More filler on the BBC.....

[Robches]

What I hate about TV news on all channels is when they do pointless "reconstrcutions". Let's say two terrorists met in a car park, they don't have any actual footage, so they film two dodgy looking blokes meeting in a car park. For fuck's sake, I know what a bloody car park looks like, and I know what two blokes talking look like. If you haven't got any real footage, don't try and make it up. It's just a way of them showing that they think their viewers are morons who can't follow a story unless there are pictures to back it up.

[Robches]

Amen to that. It riles me when they "go to our Westminster correspondent", so that we see some poor schmuck stood in the rain outside Number Ten, with a full outside broadcast crew, telling us something he could just as easily, and cheaply, said from the studio. They think we are so stupid that if we see their reporter in front of Number Ten we will think their man is in the information loop, and is bringing us the hot news, rather than just regurgitating whatever press handout the government's press office has just given him.

[The Last Word]

Sam Slater wrote:

> It's raw with a hint of anger & frustration..............bang on for a young -working class- band.

And if they weren't such a middle class idea of what a working class band should be, they might actually have something to say. Presently, however, they have nothing to say.

[Lizard]

The Mad monk wrote

"Btw TV people think that the public are all as stupid as they are, sharing their little obsessions about how goddamm well important TV is...."


Sadly Keith the majority of the public are.

[Sam Slater]

[quote]You think Oasis was a break-through band? ha ha ha ha ha They got signed because they're so derivative... Listen to the guitar riffs on Abbey Road near the end of the B side and then listen to Oasis some 23 years later.....[/quote]

I wasn't judging Oasis on guitar riffs, but on the affect their music had on the populace at the time. Fucking overwhelming.

[quote]The difference between the file-sharing/downloading era and the era where people actually went out of their houses to buy a single and then an album meant that people had to actually go out and buy units, which meant that they had to be really quite motivated.[/quote]

Wrong..........totally. If the 1960's youth had file sharing they'd have used it. They didn't pop to the music store through pure motivation, but through no other alternative. Also due to viruses, adware, differing software, drivers, memory & cpu usage, compatibility issues, download times and costs, digital formats, bit rates, along with purchasing a pc and learning how to use it, you could say music downloading takes more motivation and dedication !laugh!

I judge music by it's effect, not the technicalities. It's an art after all.