest example, ever
Yes, Biden has attempted to curry favour with the Irish with one hand and with the other he's pushing through tax and economic reforms that will decimate the Irish economic model.
And, whilst that is probably embarrassing for them to indulge, he's actually seriously upset the NI Unionists and been continually rude about the British. His main objective seems to have been personal indulgence of some rather prejudiced and mildly bigoted views he was no doubt raised upon.
He should never have come.
Who cares, the man's an idiot, and Ireland is meaningless in the greater scheme, and in the end America will align with the UK, because it has to: the Anglosphere is the future for America, combatting China. Hence AUKUS
You can't come over pretending to help the peace process and restore power sharing, like he did, and then shit all over the other side and flick the V to the UK government.
The only thing I saw from stateside was the black & tans comment. Embarrassing misstep but meaningless. What else has he done?
Nothing, except that he obviously enjoyed himself more in Dublin with the Irish than he did in Belfast with Sunak.
That’s like saying Oxford is more fun than Rochdale…
Belfast is pretty sodding dreary
And Sunak, who looked excruciatingly awkward, is hardly the life of the party.
Let Biden have his fun. He is very old. But no, there was offence to the British unless one has a serious chip on the shoulder.
He's mentioned the Black and Tans, posed enthusiastically for a selfie with Gerry Adams, mentioned the repression of the British in Palestine, and told a BBC reporter when asked for a comment, "I'm Irish".
It's happened once too often to be mere happenstance. His anti-Britishness is part of his identity, and the chip is his.
No mention for the billions $$$$$ offered to NI then?
You can't bribe people to change when they think that fundamentally you're not on their side.
Biden's failings are ones of basic diplomacy. There's a lot of excusing of him on here today, no doubt because we know Trump would be much worse and we're all desperate for that not to happen again, but that shouldn't give him a free pass.
It's pretty clear to me Biden has prejudicial views against Britain, even if he's sensible enough to by and large not let them affect policy - UK/US trade deal notwithstanding - but it does mean he's not as effective as he could be.
If he is declining mentally that will also manifest itself in these sorts of things coming more to the fore.
We should not listen to the man, or pretend he's our friend.
If it came to a choice between supporting the IRA and the UK, not hard to say which side Biden would be on.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
A lot there I can’t disagree with.
Chiles is perhaps the world’s most boring man. He almost killed me when I inadvertently tuned into him on the car radio and came within an ace of falling asleep before I was able to switch stations.
Shudder.
TBF I think his unique shtick on TV - the everyman's everyman - does actually work. He is affable and mildly amusing, and never offends. He is genial (harder to do than it looks on screen). He's mildly intelligent without being overbearing, he's good, undemanding TV company if you're knackered after a day of work
But exactly what works on early evening TV is quite pitiful in print. No I don't care if you lost your spectacles, Adrian. Nor am I stimulated by the fact you don't like sliced carrots. I want to be entertained, amused and provoked, as much as possible. A terrible editorial decision by Viner. His wife
Doesn’t work for me in any medium.
(Though I have to confess I’ve never actually read any of his stuff; the titles of his pieces are so ridiculously banal that I’d suspect they were a modern take on Diary of a Nobody if I didn’t know who he is.)
I actually assumed that Adrian Chiles was a kind of postmodern pisstake of lameness.
I knew he was married to the editor, and it astonished me is able to attract an actual woman.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Apparently it is. Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
But is Britain really less important?
I would have thought the experience of the past year of the Russo-Ukraine War would have shown that, at the most important times, Britain is the country that the US can count on most. They know that. Britain should know that they know that.
Who else is the US going to turn to? France? Germany? Ireland?
I guess this is the thing about the right-wing in Britain (and the US). They've lost their nerve and their self-confidence. Brexit was fundamentally a pessimistic project based on a fear of being subsumed into a European whole. Losing your shit over the US President not attending the coronation, or being fawned over by the Irish exhibits a deep-seated insecurity. Trump's sucking up to dictators is a product of being scared to stand up to them.
The problem is that pessimism is something of a self-fulfilling state of mind. The Left have been pessimistic for a long time, largely since having the political shit kicked out of them by Thatcherites and Reaganites in the 80s. We really need to shake ourselves out of it and be more optimistic about the good that we can do if we put our minds to it.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me… See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House...
That was my point from upthread.
It’s what presidents do when they visit Ireland. It’s almost impossible to imagine a British politician showing such unabashed delight at meeting one of them, however well they get along. And it’s likely worth the odd fraction of a percent at the polls, perhaps more in the right circumstances. Again, nothing that we can offer.
Our cultural relationship with the US is just different. It’s nothing personal, most of the time.
"In the bustle of the brewery shop in Aviemore, Sam Faircliff is trying her best to stay positive. It’s hard, she admits, because for months she’s been suffering from a sense that politicians and civil servants in distant Edinburgh are intent on putting her out of business.
“They’re just not listening,” Faircliff sighs. “They pay lip service to the notion that they represent the whole of Scotland. I’m sorry but they don’t represent us.”
Faircliff, 58, is the managing director of Cairngorm Brewery and her gloomy view is far from unique in the Highlands and Islands. In 25 years of reporting across post-devolution Scotland, I’ve never encountered such widespread frustration, antipathy even, towards government as there is towards the SNP-Green coalition at Holyrood. This is a country divided."
Absolutely agree with this. The rejection of Forbes, supposedly becsuse of her Wee Free views, which are authentically Highland, in favour of a performative beardy Muslim, who is demonstratively hopeless, will be going down like a lead balloon across rural Scotland.
What relevance does him being Muslim have? Are you saying 'authentically' Highland people would have a problem with it?
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Apparently it is. Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
Sure, but there's definitely plenty of overdoing it. So many comments during the Brexit negotiations about hwo the EU doesn't care or even think about the UK anymore, or how we're a tiny island etc, which if true would just show the EU leaders to be utter cretins, which I don't they are - they would not be so stupid as to be uninterested in what is going on, and their own relations with, a country with a massive population by the standards of most world nations, and a large (if not as large as we'd like) economy, right on their doorstep.
I think most regular people don't feel some anxious pain over the fact we are not as important as we used to be, they are content to be a middling power with some soft power punching above our weight, and there is this really annoying minority of WW2 era/Empire nostalgiasts who are butthurt about it, and another group who love to self-flagellate about our supposed irrelevance.
I am more concerned with my own life and career, which is UK based; than the relative status of the UK in the world. I did wonder about moving to Finland, where my wife is from; but then I realised that I would have nothing to offer to Finland so it would be quite frustrating.
"In the bustle of the brewery shop in Aviemore, Sam Faircliff is trying her best to stay positive. It’s hard, she admits, because for months she’s been suffering from a sense that politicians and civil servants in distant Edinburgh are intent on putting her out of business.
“They’re just not listening,” Faircliff sighs. “They pay lip service to the notion that they represent the whole of Scotland. I’m sorry but they don’t represent us.”
Faircliff, 58, is the managing director of Cairngorm Brewery and her gloomy view is far from unique in the Highlands and Islands. In 25 years of reporting across post-devolution Scotland, I’ve never encountered such widespread frustration, antipathy even, towards government as there is towards the SNP-Green coalition at Holyrood. This is a country divided."
Absolutely agree with this. The rejection of Forbes, supposedly becsuse of her Wee Free views, which are authentically Highland, in favour of a performative beardy Muslim, who is demonstratively hopeless, will be going down like a lead balloon across rural Scotland.
What relevance does him being Muslim have? Are you saying 'authentically' Highland people would have a problem with it?
I don't think the UK is declining at such a rate that emigration is a vaguely reasonable response, for most people at least.
What I am seeing quite a bit is people 'emigrating' out of the south east due largely to housing costs. There was a guy I played football with who went to Lincoln, and another bloke in the gym who is moving up to Southport... where 'houses cost £150k'
On my one and only visit to New Zealand in 2016 I was standing on that hill overlooking Wellington, by the botanical gardens, and a couple started talking to me, and it wasn't long before one of them said "Have you thought about moving to New Zealand?" I was a bit surprised because I thought they'd probably got enough British people living there already.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
The main thing I took from this visit is how rare and special a visit from a U.S. President is for even a country like Ireland, whereas for us it’s all the bloody time and we have to head scratch to think of a new and interesting state gift. If anything, one of the things that makes us special is that we are routine.
So I asked everyone in Dallas how they liked living in Dallas.
Texas is of course regarded with horror by East Coasters (and indeed British bien pensant opinion).
Everyone - including the Somali lady who drives Ubers - declared that they loved it and could never live anywhere else.
Leon may regard Dallas as dystopian, and I myself would struggle gravely, but revealed preference is an amazing thing.
Not exactly surprising. Usually the vast majority of people in any given place will say that they wouldn't live anywhere else.
Maybe. Nevertheless, it is indeed too easy to dismiss a life that still offers cheap(ish) housing, low taxes, less traffic, etc. Of course it is probably an environmental disaster, but I’m going to put that to one side for the moment.
And a life expectancy of 76, the advanced world's worst infant mortality, worst maternal mortality, no universal healthcare, no paid maternity leave, no holiday pay, severe gun crime, every day mass shootings, hideous homeless shit, terrible opioid problems, and on and on
If people like life in Dallas or Houston, it is either because they are billionaires who can escape half the year and go to Europe, or because they have come from Honduras, Nicaragua or Venezuela, which most of them have
So I asked everyone in Dallas how they liked living in Dallas.
Texas is of course regarded with horror by East Coasters (and indeed British bien pensant opinion).
Everyone - including the Somali lady who drives Ubers - declared that they loved it and could never live anywhere else.
Leon may regard Dallas as dystopian, and I myself would struggle gravely, but revealed preference is an amazing thing.
Not exactly surprising. Usually the vast majority of people in any given place will say that they wouldn't live anywhere else.
Maybe. Nevertheless, it is indeed too easy to dismiss a life that still offers cheap(ish) housing, low taxes, less traffic, etc. Of course it is probably an environmental disaster, but I’m going to put that to one side for the moment.
And a life expectancy of 76, the advanced world's worst infant mortality, worst maternal mortality, no universal healthcare, no paid maternity leave, no holiday pay, severe gun crime, every day mass shootings, hideous homeless shit, terrible opioid problems, and on and on
If people like life in Dallas or Houston, it is either because they are billionaires who can escape half the year and go to Europe, or because they have come from Honduras, Nicaragua or Venezuela, which most of them have
This stuff is political gold for a US politician. It doesn’t involve policy making, awkward questions from the media, or any kind of political commitments. Just pure feelgood with no downside. Apart from getting up Casino’s nose a bit.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
We can get some real cringe on when people genuinely start worrying about things like what order of phone call we got when a new President takes office (or feeling pride/shame over the order).
The first phone call is always the Canadian PM isn't it? It was LOL when May had to pimp the queen out with a state visit for Trump in order to get a Whitehouse invitation.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Apparently it is. Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
But is Britain really less important?
I would have thought the experience of the past year of the Russo-Ukraine War would have shown that, at the most important times, Britain is the country that the US can count on most. They know that. Britain should know that they know that.
Who else is the US going to turn to? France? Germany? Ireland?
I guess this is the thing about the right-wing in Britain (and the US). They've lost their nerve and their self-confidence. Brexit was fundamentally a pessimistic project based on a fear of being subsumed into a European whole. Losing your shit over the US President not attending the coronation, or being fawned over by the Irish exhibits a deep-seated insecurity. Trump's sucking up to dictators is a product of being scared to stand up to them.
The problem is that pessimism is something of a self-fulfilling state of mind. The Left have been pessimistic for a long time, largely since having the political shit kicked out of them by Thatcherites and Reaganites in the 80s. We really need to shake ourselves out of it and be more optimistic about the good that we can do if we put our minds to it.
Yes I agree with your paragraph about right wing pessimism.
Is Britain less important? In economic and trade terms, certainly. The world has one hegemon, USA, a wannabe hegemon in China, and a “regulatory superpower” and a third centre of economic power in the EU.
Britain is a rank below now, alongside Japan, Australia, South Korea. Which is not nothing, but it’s a notable drop since even 20 years ago.
So I asked everyone in Dallas how they liked living in Dallas.
Texas is of course regarded with horror by East Coasters (and indeed British bien pensant opinion).
Everyone - including the Somali lady who drives Ubers - declared that they loved it and could never live anywhere else.
Leon may regard Dallas as dystopian, and I myself would struggle gravely, but revealed preference is an amazing thing.
Not exactly surprising. Usually the vast majority of people in any given place will say that they wouldn't live anywhere else.
Maybe. Nevertheless, it is indeed too easy to dismiss a life that still offers cheap(ish) housing, low taxes, less traffic, etc. Of course it is probably an environmental disaster, but I’m going to put that to one side for the moment.
And a life expectancy of 76, the advanced world's worst infant mortality, worst maternal mortality, no universal healthcare, no paid maternity leave, no holiday pay, severe gun crime, every day mass shootings, hideous homeless shit, terrible opioid problems, and on and on
If people like life in Dallas or Houston, it is either because they are billionaires who can escape half the year and go to Europe, or because they have come from Honduras, Nicaragua or Venezuela, which most of them have
It's like talking to Syrians in Luton
No universal healthcare is a feature, not a bug.
Not if you’re the part of the universe without healthcare.
This stuff is political gold for a US politician. It doesn’t involve policy making, awkward questions from the media, or any kind of political commitments. Just pure feelgood with no downside. Apart from getting up Casino’s nose a bit.
This stuff is political gold for a US politician. It doesn’t involve policy making, awkward questions from the media, or any kind of political commitments. Just pure feelgood with no downside. Apart from getting up Casino’s nose a bit.
Yup. This is where Ireland is more like an interesting pacific island with a culture that thinks you’re a God to the US than the UK, where it’s just another set of discussions about actual stuff we discuss all the time and you might get a protest.
Anyone who wants the love in for us doesn’t understand what we have. And, by the way, what we have is utterly transactional and we all would do well to remember that. We just also ought to be happy that we ain’t the quant novelty.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
We can get some real cringe on when people genuinely start worrying about things like what order of phone call we got when a new President takes office (or feeling pride/shame over the order).
The first phone call is always the Canadian PM isn't it? It was LOL when May had to pimp the queen out with a state visit for Trump in order to get a Whitehouse invitation.
Canada followed by Mexico IIRC, as the neighbours up/downstairs.
"The Ministry of Defence is poised to provide a replacement service for isolated communities left stranded by Scotland’s ferry crisis.
In a highly unusual plea, one of the SNP’s most senior MPs has spoken to military chiefs urging them to help provide a “short-term solution” to the collapse of parts of the ferry network after vessels were taken in for repairs lasting at least six weeks. The move by Ian Blackford, former leader of the nationalists at Westminster, comes after warnings that Highland companies are at risk of going bust if there is further disruption to ferry services."
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
We can get some real cringe on when people genuinely start worrying about things like what order of phone call we got when a new President takes office (or feeling pride/shame over the order).
What people think are silly actually matter in the world of diplomacy
If the POTUS were to call the UK PM #17 then that would be the equivalent of a slap in the face with a wet fish
Whereas #1 is a firm handshake and a “thank you brother”.
Other countries would take note - a lot of the UK’s soft power comes from our perceived closeness to the US. It’s why France always gets their panties in a twist at new POTUS time
Just woken from an intense dream in which Victoria Coren was trying to persuafe me to take over the running of Pinner Post Office because the previous incumbent, (who in my dream was a man who my ex-girlfriend had worked with briefly in the late 90s, and whose mundane name sticks in my head despite the fact I never met him because he changed it by deed poll from somethig marginally more interesting - but whom my brain had renamed 'Steve Johnson' for the purposes of the dream) had jacked it all in to move to Torshavn. Woke to realise I had a banging headache. Shuffled around the house to find some aspirin and waited for it to kick in. After a while, became aware of a strange sucking noise and flashing orange lights. The former turned out to be both the dishwasher and the fridge (making separate sucking noises); the latter a van outside where a man is considering distributing a load of cones and 'road closed' signs. Rebooted both the dishwasher and the fridge. Elected not to worry about the man outside for now. Noting all thos down here in case itturns out to be the end of days sio that I can say 'I told you so'. Headache is clearing but air of vague disquiet - coupled with the warm feeling of having dreamt about Victoria Coren, albeit only in the role of some sort of recruitment consultant - remains. Back into the hole I go..
This stuff is political gold for a US politician. It doesn’t involve policy making, awkward questions from the media, or any kind of political commitments. Just pure feelgood with no downside. Apart from getting up Casino’s nose a bit.
Casino of course still unironically refers to Eire like its 1937
Just woken from an intense dream in which Victoria Coren was trying to persuafe me to take over the running of Pinner Post Office because the previous incumbent, (who in my dream was a man who my ex-girlfriend had worked with briefly in the late 90s, and whose mundane name sticks in my head despite the fact I never met him because he changed it by deed poll from somethig marginally more interesting - but whom my brain had renamed 'Steve Johnson' for the purposes of the dream) had jacked it all in to move to Torshavn. Woke to realise I had a banging headache. Shuffled around the house to find some aspirin and waited for it to kick in. After a while, became aware of a strange sucking noise and flashing orange lights. The former turned out to be both the dishwasher and the fridge (making separate sucking noises); the latter a van outside where a man is considering distributing a load of cones and 'road closed' signs. Rebooted both the dishwasher and the fridge. Elected not to worry about the man outside for now. Noting all thos down here in case itturns out to be the end of days sio that I can say 'I told you so'. Headache is clearing but air of vague disquiet - coupled with the warm feeling of having dreamt about Victoria Coren, albeit only in the role of some sort of recruitment consultant - remains. Back into the hole I go..
I don't think the UK is declining at such a rate that emigration is a vaguely reasonable response, for most people at least.
What I am seeing quite a bit is people 'emigrating' out of the south east due largely to housing costs. There was a guy I played football with who went to Lincoln, and another bloke in the gym who is moving up to Southport... where 'houses cost £150k'
Which is properly bad news for us northerners. Southerners selling up and going abroad - fine. Southerners coming up here, bringing with them inflated house prices (they were more than high enough already) and poincy southern attitudes is bad. We should protect the north by making it a law that if you've ever had a house within 20 miles of the M25, if you buy anything north of Birmingham there is 200% anchor tax stamp duty to pay.
Perhaps, I say, it might be good for this broken party, which has cut itself loose from the Scottish public, to begin self-medicating with a good dose of being in opposition.
Ms Rhodes agrees. “That leadership election might have been a good one for Kate Forbes to lose when you consider what’s engulfed the party in the last two weeks.”
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
I don't think comparing the Spectator with the Guardian has any merit, given the nature of the publications. A more interesting, and valid, comparison would be the Spectator with the New Statesman, surely?
Probably
Maybe it just entertains me that the Spectator (albeit a weekly, but an intellectual and highbrow magazine no doubt) now probably and literally outsells the Guardian's daily (woke, ludicrous, tedious) sales. Spec is somewhere around 120,000. Guardian is about 100,000
Anything that has that affected twerp Nelson involved can only be toilet paper for me.
When the chips are down Biden is the sort of President that Britain can rely on to be there to do what is necessary and important. Trump would sell us out to Russia.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
I really hope not and Biden's visit was in truth a trip down his own personal memory lane and truthfully had little impact on Northern Ireland's politics
Indeed. And Ireland's importance to Biden starts and finishes as an opportunity for a photoshoot which plays very well to the audience back home that he needs in 2024.
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
This image of the visit sums it up for me.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
Why has Biden got a bunch of flowers growing out of his head?
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1646685843438940161 Tucker Carlson: "The second thing we learned from these slides is that despite direct U.S. involvement, Ukraine is in fact losing the war. Seven Ukrainians are being killed for every Russian. Ukrainian air defenses have been utterly degraded. Ukraine is losing."
We now have our very own comedy version of Fox. Fortunately the production values of GB News render it unwatchable. But the time will come when either it becomes more professional or something less comedic but equally malign comes along.
Have you actually ever watched GB News, or just the caricature of what you think GB News represents?
Some of its programmes and talk shows are interesting precisely because - like on here - they allow views that you wouldn't normally hear on MSM unless token and limited, and even then heavily curtailed/interrupted by the interviewing journalist.
Such as?
GB News should, at the least, be stripped of its “News” label by Ofcom. It’s propaganda for the mentally deficient, occupying a space not unlike “Novara” on the left.
Andrew Doyle, for one. Eamonn Holmes, Alister Stewart, and Nana Akua. And I look forward to John Cleese as well. Even Farage's chats and interviews are interesting.
Do I agree with everything they all say?
No, of course not - and neither would you with Channel 4 journalists, I'm sure - but objections to it are purely because it's offering something in the marketplace that people disagree with, and they'd rather it was shut up.
It would be weird if I insisted that broadcasting be limited only to things I personally agree with,
I would not ban GB News, but I recognise that it is essentially a propaganda outlet, funded by private money in order to push right-wing memes to the gullible.
And what the fuck is the Guardian? lol
Personally I think the Guardian has gone downhill. Unreadable these days.
Also, losing money hand over fist, for related reasons. It just churns out juvenile leftwing Woke clickbait that you can get anywhere else. What sets it apart any more?
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
I like its cricket coverage.
They have a couple of good sports writers, but - from what I am hearing - they are in such deep financial shit they are about to lose them, as well, and then it is just Polly Toynbee and Owen Jones. And some mad trans shite and "everything is racist" which you can, to put it politely, find literally anywhere and leave it unread
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
I pretty much agree with this. And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
She really is terrible. You know she is married to Adrian Chiles? That's why he's allowed to have a column which consists of "Gardens are interesting to be in, sometimes" or "I'm annoyed when I lose the TV remote control"
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
A lot there I can’t disagree with.
Chiles is perhaps the world’s most boring man. He almost killed me when I inadvertently tuned into him on the car radio and came within an ace of falling asleep before I was able to switch stations.
Shudder.
TBF I think his unique shtick on TV - the everyman's everyman - does actually work. He is affable and mildly amusing, and never offends. He is genial (harder to do than it looks on screen). He's mildly intelligent without being overbearing, he's good, undemanding TV company if you're knackered after a day of work
But exactly what works on early evening TV is quite pitiful in print. No I don't care if you lost your spectacles, Adrian. Nor am I stimulated by the fact you don't like sliced carrots. I want to be entertained, amused and provoked, as much as possible. A terrible editorial decision by Viner. His wife
Most papers have some of that 'mundane whimsy' stuff though. Eg the Times has a ton of it. And usually the author is there through connections rather than talent.
I'm not keen. If there has to be a regular short column give me something like Toby Young's "Sacred Cows" because I prefer to have the little grey cells tickled. But not everyone does. Many people just want a light chuckle and you have to respect that.
I agree. They have to find something to write about constantly, which must be a challenge and what you are then relying on is the quality of the writing rather than the content often. I really enjoy Clarkson. He makes me laugh. I recently read a review of the car I have just bought. I was in fits, but there was nil content. I would love to have the skill that @Leon has to write.
I suppose it works the other way also. I booked the guy (sorry his name has left me for some reason) who ran the Thrust project for a conference speech. He wasn't the greatest speaker but the subject matter was enthralling. A salesman after said it wants to make you salute and sing Rule Britannia. He was right. I got a signed copy of his book. I couldn't read it, it was so clunky. He needed someone like @leon to ghost write it.
Comments
I reckon it is doomed unless it goes behind a paywall and recruits MUCH better writers who can command a paying audience. Other papers have shown that this works - the Times, the FT, the New York Times, etc. All now doing pretty well, if not very well
Also: the Spectator. Now making spectacular profits due to an unrivalled roster of the world's best writers, as the world's most prestigious - and oldest - weekly magazine
Anyway, I'm having an early-ish night.
Sleep well all.
I suspect Dallas is one of the wealthier cities in the South, and it’s possible to live a pretty low stress and low tax life in the suburbs.
I would not live there, because I demand culture, good food, and the occasional cloudy sky. But its certainly nothing like dystopia and clearly a magnet for many, including folks from across the US.
Strangely Casino seems to be displaying the kind of paranoia towards the US president that some celts seem to have for the English.
There are also different rules for broadcasting versus the press.
https://www.irishtimes.com/world/middle-east/2022/07/15/joe-biden-compares-plight-palestinians-under-israel-to-that-of-irish-catholics-under-britain/
Weather generally MUCH better in Dallas, but also burning burning summers
Honestly, if you put a gun to my head, and said: where would you rather live, I'd be pushed to answer. Both seem quite shite to me. Dallas is obviously richer, but somehow even bleaker and more dangerous. And at least Luton is just 30 minutes from London and 2 hours from all of western Europe, Dallas is about 2 hours from... Fort Worth, during a bad commute
Both are shit
A lot of Americans wanna live in Dallas.
For an professed right winger, you don’t seem v right wing.
The opinion stuff is largely a waste of time (which is where the comparison with GB News is not unreasonable), but a fair amount of the reporting is still decent, even on occasion excellent.
Who relies on only one news source these days, anyway ?
There was a town we stopped in South of Dallas in an area settled by Germans. We went to a German restaurant but were disappointed by the dessert choices. We asked the Waitress for a German dessert, but she apologised that they only had apple strudel or Black Forest cake.
* Before Children
I don't see how they turn what they presently have into a successful paywall model (which they will surely have to do) unless they recruit better writers
Jay Rayner is good as a restaurant critic, but I bet he's tempted to go solo on Substack
The forecast for the English economy is moribund, and as much essayed on here, the housing situation is a catastrophe, and that doesn’t look like it is going to change soon.
Many people can have a better life than the one the UK economy currently affords them. It’s not the country it was 20 years ago.
😜
And even the “news”, which someone commends up thread, is buried among the “mad trans shite” and demands that your nan sell her dog to pay reparations for slavery.
Viner is a terrible editor.
Decreasing the number of rental properties, in an under supplied rental market (and overall housing market), drives prices higher. That was completely unforeseeable.
“… but then politicians never were very good at predicting basic second order effects anything.”
He also had a consistent positive message about the American business investment that is poised to enter Northern Ireland if the parties there can get their shit together and form a government.
I reckon that he also trusts that the British government are grown-up enough to recognise that the world doesn't revolve around Britain, and that Britain can be relied upon to recognise what is important - co-operation over Ukraine and Taiwan, etc - and what isn't - absurd photo opportunities.
You really should stop being so insecure about all of this.
That some of you are pathetically butthurt at the US President visiting Ireland that you are pining after having Trump as President again is really disappointing
Really? That's what is important to you?
He’s just doing what most US Presidents who visit Ireland do.
https://www.jfklibrary.org/visit-museum/exhibits/past-exhibits/a-journey-home-john-f-kennedy-in-ireland
In 2015 he married a Canadian and they live in Vancouver and again there are plusses and minuses
Some may well benefit by emigrating but wherever you live day to day problems are much the same, and you can hardly say the US is a place to emigrate to with Biden and Trump the choices and a dysfunctional country far worse than the UK
I know I am biased, as a rightwinger, but the contrast with the Spectator is remarkable. The Spec has more than doubled its readership in a decade, is rigidly paywalled, yet has expanding podcasts and international reach, and throughout maintains high intellectual quality - because people WILL pay for good writers and new ideas, and a bit of literary sparkle
The Guardian is going exactly the wrong way, to cheaper and cheaper clickbait. People simply won't pay for that, plus hectoring Woke shit, and eventually it will be fucked. Listicles, lame Wokery and Adrian Chiles, er no. It has a big decision to make soon
We should not listen to the man, or pretend he's our friend.
A more interesting, and valid, comparison would be the Spectator with the New Statesman, surely?
Chiles is perhaps the world’s most boring man. He almost killed me when I inadvertently tuned into him on the car radio and came within an ace of falling asleep before I was able to switch stations.
Shudder.
Maybe it just entertains me that the Spectator (albeit a weekly, but an intellectual and highbrow magazine no doubt) now probably and literally outsells the Guardian's daily (woke, ludicrous, tedious) sales. Spec is somewhere around 120,000. Guardian is about 100,000
But exactly what works on early evening TV is quite pitiful in print. No I don't care if you lost your spectacles, Adrian. Nor am I stimulated by the fact you don't like sliced carrots. I want to be entertained, amused and provoked, as much as possible. A terrible editorial decision by Viner. His wife
It really is in the UK's interests that if he runs he is able see off Trump in 2024. So if to do that he sees the need to indulge in a few remarks now that make the Irish feel self important and good about themselves, at our apparent expense, we should be happy to oblige them in their delusions of grandeur, in the knowledge that it means diddly-squat in the wider scheme of things.
Let him weep in County Clare if he so wishes, and be mildly Anglophobic, he's an old man of wobbly sentiment, He also has a hard edge of realpolitik, or at least he is surrounded by people with that. They know where western interests lie, and they are not centred on Sligo, they are nearer to London, Canberra, and Toronto. Trump would be worse
The Spectator panders to literal white supremacists with pricks like Taki. Presumably the standard is that talking about books makes you "highbrow".
However, the Spectator is at least mildly entertaining and, despite carrying absolute dreck like Rod Liddle, that doesn’t seem to the actual *point* of the magazine.
See that smile on the Irish politician's face? That's the delighted grin of an Irish politician who has finally got the photo with the US President he's worked his whole political life for, after narrowly missing out at St Patrick's Day last year when he came down with Covid the evening before visiting the White House.
Is Britain now so small that they envy Michael Martin his moment of glee? I didn't think it was.
What I am seeing quite a bit is people 'emigrating' out of the south east due largely to housing costs. There was a guy I played football with who went to Lincoln, and another bloke in the gym who is moving up to Southport... where 'houses cost £150k'
Telegraph types REALLY can’t stand the idea that Britain is a bit less important these days, both to the US and indeed to the Irish.
I'm not keen. If there has to be a regular short column give me something like Toby Young's "Sacred Cows" because I prefer to have the little grey cells tickled. But not everyone does. Many people just want a light chuckle and you have to respect that.
A Kiwi
I think most regular people don't feel some anxious pain over the fact we are not as important as we used to be, they are content to be a middling power with some soft power punching above our weight, and there is this really annoying minority of WW2 era/Empire nostalgiasts who are butthurt about it, and another group who love to self-flagellate about our supposed irrelevance.
It’s also a true blessing to be a New Zealander.
(Though I have to confess I’ve never actually read any of his stuff; the titles of his pieces are so ridiculously banal that I’d suspect they were a modern take on Diary of a Nobody if I didn’t know who he is.)
I knew he was married to the editor, and it astonished me is able to attract an actual woman.
I would have thought the experience of the past year of the Russo-Ukraine War would have shown that, at the most important times, Britain is the country that the US can count on most. They know that. Britain should know that they know that.
Who else is the US going to turn to? France? Germany? Ireland?
I guess this is the thing about the right-wing in Britain (and the US). They've lost their nerve and their self-confidence. Brexit was fundamentally a pessimistic project based on a fear of being subsumed into a European whole. Losing your shit over the US President not attending the coronation, or being fawned over by the Irish exhibits a deep-seated insecurity. Trump's sucking up to dictators is a product of being scared to stand up to them.
The problem is that pessimism is something of a self-fulfilling state of mind. The Left have been pessimistic for a long time, largely since having the political shit kicked out of them by Thatcherites and Reaganites in the 80s. We really need to shake ourselves out of it and be more optimistic about the good that we can do if we put our minds to it.
https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1646261982583050241
It’s what presidents do when they visit Ireland. It’s almost impossible to imagine a British politician showing such unabashed delight at meeting one of them, however well they get along.
And it’s likely worth the odd fraction of a percent at the polls, perhaps more in the right circumstances. Again, nothing that we can offer.
Our cultural relationship with the US is just different. It’s nothing personal, most of the time.
And he certainly has an ego big enough.
Mike Pompeo not running for president in 2024, @BretBaier reports
https://twitter.com/LucasFoxNews/status/1646998377010274307
https://twitter.com/rtenews/status/1646980726469033986
This stuff is political gold for a US politician. It doesn’t involve policy making, awkward questions from the media, or any kind of political commitments. Just pure feelgood with no downside.
Apart from getting up Casino’s nose a bit.
Is Britain less important? In economic and trade terms, certainly. The world has one hegemon, USA, a wannabe hegemon in China, and a “regulatory superpower” and a third centre of economic power in the EU.
Britain is a rank below now, alongside Japan, Australia, South Korea. Which is not nothing, but it’s a notable drop since even 20 years ago.
Anyone who wants the love in for us doesn’t understand what we have. And, by the way, what we have is utterly transactional and we all would do well to remember that. We just also ought to be happy that we ain’t the quant novelty.
The Times - Ministry of Defence called in to tackle ferry crisis
'Military chiefs asked to help out after ageing vessels taken in for lengthy repairs'
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/royal-navy-scotland-ferry-fleet-ministry-of-defence-knptdws6j
"The Ministry of Defence is poised to provide a replacement service for isolated communities left stranded by Scotland’s ferry crisis.
In a highly unusual plea, one of the SNP’s most senior MPs has spoken to military chiefs urging them to help provide a “short-term solution” to the collapse of parts of the ferry network after vessels were taken in for repairs lasting at least six weeks. The move by Ian Blackford, former leader of the nationalists at Westminster, comes after warnings that Highland companies are at risk of going bust if there is further disruption to ferry services."
If the POTUS were to call the UK PM #17 then that would be the equivalent of a slap in the face with a wet fish
Whereas #1 is a firm handshake and a “thank you brother”.
Other countries would take note - a lot of the UK’s soft power comes from our perceived closeness to the US. It’s why France always gets their panties in a twist at new POTUS time
Woke to realise I had a banging headache. Shuffled around the house to find some aspirin and waited for it to kick in.
After a while, became aware of a strange sucking noise and flashing orange lights. The former turned out to be both the dishwasher and the fridge (making separate sucking noises); the latter a van outside where a man is considering distributing a load of cones and 'road closed' signs.
Rebooted both the dishwasher and the fridge. Elected not to worry about the man outside for now.
Noting all thos down here in case itturns out to be the end of days sio that I can say 'I told you so'. Headache is clearing but air of vague disquiet - coupled with the warm feeling of having dreamt about Victoria Coren, albeit only in the role of some sort of recruitment consultant - remains. Back into the hole I go..
We should protect the north by making it a law that if you've ever had a house within 20 miles of the M25, if you buy anything north of Birmingham there is 200% anchor tax stamp duty to pay.
https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1646615867285708802
"Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸
@RepMTG
Jake Teixeira is white, male, christian, and antiwar.
That makes him an enemy to the Biden regime.
And he told the truth about troops being on the ground in Ukraine and a lot more.
Ask yourself who is the real enemy?
A young low level national guardsmen?
Or the administration that is waging war in Ukraine, a non-NATO nation, against nuclear Russia without war powers?
9:46 pm · 13 Apr 2023
·14M Views"
Ms Rhodes agrees. “That leadership election might have been a good one for Kate Forbes to lose when you consider what’s engulfed the party in the last two weeks.”
https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/viewpoint/23453647.kevin-mckenna-interviews-mandy-rhodes-my-family-feared-me/
I suppose it works the other way also. I booked the guy (sorry his name has left me for some reason) who ran the Thrust project for a conference speech. He wasn't the greatest speaker but the subject matter was enthralling. A salesman after said it wants to make you salute and sing Rule Britannia. He was right. I got a signed copy of his book. I couldn't read it, it was so clunky. He needed someone like @leon to ghost write it.
PS Richard Noble.