I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
Italy did it with the consent and authority of the EU.
So yes the EU did it.
The US export ban was put in place before the contracts were, so countries placed their contracts knowing the ban was in place. That's different to taking orders and then banning them.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
"Australia said losing "one shipment" would not badly affect its rollout.
"But it has asked the European Commission, which reportedly backs Italy's move, to review the decision."
"Matt Hancock finally confirms India IS behind vaccine delay: Delhi government blocks 4million doses to prioritise its own needs and there could be more shortfalls - but ministers insist it WON'T delay end of lockdown
Serum Institute of India has been told it must supply its own citizens before exporting vaccines One batch of five million doses of the AstraZeneca jab bound for the UK has been delayed by a month Ministers insist the UK is 'still on track' to hit April and July targets, and people due a second dose will get one But hiccup means plans to expand jabs to under-50s have been put on ice until May at the earliest"
"May at the earliest" is not a pleasing phrase. Let us hope MaxPB's optimism is vindicated
Hmpft
Lord Sumption has been giving advice on disregarding the law.
"On the ethics of law-breaking: “I feel sad that we have the kind of laws which public-spirited people may need to break. I have always taken a line on this, which is probably different from that of most of my former colleagues. I do not believe that there is a moral obligation to obey the law… You have to have a high degree of respect, both for the object that the law is trying to achieve, and for the way that it’s been achieved. Some laws invite breach. I think this is one of them.”"
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Also Scotland. Don't forget Scotland. We must always be ready to send our soldiers north, over Hadrian's, fortified with hot broth
That's easy, we just activate the chip implanted in the neck of each soldier in the Scottish regiments and voila - the country is ours.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
It was ultimately the EU, not Italy.
Italy used a special new EU law, which allowed Italy to do this. An EU law made by the EU Commission and passed by the EU Parliament to defend the EU's vaccine supplies - it was just first applied in Italy.
How odd that you and Topping should seek to avert blame from the EU
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
I blame the EU for being stupid, using inflammatory language and counter productive threats on vaccines. I blame Italy for blocking exports because it was their decision, taken by Italian, not EU officials.
No problem blaming the EU, I'm not a fan, just find the hyperbolic reactions on here hypocritical and illogical.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
And the Aussies are NOT happy. They are also expecting 1m doses from the EU to go to Papua New Guinea, where the virus is raging, and risking mutation.
That's the next stramash down the line, if the EU continues to be arsey
And yeah I am happy to criticise the Americans if they blocked lawfully contracted exports. Indeed I am happy to criticise them even if they didn't. Stupid obese twits.
This not happy?
"Prime Minister Scott Morrison said while he had requested the review, he could also understand why Italy made the decision."
lol. Italy was using an EU law made by the EU for the purposes of the EU. It wasn't "just Italy"
Strasbourg Syndrome. Defend the EU at all costs, even if it makes you look a twat. Classic example
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
"Australia said losing "one shipment" would not badly affect its rollout.
"But it has asked the European Commission, which reportedly backs Italy's move, to review the decision."
You're questioning my statement that it was Italy by posting a link to a news story that says it was Italy?
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Tosh the EU stated up front it was putting powers in but it was up to nation states to use them. If the EU hadn't taken the route it did italy wouldn't have blocked vaccines. Claiming its not the EU doing it is nothing more than sophistry. I didn't shoot him your honour I just passed someone a loaded gun and suggested they shot him.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
It was ultimately the EU, not Italy.
Italy used a special new EU law, which allowed Italy to do this. An EU law made by the EU Commission and passed by the EU Parliament to defend the EU's vaccine supplies - it was just first applied in Italy.
How odd that you and Topping should seek to avert blame from the EU
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
I blame the EU for being stupid, using inflammatory language and counter productive threats on vaccines. I blame Italy for blocking exports because it was their decision, taken by Italian, not EU officials.
No problem blaming the EU, I'm not a fan, just find the hyperbolic reactions on here hypocritical and illogical.
Sadly it has gone beyond that. If those who have moaned and whined about the EU for days on here don't take up arms and march on the EU, India, and the US RIGHT THIS MINUTE they will forever be labelled pussies.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
It was ultimately the EU, not Italy.
Italy used a special new EU law, which allowed Italy to do this. An EU law made by the EU Commission and passed by the EU Parliament to defend the EU's vaccine supplies - it was just first applied in Italy.
How odd that you and Topping should seek to avert blame from the EU
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
I blame the EU for being stupid, using inflammatory language and counter productive threats on vaccines. I blame Italy for blocking exports because it was their decision, taken by Italian, not EU officials.
No problem blaming the EU, I'm not a fan, just find the hyperbolic reactions on here hypocritical and illogical.
Oh FFS. The EU expressly passed an EU law so they could seize vaccines on behalf of the EU. Yet somehow this is not the EU's "fault", when this then happens inside the EU. Rrrriiiiiight
You know what, I give up. There is no point in arguing with people who have The Syndrome. It's a form of madness, so I am arguing with a madman, which makes me, in turn, a bit mad. Enuff
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
It was ultimately the EU, not Italy.
Italy used a special new EU law, which allowed Italy to do this. An EU law made by the EU Commission and passed by the EU Parliament to defend the EU's vaccine supplies - it was just first applied in Italy.
How odd that you and Topping should seek to avert blame from the EU
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
The EU cannot force a country to not export the vaccines, it can merely give it the powers.
@MaxPB has made a very strong case about why Belgium - with its big Pharmaceutical manufacturing base - will not limit exports. Italy, which has very little (if any) high value pharma, will make a different calculation.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Also Scotland. Don't forget Scotland. We must always be ready to send our soldiers north, over Hadrian's, fortified with hot broth
That's easy, we just activate the chip implanted in the neck of each soldier in the Scottish regiments and voila - the country is ours.
I thought it was Sturgeon that was more likely to activate Order 66.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Also Scotland. Don't forget Scotland. We must always be ready to send our soldiers north, over Hadrian's, fortified with hot broth
That's easy, we just activate the chip implanted in the neck of each soldier in the Scottish regiments and voila - the country is ours.
No self respecting Scot would allow a chip to be implanted rather than eating it.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
It was ultimately the EU, not Italy.
Italy used a special new EU law, which allowed Italy to do this. An EU law made by the EU Commission and passed by the EU Parliament to defend the EU's vaccine supplies - it was just first applied in Italy.
How odd that you and Topping should seek to avert blame from the EU
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
The EU cannot force a country to not export the vaccines, it can merely give it the powers.
@MaxPB has made a very strong case about why Belgium - with its big Pharmaceutical manufacturing base - will not limit exports. Italy, which has very little (if any) high value pharma, will make a different calculation.
"Both" I can accept. Sure
But completely exonerating the EU when it is an EU law made by EU MEPs and EU Commissioners, being applied inside the EU by an EU member for the benefit of the EU, I mean, Jesus.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Also Scotland. Don't forget Scotland. We must always be ready to send our soldiers north, over Hadrian's, fortified with hot broth
That's easy, we just activate the chip implanted in the neck of each soldier in the Scottish regiments and voila - the country is ours.
No self respecting Scot would allow a chip to be implanted rather than eating it.
Reminds me of a joke I was told by my Scottish friend.
Q: What does Las Vegas and Glasgow have in common?
A: Only places in the world you can use to chips to pay for sex.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
It was ultimately the EU, not Italy.
Italy used a special new EU law, which allowed Italy to do this. An EU law made by the EU Commission and passed by the EU Parliament to defend the EU's vaccine supplies - it was just first applied in Italy.
How odd that you and Topping should seek to avert blame from the EU
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
I blame the EU for being stupid, using inflammatory language and counter productive threats on vaccines. I blame Italy for blocking exports because it was their decision, taken by Italian, not EU officials.
No problem blaming the EU, I'm not a fan, just find the hyperbolic reactions on here hypocritical and illogical.
Oh FFS. The EU expressly passed an EU law so they could seize vaccines on behalf of the EU. Yet somehow this is not the EU's "fault", when this then happens inside the EU. Rrrriiiiiight
You know what, I give up. There is no point in arguing with people who have The Syndrome. It's a form of madness, so I am arguing with a madman, which makes me, in turn, a bit mad. Enuff
Not only that but when that didn't work they are doubling down and talking about seizing factories and ignoring ip. If I was AZN and the factories were seized I would frankly tell all the staff to go home and good luck to the commission running the plant
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Tosh the EU stated up front it was putting powers in but it was up to nation states to use them. If the EU hadn't taken the route it did italy wouldn't have blocked vaccines. Claiming its not the EU doing it is nothing more than sophistry. I didn't shoot him your honour I just passed someone a loaded gun and suggested they shot him.
Blimey that's a funny way of looking at things. You lot really do think the EU is the big bad superpower controlling all of us. No wonder you were so keen to leave.
Italy (like us) is a sovereign nation. It can do whatever it goddamn pleases. And did, in this instance. It could, I daresay (IANAEUL) have done it with or without the EU's blessing.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Also Scotland. Don't forget Scotland. We must always be ready to send our soldiers north, over Hadrian's, fortified with hot broth
That's easy, we just activate the chip implanted in the neck of each soldier in the Scottish regiments and voila - the country is ours.
No self respecting Scot would allow a chip to be implanted rather than eating it.
There was that running through my mind as I typed...
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Also Scotland. Don't forget Scotland. We must always be ready to send our soldiers north, over Hadrian's, fortified with hot broth
That's easy, we just activate the chip implanted in the neck of each soldier in the Scottish regiments and voila - the country is ours.
No self respecting Scot would allow a chip to be implanted rather than eating it.
Not to mention the arguments about brown sauce versus vinegar.
But I'm coming to feel that the incessant snipes and jokes from certain PBers about military invasion of a part of the UK are not only tiresome 'banter' but also getting in the way of genuinely interesting discussion - I for one have had to rethink some of my notions after comments from several quarters today.
This is a PB website. Not an alternative history military fanzine.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
It was ultimately the EU, not Italy.
Italy used a special new EU law, which allowed Italy to do this. An EU law made by the EU Commission and passed by the EU Parliament to defend the EU's vaccine supplies - it was just first applied in Italy.
How odd that you and Topping should seek to avert blame from the EU
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
The EU cannot force a country to not export the vaccines, it can merely give it the powers.
@MaxPB has made a very strong case about why Belgium - with its big Pharmaceutical manufacturing base - will not limit exports. Italy, which has very little (if any) high value pharma, will make a different calculation.
First off, Australia seems to have been a grown up about it. And secondly, anyone on here know if Italy could have done it with or without the EU? My guess is yes. Is vaccine export an EU competence? Did Italy sign away its rights over vaccines? No idea.
"A member of the UK's vaccine advisory group the JCVI, Professor Adam Finn, suggested the [unlockdowning] roadmap could be impacted by the hold-up. He said on Radio 4: 'The next phase – phase two – may kick off slightly later than we’d optimistically hoped.'"
Jesus effing Christ
Oh lordy. That is NOT what we want to hear from anyone anywhere near government.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
It was ultimately the EU, not Italy.
Italy used a special new EU law, which allowed Italy to do this. An EU law made by the EU Commission and passed by the EU Parliament to defend the EU's vaccine supplies - it was just first applied in Italy.
How odd that you and Topping should seek to avert blame from the EU
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
I blame the EU for being stupid, using inflammatory language and counter productive threats on vaccines. I blame Italy for blocking exports because it was their decision, taken by Italian, not EU officials.
No problem blaming the EU, I'm not a fan, just find the hyperbolic reactions on here hypocritical and illogical.
Oh FFS. The EU expressly passed an EU law so they could seize vaccines on behalf of the EU. Yet somehow this is not the EU's "fault", when this then happens inside the EU. Rrrriiiiiight
You know what, I give up. There is no point in arguing with people who have The Syndrome. It's a form of madness, so I am arguing with a madman, which makes me, in turn, a bit mad. Enuff
Me: It was Italy, not "the EU" Leon, with a slam dunk quote from the BBC: "it was Italy"
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Also Scotland. Don't forget Scotland. We must always be ready to send our soldiers north, over Hadrian's, fortified with hot broth
That's easy, we just activate the chip implanted in the neck of each soldier in the Scottish regiments and voila - the country is ours.
No self respecting Scot would allow a chip to be implanted rather than eating it.
Not to mention the arguments about brown sauce versus vinegar.
But I'm coming to feel that the incessant snipes and jokes from certain PBers about military invasion of a part of the UK are not only tiresome 'banter' but also getting in the way of genuinely interesting discussion - I for one have had to rethink some of my notions after comments from several quarters today.
This is a PB website. Not an alternative history armchair general fantasy mummy let me stay up late military fanzine.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
I'm trying not be be patronising here, but I'm surprised we're still getting this after people said the same thing about Matt Hancock.
This is a Government building. You will see frequent images of the Queen, as well as flags, in Government buildings. It's not Robert Jenrick's personal boudoir. See also police stations.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
It was ultimately the EU, not Italy.
Italy used a special new EU law, which allowed Italy to do this. An EU law made by the EU Commission and passed by the EU Parliament to defend the EU's vaccine supplies - it was just first applied in Italy.
How odd that you and Topping should seek to avert blame from the EU
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
The EU cannot force a country to not export the vaccines, it can merely give it the powers.
@MaxPB has made a very strong case about why Belgium - with its big Pharmaceutical manufacturing base - will not limit exports. Italy, which has very little (if any) high value pharma, will make a different calculation.
First off, Australia seems to have been a grown up about it. And secondly, anyone on here know if Italy could have done it with or without the EU? My guess is yes. Is vaccine export an EU competence? Did Italy sign away its rights over vaccines? No idea.
They made an EU law expressly for this purpose. Have you gone stupid as well as mad?
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
100 new scripted titles over the next three years that will “portray lives of people outside of London, for the nations”, including two long-running dramas – one from the north, one from the nations.
That guy who partially cashed out will be breathing a big relief now.
Wonder if he was rooting for it? OTOH 50k richer if it won. BOTOH the loss validates the partial cash out.
We've all been there (not for the sums involved). My guess is rooting against.
Yes think I would have been - although pure financial rationality says you want it to win.
Like that experiment where they offer two people money. They have £100 and offer one person £5 and the other £95 and they can each keep the amount if they both agree. Oftentimes the one offered £5 disagrees.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
Italy is not the EU. Still no-one has criticised the US export ban using legislation designed for the Korean war which is blocking UK vaccines arriving on time.
It was ultimately the EU, not Italy.
Italy used a special new EU law, which allowed Italy to do this. An EU law made by the EU Commission and passed by the EU Parliament to defend the EU's vaccine supplies - it was just first applied in Italy.
How odd that you and Topping should seek to avert blame from the EU
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
The EU cannot force a country to not export the vaccines, it can merely give it the powers.
@MaxPB has made a very strong case about why Belgium - with its big Pharmaceutical manufacturing base - will not limit exports. Italy, which has very little (if any) high value pharma, will make a different calculation.
First off, Australia seems to have been a grown up about it. And secondly, anyone on here know if Italy could have done it with or without the EU? My guess is yes. Is vaccine export an EU competence? Did Italy sign away its rights over vaccines? No idea.
They made an EU law expressly for this purpose. Have you gone stupid as well as mad?
a) you should be rejoicing that the EU repatriated powers to the Member States; and
b) are you sure it needed the EU for Italy to do this?
He accuses the UK of "gold plated vaccine nationalism", and says we are hoarding vaccines, whereas the EU has delivered vaccines to us "with love"
I am not kidding. WITH LOVE. The EU has kindly given us THEIR vaccines because they LOVE US, whereas the British "on their little island", are just evil etc etc etc etc. He doesn't touch on the fact we have these vaccines for the reasons everyone knows: we invested sooner, paid more, got better contracts, helped the manufacturers.
Nor does he mention that the EU "which LOVES us", has been trashing the UK vaccine even as it seeks to ban vaccine export and steal some from us at the same time.
This is on the same scale of derangement as Keating. I really believe it is a genuine psychological affliction, like, say, Stockholm syndrome, but it just has not been diagnosed and named yet. This will happen, soon.
We must simply love bomb him. Cause his little head to explode with Brexiteers asking "are you alright, pet?"
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Tosh the EU stated up front it was putting powers in but it was up to nation states to use them. If the EU hadn't taken the route it did italy wouldn't have blocked vaccines. Claiming its not the EU doing it is nothing more than sophistry. I didn't shoot him your honour I just passed someone a loaded gun and suggested they shot him.
Blimey that's a funny way of looking at things. You lot really do think the EU is the big bad superpower controlling all of us. No wonder you were so keen to leave.
Italy (like us) is a sovereign nation. It can do whatever it goddamn pleases. And did, in this instance. It could, I daresay (IANAEUL) have done it with or without the EU's blessing.
No, the EU awarded itself these powers, it looks very much like an EU competence under the Single Market. Italy could not have done it until the EU wrote a new law to allow it. It is controversial and possibly contravenes WTO rules, but the EU did it anyway
The stars of Channel 4's Gogglebox teared into Meghan Markle as they watched her blockbuster interview with Oprah Winfrey, joking that she should 'get a job in the gift shop' to pay for her security after it was removed.
My Oxford AZN jab was yesterday. No sore arm at all. Seems that some get a reaction but some don't.
Me too, jabbed that is. But distinctly off colour today.
Strange isn't it. I wonder whether those that do get a reaction are slightly more protected by the vaccine?
As I understand it, the reaction and the protection are from different parts of the immune system.
The reaction is from the innate immune system (non-specific, general defences) tooling up to attack the invaders with generic defences (eg cytokine). The protection comes from the acquired immune system tooling up with tailored antibodies and T-cells that target covid specifically.
NB - there can also be a reaction if you already have antibodies targeting covid from infection; that’s a special case).
As I got jabbed 5 hours ago, I’d prefer to know if there was a way to tell in advance (I feel fine so far, but most people who report the flu-like reaction say it happens the following day) and if it meant anything, but sadly it doesn’t seem to.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Tosh the EU stated up front it was putting powers in but it was up to nation states to use them. If the EU hadn't taken the route it did italy wouldn't have blocked vaccines. Claiming its not the EU doing it is nothing more than sophistry. I didn't shoot him your honour I just passed someone a loaded gun and suggested they shot him.
Blimey that's a funny way of looking at things. You lot really do think the EU is the big bad superpower controlling all of us. No wonder you were so keen to leave.
Italy (like us) is a sovereign nation. It can do whatever it goddamn pleases. And did, in this instance. It could, I daresay (IANAEUL) have done it with or without the EU's blessing.
No, the EU awarded itself these powers, it looks very much like an EU competence under the Single Market. Italy could not have done it until the EU wrote a new law to allow it. It is controversial and possibly contravenes WTO rules, but the EU did it anyway
I presume Leon will be calling for the circling bombers to be redirected from Europe to India to go on a carpet bombing run....
As I pointed out earlier, the Indian delay is due a ban on exports of vaccine ingredients from the US. Unsurprisingly all those piling on the EU for talking about such restrictions have no interest in criticising the US for actually doing so.
The EU hasnt talked about it they have done it ask australia
It was Italy, not the EU.
The EU seems to be the only major continental "power" that hasn't blocked vaccines.
But yep throw them in as well. PB armchair generals now have a war on three fronts - US, India and the EU.
Good luck.
Tosh the EU stated up front it was putting powers in but it was up to nation states to use them. If the EU hadn't taken the route it did italy wouldn't have blocked vaccines. Claiming its not the EU doing it is nothing more than sophistry. I didn't shoot him your honour I just passed someone a loaded gun and suggested they shot him.
Blimey that's a funny way of looking at things. You lot really do think the EU is the big bad superpower controlling all of us. No wonder you were so keen to leave.
Italy (like us) is a sovereign nation. It can do whatever it goddamn pleases. And did, in this instance. It could, I daresay (IANAEUL) have done it with or without the EU's blessing.
No, the EU awarded itself these powers, it looks very much like an EU competence under the Single Market. Italy could not have done it until the EU wrote a new law to allow it. It is controversial and possibly contravenes WTO rules, but the EU did it anyway
Strasbourg Syndrome. The EU can do no wrong, even when you are offered gold plated evidence and a slam dunk case.
I will not engage with you further until you revert to sanity. Which might be like waiting for unlockdowning, a goal that forever recedes into the near future
That guy who partially cashed out will be breathing a big relief now.
Wonder if he was rooting for it? OTOH 50k richer if it won. BOTOH the loss validates the partial cash out.
We've all been there (not for the sums involved). My guess is rooting against.
Yes think I would have been - although pure financial rationality says you want it to win.
Like that experiment where they offer two people money. They have £100 and offer one person £5 and the other £95 and they can each keep the amount if they both agree. Oftentimes the one offered £5 disagrees.
From memory the result very much depends on the information provided. If it's known that the total amount was £100 it's way more likely that people disagree than they would if they didn't know the total amount or their percentage share..
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Exactly. It is a brief moment, yet it is one of the purest examples of metropolitan sneering and London bubblethink that I've seen.
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
Have we covered this? It's an interesting hypothesis which might conceivably explain why the blood-clotting issue hasn't been seen here or in the clinical trials, but has apparently happened in a few cases on the continent:
Given that we have rounded up volunteers from here there and everywhere, it would be surprising if all of their technique was perfect
Yes, it describes how some giving the injection were pinching rather than stretching the skin where the needle was inserted, which made it slightly more likely that the shot would go into a small vein rather than the shoulder muscle. (It's also practice for intramuscular injection to withdraw the plunger slightly first, to see if you draw blood from a vein, but this is often omitted, as I understand it.)
It's quite likely that some our medics/nurses have made similar errors - but even with accidental intravenous injection, the likelihood of such severe side effects is still very low indeed.
My impression is that training has been thorough, and preparation good.
Also in the UK, volunteers have been heavily sought from eg St John's Ambulance.
My injection was certainly "long needle, right angle and deep in the muscle pad", a it should be.
But UK dist. infrastructure was the one where Hancock said "I don't care - do it now, I want to be ready" months in advance. That may account for some difference.
I must admit I felt and saw nothing - so I couldn't say. It was only the side affects of sore arm plus a 24 hour flu that proved to me I'd had the jab at all.
Type I diabetic. Jabs and needles are a specialist subject, albeit usually into the fat not the muscle.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Exactly. It is a brief moment, yet it is one of the purest examples of metropolitan sneering and London bubblethink that I've seen.
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
But they are going to move more out of London and becomes all down with provinces....like they did when they moved to Salford....
My Oxford AZN jab was yesterday. No sore arm at all. Seems that some get a reaction but some don't.
Me too, jabbed that is. But distinctly off colour today.
Strange isn't it. I wonder whether those that do get a reaction are slightly more protected by the vaccine?
As I understand it, the reaction and the protection are from different parts of the immune system.
The reaction is from the innate immune system (non-specific, general defences) tooling up to attack the invaders with generic defences (eg cytokine). The protection comes from the acquired immune system tooling up with tailored antibodies and T-cells that target covid specifically.
NB - there can also be a reaction if you already have antibodies targeting covid from infection; that’s a special case).
As I got jabbed 5 hours ago, I’d prefer to know if there was a way to tell in advance (I feel fine so far, but most people who report the flu-like reaction say it happens the following day) and if it meant anything, but sadly it doesn’t seem to.
Oh, one addition. As a significant number of the bad outcomes to infection seem to occur when the acquired immune system is, for whatever reason, very slow in developing tailored defences while the innate system continues to pour its generic firepower in (causing significant collateral damage to the battlefield, aka your body), it may be plausible that a bad reaction to the vaccine could indicate an enhanced likelihood to having had a bad outcome from infection (if the acquired immune system reaction had also been slow, the strong innate system reaction could, if sustained, be a bad thing).
NB - I am by no means an immunologist, nor do I play one on TV, and the above could easily be bollocks.
Suzanne McKie QC, representing the claimant, said the Labour Party had been in "radio silence" for 18 months.
The party said it took claims of sexual harassment "extremely seriously".
In September 2019, while Jeremy Corbyn was Labour leader, Mr Hill was suspended from the party following an accusation of sexual harassment.
He denied the allegation, which was later dropped , and had the whip reinstated.
Farore Law, the firm managed by Ms McKie, said the Labour Party had a duty of care, but that both Mr Corbyn and current leader Sir Keir Starmer had failed to offer support to its client. It said the claimant had "experienced significant distress, lost employment, and had not had access to counselling".
As I suggested yesterday, AZN are clearly still having production issues. They claimed they could do 3-4 million a week, no sweat. They have never managed that.
Yes. It's a hard thing to say about a company that has done great work developing an effective vaccine that doesn't have the same storage issues as some others. But their production side is different from product development, and they've over-promised and under-delivered on that front, quite clearly.
As I have it, the UK AZ production ramp-up goal is 10 million a month by the end of 2021.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Exactly. It is a brief moment, yet it is one of the purest examples of metropolitan sneering and London bubblethink that I've seen.
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
As I suggested yesterday, AZN are clearly still having production issues. They claimed they could do 3-4 million a week, no sweat. They have never managed that.
Yes. It's a hard thing to say about a company that has done great work developing an effective vaccine that doesn't have the same storage issues as some others. But their production side is different from product development, and they've over-promised and under-delivered on that front, quite clearly.
As I have it, the UK AZ production ramp-up goal is 10 million a month by the end of 2021.
Perhaps I missed something.
I think it's quite a lot more than that by the end of the year.
SirNorfolkPassmore said: » show previous quotes Yes. It's a hard thing to say about a company that has done great work developing an effective vaccine that doesn't have the same storage issues as some others. But their production side is different from product development, and they've over-promised and under-delivered on that front, quite clearly.
The vaccine was developed by Oxford University - AZ were brought in to take it to industrial production and distribution. They're doing it for free, so not reasonable to go too hard, but at this point they do seem to have done a terrible expectations management job if nothing else.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Exactly. It is a brief moment, yet it is one of the purest examples of metropolitan sneering and London bubblethink that I've seen.
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
100 new scripted titles over the next three years that will “portray lives of people outside of London, for the nations”, including two long-running dramas – one from the north, one from the nations.
Sounds rather patronizing...by central decree, we need special programmes for those funny folk in the North, ee by gum, flat caps and whippets.
Surely the real issue is not whether the BBC reflects the nation, but that viewers are increasingly choosing non-British programmes on non-British services like Netflix, Disney+ and so on. That does not sound to me like a problem that is countered wth more regional production, because it seems people don't really care where the programmes come from as long as they are good. The BBC needs a plan to get a lot more money, to make a lot more high-cost programming, that makes the iPlayer competitive.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Exactly. It is a brief moment, yet it is one of the purest examples of metropolitan sneering and London bubblethink that I've seen.
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
Leaving aside the flag debate, BBC critics tend to overstate the absence of the younger audience. It's declined, but still 2.5 hours a week in the 18-34 age group, with 56% of young viewers watching it at some time during the week. (For comparison, the 55+ age group are 13 hours and 92%). iplayer watching (which in my circle is the preferred mechanism for younger people) has gone through the roof at 3.5 billion, or a programme a week for everyone in Britain of any age, including infants.
100 new scripted titles over the next three years that will “portray lives of people outside of London, for the nations”, including two long-running dramas – one from the north, one from the nations.
Sounds rather patronizing...by central decree, we need special programmes for those funny folk in the North, ee by gum, flat caps and whippets.
Surely the real issue is not whether the BBC reflects the nation, but that viewers are increasingly choosing non-British programmes on non-British services like Netflix, Disney+ and so on. That does not sound to me like a problem that is countered wth more regional production, because it seems people don't really care where the programmes come from as long as they are good. The BBC needs a plan to get a lot more money, to make a lot more high-cost programming, that makes the iPlayer competitive.
American programming is better quality, which hasn't always been the case.
The BBC needs to up its game. Not pander to regional box ticking.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Even the sanest posters are turning into Stanley Baker in Zulu. That's what Brexit does to you.....
100 new scripted titles over the next three years that will “portray lives of people outside of London, for the nations”, including two long-running dramas – one from the north, one from the nations.
Sounds rather patronizing...by central decree, we need special programmes for those funny folk in the North, ee by gum, flat caps and whippets.
Surely the real issue is not whether the BBC reflects the nation, but that viewers are increasingly choosing non-British programmes on non-British services like Netflix, Disney+ and so on. That does not sound to me like a problem that is countered wth more regional production, because it seems people don't really care where the programmes come from as long as they are good. The BBC needs a plan to get a lot more money, to make a lot more high-cost programming, that makes the iPlayer competitive.
American programming is better quality, which hasn't always been the case.
The BBC needs to up its game. Not pander to regional box ticking.
The BBC can't afford to up its game - already it needs Amazon's money for a lot of it's fancier productions.
So all it can do is some regional box ticking while hoping moving outside London results in interesting program ideas that also attracts viewers.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Exactly. It is a brief moment, yet it is one of the purest examples of metropolitan sneering and London bubblethink that I've seen.
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
Leaving aside the flag debate, BBC critics tend to overstate the absence of the younger audience. It's declined, but still 2.5 hours a week in the 18-34 age group, with 56% of young viewers watching it at some time during the week. (For comparison, the 55+ age group are 13 hours and 92%). iplayer watching (which in my circle is the preferred mechanism for younger people) has gone through the roof at 3.5 billion, or a programme a week for everyone in Britain of any age, including infants.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Exactly. It is a brief moment, yet it is one of the purest examples of metropolitan sneering and London bubblethink that I've seen.
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
Leaving aside the flag debate, BBC critics tend to overstate the absence of the younger audience. It's declined, but still 2.5 hours a week in the 18-34 age group, with 56% of young viewers watching it at some time during the week. (For comparison, the 55+ age group are 13 hours and 92%). iplayer watching (which in my circle is the preferred mechanism for younger people) has gone through the roof at 3.5 billion, or a programme a week for everyone in Britain of any age, including infants.
100 new scripted titles over the next three years that will “portray lives of people outside of London, for the nations”, including two long-running dramas – one from the north, one from the nations.
Sounds rather patronizing...by central decree, we need special programmes for those funny folk in the North, ee by gum, flat caps and whippets.
Surely the real issue is not whether the BBC reflects the nation, but that viewers are increasingly choosing non-British programmes on non-British services like Netflix, Disney+ and so on. That does not sound to me like a problem that is countered wth more regional production, because it seems people don't really care where the programmes come from as long as they are good. The BBC needs a plan to get a lot more money, to make a lot more high-cost programming, that makes the iPlayer competitive.
Yes we have done this to death. For example, Disney are going to produce 7 Star Wars shows in the next couple of years. The BBC will still be producing 4 episodes seasons on an every other year basis.
And of course YouTube will be producing 100000s of hours of content every single day, which the yuff watch morning, noon and night.
The BBC boss decreeing we need a "northern" show or two is fiddling while Rome burns.
100 new scripted titles over the next three years that will “portray lives of people outside of London, for the nations”, including two long-running dramas – one from the north, one from the nations.
Sounds rather patronizing...by central decree, we need special programmes for those funny folk in the North, ee by gum, flat caps and whippets.
Surely the real issue is not whether the BBC reflects the nation, but that viewers are increasingly choosing non-British programmes on non-British services like Netflix, Disney+ and so on. That does not sound to me like a problem that is countered wth more regional production, because it seems people don't really care where the programmes come from as long as they are good. The BBC needs a plan to get a lot more money, to make a lot more high-cost programming, that makes the iPlayer competitive.
American programming is better quality, which hasn't always been the case.
The BBC needs to up its game. Not pander to regional box ticking.
The BBC can't afford to up its game - already it needs Amazon's money for a lot of it's fancier productions.
So all it can do is some regional box ticking while hoping moving outside London results in interesting program ideas that also attracts viewers.
They could afford to up its game by being smarter.
The BBC is a monolith now that is the true "Jack of All Trades" with what follows too.
The BBC should pick some good quality things to concentrate on and work on those, rather than trying to do everything.
Why would you take the word of the Health Secretary speaking in the House of Commons, when you could instead just ingest @Leon's conspiracy theories?
To be fair I did admit it was a conspiracy theory, and I said I was "wearing my tin foil trilby"
It was also an enormous coincidence, that the EU made its vaccine embargo threats on the day the UK admitted it was suddenly facing a future vaccine shortfall.
Or was it coincidence? I don't like coincidences.
Someone wondered last night if the government sent out that letter yesterday, BECAUSE of the EU threats. "Look, we don't have any vaccines anyway", is a good riposte to the EU mafia. They are less able to exert "moral pressure".
ie the depressing letter was going out anyway, but at least this way it did some good.
100 new scripted titles over the next three years that will “portray lives of people outside of London, for the nations”, including two long-running dramas – one from the north, one from the nations.
Sounds rather patronizing...by central decree, we need special programmes for those funny folk in the North, ee by gum, flat caps and whippets.
Surely the real issue is not whether the BBC reflects the nation, but that viewers are increasingly choosing non-British programmes on non-British services like Netflix, Disney+ and so on. That does not sound to me like a problem that is countered wth more regional production, because it seems people don't really care where the programmes come from as long as they are good. The BBC needs a plan to get a lot more money, to make a lot more high-cost programming, that makes the iPlayer competitive.
American programming is better quality, which hasn't always been the case.
The BBC needs to up its game. Not pander to regional box ticking.
The BBC can't afford to up its game - already it needs Amazon's money for a lot of it's fancier productions.
So all it can do is some regional box ticking while hoping moving outside London results in interesting program ideas that also attracts viewers.
They could afford to up its game by being smarter.
The BBC is a monolith now that is the true "Jack of All Trades" with what follows too.
The BBC should pick some good quality things to concentrate on and work on those, rather than trying to do everything.
A great example of this....BBC have bought the rights to second tier cage fighting, Bellator, then stuck it on iPlayer. Why are they getting involved with cage fighting, which is popular but still a very niche sport, are buying the rights to a second tier organisation and then sticking it hidden away on their streaming service. Its like buying the rights to the rugby union championship i.e. the one below the Premiership, only the hardcore of the hardcore are interested.
They are doing the same with buying rights to some minor e-sports events. Nobody into e-sports thinks BBC, they think Twitch.
They are trying to get involved in markets they don't understand, are niche, buying the secondary stuff and aren't where the hardcore fans would ever think of going for that coverage.
I am sure some committee have see these things are popular with da yuff and those funny working class folk, but they don't understand them.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Exactly. It is a brief moment, yet it is one of the purest examples of metropolitan sneering and London bubblethink that I've seen.
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
Leaving aside the flag debate, BBC critics tend to overstate the absence of the younger audience. It's declined, but still 2.5 hours a week in the 18-34 age group, with 56% of young viewers watching it at some time during the week. (For comparison, the 55+ age group are 13 hours and 92%). iplayer watching (which in my circle is the preferred mechanism for younger people) has gone through the roof at 3.5 billion, or a programme a week for everyone in Britain of any age, including infants.
Is that 2.5 hours a week for live telly - plus an indeterminate amount of iplayer?
I don't have anyone in my house in the 18-34 category. Those in the U18 category don't watch TV at all. They watch youtube, or Netflix. Those of us in our 40s watch TV almost entirely through the medium of catch-up - though we might get drawn into something after watching whatever we were watching on catchup. Last night I watched my first bit of live BBC1 this year. It fell into the category above - programme on catchup finished (Police Interceptors, would you believe - who catch-ups that? It's never not on. A small guilty pleasure.) and it turns out there's a Bill Bailey stand-up show on BBC1. I have honestly never laughed so hard in my life. I'd forgotten the BBC could do funny. Still a mad dash to turn over at 10pm before the news though!
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Exactly. It is a brief moment, yet it is one of the purest examples of metropolitan sneering and London bubblethink that I've seen.
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
What rubbish!
And they pay you to write......
Roger, you might think it rubbish but I have never liked the BBC since it went all.PC Wokish... I dislike it intensely now. They have announcers who say "free" instead of three and the spoken word is going all Eastenders. I won't watch BBC news either and prefer ITV. The only think left worth watching is BBC 4. I cannot wait for the licence to be abolished. Let them take ads to pay for the crap they are offering.
American programming is better quality, which hasn't always been the case.
The BBC needs to up its game. Not pander to regional box ticking.
I'm not against more regional production or programming, but I don't see how it will help deal with the problems the BBC faces. Things like, the switch away from broadcasting to streaming, the switch by viewers from national to global services, and the power of the funding those global services can draw on.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Exactly. It is a brief moment, yet it is one of the purest examples of metropolitan sneering and London bubblethink that I've seen.
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
Leaving aside the flag debate, BBC critics tend to overstate the absence of the younger audience. It's declined, but still 2.5 hours a week in the 18-34 age group, with 56% of young viewers watching it at some time during the week. (For comparison, the 55+ age group are 13 hours and 92%). iplayer watching (which in my circle is the preferred mechanism for younger people) has gone through the roof at 3.5 billion, or a programme a week for everyone in Britain of any age, including infants.
It's still a huge drop tho. When I were a lad the whole family watched the BBC, and we watched LOTS. 3 hours a day on average? Even in my 20s I watched 1-2 hours a day, average, I'd guess. Some days none but other days many hours - especially sports, news, documentaries and comedy
This probably did not change until the internet really kicked in. Now my consumption is minimal. I don't listen to BBC radio, I have largely stopped using the BBC website as it is so dumbed down
I watch quite lot of other TV. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Apple TV, some Sky (sports mainly), Youtube.
But overall my TV consumption is down, in all forms, and the BBC is the most reduced.
Why would you take the word of the Health Secretary speaking in the House of Commons, when you could instead just ingest @Leon's conspiracy theories?
To be fair I did admit it was a conspiracy theory, and I said I was "wearing my tin foil trilby"
It was also an enormous coincidence, that the EU made its vaccine embargo threats on the day the UK admitted it was suddenly facing a future vaccine shortfall.
Or was it coincidence? I don't like coincidences.
Someone wondered last night if the government sent out that letter yesterday, BECAUSE of the EU threats. "Look, we don't have any vaccines anyway", is a good riposte to the EU mafia. They are less able to exert "moral pressure".
ie the depressing letter was going out anyway, but at least this way it did some good.
Plausible
I just did some simple maths on second vaccinations - take the first vaccinations that have been administered, and shift the number forward.
Look likes at least 10 million second vaccinations required in April.
It's not my area, but the idea that teenagers and those in their 20s are going to watch it on the BBC rather than, as you say, through Twitch is perhaps optimistic.
I occasionally catch bits of the news on the BBC. And that's it.
Tbh looking at the remaining over 50s to be done, combined with the incoming needed 2nd dose surge that is a hefty amount to get through if supply is constrained.
That's really pretty bad. Make a joke, sure, yay, sense of humour.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
It is a bit weird though. What kind of person has a picture of the Queen on the wall?
He's not at home, he's in an office (in Whitehall?). I imagine loads of government offices have flags and pix of the Queen, it's normal.
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
I'm also struck by the assumption that everyone shares their views - that anyone watching the BBC would find it laughably gauche to be associated with the union flag and/or the queen. I can imagine how you might put a case that it is. But you wouldn't expect a national broadcaster to necessarily expect its audience to start from that point of view.
Even the sanest posters are turning into Stanley Baker in Zulu. That's what Brexit does to you.....
You haven't seen Zulu have you?
Stanley Baker is the engineer who famously holds his nerve, and stays sane to the end, when all around are cracking up.
Comments
So yes the EU did it.
The US export ban was put in place before the contracts were, so countries placed their contracts knowing the ban was in place. That's different to taking orders and then banning them.
Really?
"Italy is the first EU country to use the bloc's new regulations allowing exports to be stopped if the company providing the vaccines has failed to meet its obligations to the EU."
"Australia said losing "one shipment" would not badly affect its rollout.
"But it has asked the European Commission, which reportedly backs Italy's move, to review the decision."
"On the ethics of law-breaking:
“I feel sad that we have the kind of laws which public-spirited people may need to break. I have always taken a line on this, which is probably different from that of most of my former colleagues. I do not believe that there is a moral obligation to obey the law… You have to have a high degree of respect, both for the object that the law is trying to achieve, and for the way that it’s been achieved. Some laws invite breach. I think this is one of them.”"
https://unherd.com/2021/03/lord-sumption-civil-disobedience-has-begun/
No problem blaming the EU, I'm not a fan, just find the hyperbolic reactions on here hypocritical and illogical.
Strasbourg Syndrome. Defend the EU at all costs, even if it makes you look a twat. Classic example
https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1372547615200579591?s=20
Sorry but them's the rules.
You know what, I give up. There is no point in arguing with people who have The Syndrome. It's a form of madness, so I am arguing with a madman, which makes me, in turn, a bit mad. Enuff
The EU cannot force a country to not export the vaccines, it can merely give it the powers.
@MaxPB has made a very strong case about why Belgium - with its big Pharmaceutical manufacturing base - will not limit exports. Italy, which has very little (if any) high value pharma, will make a different calculation.
But completely exonerating the EU when it is an EU law made by EU MEPs and EU Commissioners, being applied inside the EU by an EU member for the benefit of the EU, I mean, Jesus.
Q: What does Las Vegas and Glasgow have in common?
A: Only places in the world you can use to chips to pay for sex.
https://twitter.com/DarrenEuronews/status/1372526786781851648
Italy (like us) is a sovereign nation. It can do whatever it goddamn pleases. And did, in this instance. It could, I daresay (IANAEUL) have done it with or without the EU's blessing.
https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1372549850315821062?s=20
But I'm coming to feel that the incessant snipes and jokes from certain PBers about military invasion of a part of the UK are not only tiresome 'banter' but also getting in the way of genuinely interesting discussion - I for one have had to rethink some of my notions after comments from several quarters today.
This is a PB website. Not an alternative history military fanzine.
Leon, with a slam dunk quote from the BBC: "it was Italy"
Is certainly one route whereon madness lies.
But one, it just isn't funny, it's odd.
And, two, the sneering tone? And the woman sneering at the picture of the Queen? And the nervous sneering chortles in the studio.
Fuck the BBC.
Every time something like this happens, the BBC dies a bit more. It is determined to drive itself over a cliff.
(with apologies to Big G)
It is also normal for politicians to appear with the flag behind them, in all nations. Sturgeon does it all the time, note. The EU has about 300 flags and motifs in every shot. France, America, they all do it.
But the one that gets sneered at is the Union Jack. They would never sneer at any other, least of all, perhaps, a Scottish or Welsh flag.
It is vastly trivial, but it is one more tiny brick in the tomb the BBC is hastily building for itself.
This is a Government building. You will see frequent images of the Queen, as well as flags, in Government buildings. It's not Robert Jenrick's personal boudoir. See also police stations.
https://order-order.com/2021/03/18/tim-davie-announces-today-programme-and-newsnight-will-begin-broadcasting-from-outside-london/
Sounds rather patronizing...by central decree, we need special programmes for those funny folk in the North, ee by gum, flat caps and whippets.
b) are you sure it needed the EU for Italy to do this?
https://theconversation.com/covid-vaccines-is-it-legal-for-the-eu-to-restrict-exports-154527
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_1121
The stars of Channel 4's Gogglebox teared into Meghan Markle as they watched her blockbuster interview with Oprah Winfrey, joking that she should 'get a job in the gift shop' to pay for her security after it was removed.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9375685/Ofcom-receives-51-complaints-Googlebox-viewers-watching-Meghan-Markle-interview.html
The reaction is from the innate immune system (non-specific, general defences) tooling up to attack the invaders with generic defences (eg cytokine).
The protection comes from the acquired immune system tooling up with tailored antibodies and T-cells that target covid specifically.
NB - there can also be a reaction if you already have antibodies targeting covid from infection; that’s a special case).
As I got jabbed 5 hours ago, I’d prefer to know if there was a way to tell in advance (I feel fine so far, but most people who report the flu-like reaction say it happens the following day) and if it meant anything, but sadly it doesn’t seem to.
Or was the nasty old EU making them do it?
I will not engage with you further until you revert to sanity. Which might be like waiting for unlockdowning, a goal that forever recedes into the near future
The BBC forgets that it is mainly watched by the middle aged and the old in the provinces. A conservative audience. It has already been abandoned by the young and urban.
So it does its best to alienate the dwindling viewers it still has? Genius.
NB - I am by no means an immunologist, nor do I play one on TV, and the above could easily be bollocks.
The party said it took claims of sexual harassment "extremely seriously".
In September 2019, while Jeremy Corbyn was Labour leader, Mr Hill was suspended from the party following an accusation of sexual harassment.
He denied the allegation, which was later dropped , and had the whip reinstated.
Farore Law, the firm managed by Ms McKie, said the Labour Party had a duty of care, but that both Mr Corbyn and current leader Sir Keir Starmer had failed to offer support to its client. It said the claimant had "experienced significant distress, lost employment, and had not had access to counselling".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-tees-56436341
Perhaps I missed something.
And they pay you to write......
I can only imagine what the well known always neutral Indian cricket commentators are saying about that.
» show previous quotes
Yes. It's a hard thing to say about a company that has done great work developing an effective vaccine that doesn't have the same storage issues as some others. But their production side is different from product development, and they've over-promised and under-delivered on that front, quite clearly.
The vaccine was developed by Oxford University - AZ were brought in to take it to industrial production and distribution. They're doing it for free, so not reasonable to go too hard, but at this point they do seem to have done a terrible expectations management job if nothing else.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-48840138#:~:text=There is no question that,by 16-34 year olds.
The BBC needs to up its game. Not pander to regional box ticking.
So all it can do is some regional box ticking while hoping moving outside London results in interesting program ideas that also attracts viewers.
That's not overstating it, it is an existential crisis for Auntie.
A programme a week does not sound much either for iPlayer. I'd imagine Netflix averages over a programme a week.
And of course YouTube will be producing 100000s of hours of content every single day, which the yuff watch morning, noon and night.
The BBC boss decreeing we need a "northern" show or two is fiddling while Rome burns.
The BBC is a monolith now that is the true "Jack of All Trades" with what follows too.
The BBC should pick some good quality things to concentrate on and work on those, rather than trying to do everything.
It was also an enormous coincidence, that the EU made its vaccine embargo threats on the day the UK admitted it was suddenly facing a future vaccine shortfall.
Or was it coincidence? I don't like coincidences.
Someone wondered last night if the government sent out that letter yesterday, BECAUSE of the EU threats. "Look, we don't have any vaccines anyway", is a good riposte to the EU mafia. They are less able to exert "moral pressure".
ie the depressing letter was going out anyway, but at least this way it did some good.
Plausible
They are doing the same with buying rights to some minor e-sports events. Nobody into e-sports thinks BBC, they think Twitch.
They are trying to get involved in markets they don't understand, are niche, buying the secondary stuff and aren't where the hardcore fans would ever think of going for that coverage.
I am sure some committee have see these things are popular with da yuff and those funny working class folk, but they don't understand them.
I don't have anyone in my house in the 18-34 category. Those in the U18 category don't watch TV at all. They watch youtube, or Netflix. Those of us in our 40s watch TV almost entirely through the medium of catch-up - though we might get drawn into something after watching whatever we were watching on catchup.
Last night I watched my first bit of live BBC1 this year. It fell into the category above - programme on catchup finished (Police Interceptors, would you believe - who catch-ups that? It's never not on. A small guilty pleasure.) and it turns out there's a Bill Bailey stand-up show on BBC1. I have honestly never laughed so hard in my life. I'd forgotten the BBC could do funny.
Still a mad dash to turn over at 10pm before the news though!
This probably did not change until the internet really kicked in. Now my consumption is minimal. I don't listen to BBC radio, I have largely stopped using the BBC website as it is so dumbed down
I watch quite lot of other TV. Netflix, Amazon Prime, Apple TV, some Sky (sports mainly), Youtube.
But overall my TV consumption is down, in all forms, and the BBC is the most reduced.
Look likes at least 10 million second vaccinations required in April.
It's not my area, but the idea that teenagers and those in their 20s are going to watch it on the BBC rather than, as you say, through Twitch is perhaps optimistic.
I occasionally catch bits of the news on the BBC. And that's it.
I think one Question Time a few months ago. Before that the 2019 General Election maybe.
Stanley Baker is the engineer who famously holds his nerve, and stays sane to the end, when all around are cracking up.
lol