Is this news?

This is the 3rd headline on the BBC news site:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8335793.stm
Normally I'd ignore this sort of thing, but can't believe the BBC actually thinks this is a very newsworthy story. :roll:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8335793.stm
Normally I'd ignore this sort of thing, but can't believe the BBC actually thinks this is a very newsworthy story. :roll:
0
Posts
This really struck me a couple of years ago when the 10 o'clock news spent at least 5 mins reporting the troubles of Britney Spears. I used to have 5live on in the background a fair bit as its daily info was fairly informative but I don't bother anymore as it has got sucked into the intellecutal void of discussing things like strictly come dancing and x-factor on a regular basis. Time to rethink the license fee in my opinion.
It's another example of the meaningless, hollow, self absorbed, celebrity based, inconsequential sh*te that the world seems to absorb at an alarming rate these days.
Then again I am an old folically challenged git who would rather meet a few friends in the pub and enjoy their company than sit up all night "socializing" on Facebebospace thingy.
Did I just say that after posting on a cycling forum at 11pm on a Saturday night.........doh !
Rant over :oops:
Need to lie down now
Ride Daily, Keep Healthy
This is about as much 'news' as the 'news' that Stephen Fry is considering wiping his backside with the opposite hand next time he takes a dump (that might not be news, I might have made that up as an example). I mean, why is his 'considering' leaving twitter in any way something I need to know about let alone PAY to know about. Here in lies the source of my ire. As one who pays for a TV Licence, which is used to fund the BBC, I am paying the wages of the idiots who are clearly making work for themselves by writing stories like this. Maybe if the Beeb had to source its funding from commercial organisations like the rest of its competitors, perhaps someone holding the purse strings would recognise the waste of space that clearly exists in the organisation and we wouldn't get drivel like this. :evil:
No, we'd get more drivel like this, because stories like that are cheap, and only require one person sitting behind a desk with an internet connection.
If the BBC was forced to source its funding from commercial organisations like the rest of its competitors, what we WOULDN'T get is all the quality (ie expensive) stuff like the new David Attenborough series, or Natural World, or drama like Doctor Who or Life on Mars or Little Dorrit. When was the last time you saw a wildlife documentary on ITV? Katie and Peter: The Next Chapter does not count.
keep 'em dumb and under control...
David
Well said. BBC Breakfast keeps having exactly those sorts of self-publicising segments during the course of nearly every morning. :evil:
David
Someone at the Beeb would probably argue that the commercial channels use ad breaks as a similar form of 'padding', I guess.
David
The Grauniad is absolutely obsessed with twitter - hardly a week goes by without some feature on there.
Even Mr Fry himself is a bit baffled. This quote from The Guardian (obviously...) "OK, this is where things get seriously scary. For a major newspaper to pick up a spat between users of an ultimately insignificant glorified chat room is absolutely mind-boggling. To make a national (and international) story of it is beyond silliness. I really would have thought that there were far more important things in news generally, and the tech sector in particular, to talk about?"
True... But I'm not paying for the Guardian to publish that.
@gietvangent