Making the news today....

[Stere]

Hes abit of putin lover/apologizer old chomsky.

 

Quote

While Chomsky has been a clear and much-needed critic of American imperialism over the last 50 years, his reluctance to recognize similarly imperialistic inclinations in Vladimir Putin’s Russia has been frustrating to many of his admirers.

 

 

[difflock]

3 hours ago, Mark J said:

Yes Channel 4 is self funding, they buy/commission tv shows and films from independent media companies, if channel 4 was to go then these independent companies will lose a large chunk of their revenue, hence the anticipated loss of 2,400 jobs and 60 companies. 

Life would be pretty dull without art: no music, no films, no painting, no photography, no architecture, no design... 
Art enriches us all culturally, whether you like it or not. 

Let the private sector pay, they like flaunting their wealth, and what better way to allow them to do so.

Hey, even give them tax credits towards their donations.

Gubbermint is a fornicating wasteful shambles in this respect, especially with the subs to the Ophra!

To benefit their muckers, an Labour are ever bit as bad.

Edited April 7, 2022 by difflock

[Stere]

 

 

Im sure by making it private they hope to get rid of any goverment  crtical media

 

Why Channel 4 privatisation is an attack on media freedom

WWW.OPENDEMOCRACY.NET

---

The government’s actions echo the behaviour of populists elsewhere in the world. But there’s a twist

 

 

 

[Mark J]

31 minutes ago, difflock said:

Let the private sector pay, they like flaunting their wealth, and what better way to allow them to do so.

Hey, even give them tax credits towards their donations.

Gubbermint is a ****************ing wasteful shambles in this respect, especially with the subs to the Ophra!

To benefit their muckers, an Labour are ever bit as bad.

The point is that Channel 4 generate enough money to pay for these things.

In terms of government funding and support initiatives, do you think they stop funding sports too?

 

Edited April 7, 2022 by Mark J

[difflock]

7 hours ago, Mark J said:

The point is that Channel 4 generate enough money to pay for these things.

In terms of government funding and support initiatives, do you think they stop funding sports too?

 

Yes, absolutely.

Why fund "sports"?

Like I need a smallbore rifle range, but the Government will not fund it nor subsidize my shooting.

So why does football be so heavily subsidized ( you ANY idea what it takes to provide and maintain a Council pitch and changing rooms?) , especially when there are multi millionaire football clubs and multimillionaire  football players that should well be able to fund their "beloved" game?

Hmmmm,

I just remembered the Soviets were big into their state sponsered football clubs, something to do with distracting the proletariat from their woeful plight I suppose.

Edited April 7, 2022 by difflock

[Mark J]

3 hours ago, difflock said:

Yes, absolutely.

Why fund "sports"?

Like I need a smallbore rifle range, but the Government will not fund it nor subsidize my shooting.

So why does football be so heavily subsidized ( you ANY idea what it takes to provide and maintain a Council pitch and changing rooms?) , especially when there are multi millionaire football clubs and multimillionaire  football players that should well be able to fund their "beloved" game?

Fair enough.

Do you think that we should sell channel 4?
 

We, the public, own Channel 4. And this sell-off isn’t a done deal | Armando Iannucci | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Why is the government intent on ruining our world-leading TV industry, asks Royal Television Society vice-president...

 

[PeteB]

78,000 Non Doms......I wonder how many are supporters/sponsors of other parties, but then again, that isn't newsworthy as knocking someone who, in their mind, is trying hard in their job to do well for the country.

[Woodworks]

7 hours ago, difflock said:

Yes, absolutely.

Why fund "sports"?

Like I need a smallbore rifle range, but the Government will not fund it nor subsidize my shooting.

So why does football be so heavily subsidized ( you ANY idea what it takes to provide and maintain a Council pitch and changing rooms?) , especially when there are multi millionaire football clubs and multimillionaire  football players that should well be able to fund their "beloved" game?

Hmmmm,

I just remembered the Soviets were big into their state sponsered football clubs, something to do with distracting the proletariat from their woeful plight I suppose.

I thought sports were funded  to encourage participation and in turn improving our health.

 

As a nation we are in pretty poor shape already without making sport out of reach of many due to cost.

[Mesterh]

12 minutes ago, Woodworks said:

I thought sports were funded  to encourage participation and in turn improving our health.

 

As a nation we are in pretty poor shape already without making sport out of reach of many due to cost.

Well said.

 

 

[daveatdave]

22 hours ago, Mark J said:

very political Tracy Brabin is a ex labor MP who quit her job to take on the role of Mayor with a £120,000 salary plus expenses