Mailwatch(ed) Forum

The thought occurs: is all this Trump stuff, also an underhand attempt to bring in some "ground rules", to pre-empt the Epstein dam finally breaking.

Do these "Epstein Files" even exist? Like that mythical video tape?

Or are they a dream caused by eating too much blue cheese before bedtime?

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Nov 11, 2025 11:29 am A man has a take. As someone BTL says, this is like saying "fantastic, the Tories are disappearing".

These shortcomings are not the reasons for the attack on the BBC but what they dont do enough of. Which is intense scrutiny of demagogues used to basking in the applause of their supporters rather than being challenge. Its not just the BBC in the sights of the far right but all reputable news gathering organisations. Witness Farage yesterday getting techy at a Sky reporter questioning his friend of the worker credentials.

To use an analogy, if someone's trying to crash your house party, letting them in won't turn them into the perfect guest. They'll just use your phone to call their mates round to wreck the place because the soft cunt won't fight back.

Maybe the BBC could stop reporting on Trump, no one would miss the news items about whatever written shite hes written that day on truth social.

FFS. "Prorogation" wasn't a coup. The Government won the case in the lower courts.

Apologies for reminding everyone of the existence of Liz. Here she is with that straight talking common sense which today's young people, with their media studies degrees, don't have. "It's in the Telegraph!"

Heavyweight jurist pronounces, invoking the timeless legal principle that the side he dislikes automatically loses.

Christ, these fucking people. These terrible fucking people.

Who let the cunts out - who who!

Please read Dorian Lynskey’s assessment .

https://www.thenerve.news/p/bbc-tim-da ... 3c7a23fc28

One of the foundational errors this Labour government made was passively inheriting a slate of Tory appointees to public bodies, including the BBC, but I think Gibb has badly overplayed his hand. Culture secretary Lisa Nandy now has a choice. She can continue to allow the BBC to be sabotaged by rightwing activists who despise, among other things, the Labour party. Or she can, as far as her powers allow, wrest the corporation back from the pernicious influence of people like Gibb, strengthen its independence, and let the BBC breathe again.

The big challenge for that to happen is, who could take that on, and be “acceptable” to all

Watchman wrote: ↑Tue Nov 11, 2025 9:40 pm The big challenge for that to happen is, who could take that on, and be “acceptable” to all

GARY LINEKER

Abernathy wrote: ↑Tue Nov 11, 2025 7:18 pm Please read Dorian Lynskey’s assessment .

https://www.thenerve.news/p/bbc-tim-da ... 3c7a23fc28

One of the foundational errors this Labour government made was passively inheriting a slate of Tory appointees to public bodies, including the BBC, but I think Gibb has badly overplayed his hand. Culture secretary Lisa Nandy now has a choice. She can continue to allow the BBC to be sabotaged by rightwing activists who despise, among other things, the Labour party. Or she can, as far as her powers allow, wrest the corporation back from the pernicious influence of people like Gibb, strengthen its independence, and let the BBC breathe again.

Hasn't Nandy already said she'll do nothing about Gibb?

Boiler wrote: ↑Tue Nov 11, 2025 10:28 pm

Abernathy wrote: ↑Tue Nov 11, 2025 7:18 pm Please read Dorian Lynskey’s assessment .

https://www.thenerve.news/p/bbc-tim-da ... 3c7a23fc28

One of the foundational errors this Labour government made was passively inheriting a slate of Tory appointees to public bodies, including the BBC, but I think Gibb has badly overplayed his hand. Culture secretary Lisa Nandy now has a choice. She can continue to allow the BBC to be sabotaged by rightwing activists who despise, among other things, the Labour party. Or she can, as far as her powers allow, wrest the corporation back from the pernicious influence of people like Gibb, strengthen its independence, and let the BBC breathe again.

Hasn't Nandy already said she'll do nothing about Gibb?

She's said she can't.

"The culture secretary, Lisa Nandy, said there was a “strict legal threshold that must be met before dismissal of a board member”, adding that she could not remove Gibb. She condemned attempts to launch a “sustained attack” on the BBC."

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/ ... ters-board

Other media outlets can be as gleeful as they like, but what happens if he won and they're next?

davidjay wrote: ↑Tue Nov 11, 2025 10:53 pm Other media outlets can be as gleeful as they like, but what happens if he won and they're next?

I think GBNews is probably the only other British broadcaster he's heard of.

I find the newsagents prone to taking the worst angles on contemporary news.

It's always:
* Who spun it best.
* Who just employed a former news editor.
* Did (politician) pull off a cunning rhetorical trick.

I suppose the podcast's name is a give away.

I find the total bypass of what actually happened, on whose agenda, who benefits and who suffers extremely frustrating.
It leaves the impression of a bunch of yah's taking a flutter on the gee gees.

This is surely the right thing for the Beeb to do. Full Arkell vs. Pressdram. Trump Always Chickens Out.