Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by ECCOnoob

  1. You must be joking. Morgan is one of the biggest two-faced backstabbing fakers of the lot. Crawling up someone's back side one-minute whenever it suits his ego or boosts his profile and then at the flip of a coin he is laying into them all over the screen and social media because they did or said something he didn't like. That's behavioral traits he was notorious for even back in his gutter press days. People go on about how great it is that he "speaks his mind" if that's a good thing. Donald Trump speaks his mind, Katie Hopkins speaks her mind, Jesus even Adolf Hitler spoke his mind but I doubt we'll have many on here praising him for being outspoken and to the point. Morgan is an ego filled narcissistic bully with a long-standing history of extremely vile, aggressive and vindictive actions against people or organisations he decided he doesn't like. After the insider share dealing, phone hacking, fake photographs, public spats online, trolling and of course unprofessional childish on-air walkout scandals its a absolute disgrace that this creature was given any form of public platform let alone still being hired to be the face of a TV networks. My only hope is that one day he well and truly gets what he deserves.
  2. Why on earth would there be wearing masks? They are in their place of work. They're office. A meeting room. I certainly dont walk around wearing a mask all day in the office and neither do I suspect do millions of the people who have returned to work. They are not in some high-risk clinical setting. They are not open to the public with exposure to hundreds or thousands of different people constantly all day. Like lots of other organisations they will have other precautionary steps, enhanced cleaning and hygiene regimes and the sensibilities that on the sight of any symptoms they immediately go back and isolate. Another desperate excuse for a bit more Tory bashing. Why don't you dig out a picture of Starmer's shadow cabinet meetings. You going to tell me they're all sat 2-m apart in full hazmat suits 🙄
  3. Dear me Murdoch is as deluded as Morgan. No dear every channel does not want him. Can't wait to see this car crash happening. Have they not seen GB News start on a low point and continue to bury itself in the core of the Earth. Oh well, at least it will hopefullt get him off mainstream TV and into the obscurity of the back end of the channel list where he belongs.
  4. Not at all. But as someone who has been involved in community projects in the past and still does committee stuff for charities I often get very frustrated when people start doing a load of armchair criticisms, and having a go at something groups have worked hard to establish, without fully understanding its purpose and aims. Like I keep saying, if people feel its poor quality and they could do better, the opportunities are there. Get on with it. Assuming since you cannot "be bothered" to reply my to my post you will not be one of those. I'm sure people will make up their own minds. I just like them to have the full context and understanding before they do.
  5. Because it's supposed to be about giving a platform for the minority voices who are generally overlooked. It is supposed to be a community station run and fronted by members of the community. It is not about making money or becoming some superstar status. You are right, people can chase the money and fame offered by platforms such as YouTube but don't think for a second they won't face the same if not even more strict levels of control, rejection and overrule. Don't think for a minute that out of the thousands of thousands of YouTubers uploading everyday they are all making comfortable living out of it. In fact for many it's net deficit. It's even worse as there is so little human control and more by the might of the algorithm. If they are not producing the type of populist content that the algorithm mysteriously and totally randomly computes is attractive to advertisers you watch how much quicker they will fade into obscurity. Yes of course Sheff TV has to have some form of pitching and control and audition but that is because they are bound by the broadcast regulations just like any other network. However let's think beyond just money. Like many voluntary projects it is about someone's passion, someone's interest or just reaching out to a slightly wider audience. Not everyone has the internet, as people keep saying on this forum, and this offers a smaller more bespoke platform those people but still with a potentially wide audience capture. It can offer real local news which is not coming from some journalist phoning it in from the other side of Leeds (or in some cases on Commercial local radio literally google searching for the town location and picking the top 2 stories while sitting in some centralised news centre in London). It can also offer a great opportunity for anyone with an interest in film or Media to hone some of their skills in a real live studio setting. I emphasize again, it is supposed to be about a community service. It never is or was intended to be some genuine rival to ITV or Netflix. Regardless, the simple point is that instead of people sitting there whinging and moaning about the channel content, they can get off their backsides and go produce something themselves if they think it's so easy. That is the whole point about open access.
  6. Its a not-for-profit community station Go ahead and submit a pitch for your own show if you feel its not delivering what people want and could do better. That is partly what it's all supposed to be about. Open access for the local community. https://web.sheffieldlive.org/get-involved/
  7. Given Neil was one of the founders who set up the station and heavily promoted it... he clearly did want to be associated with it if it was successful. I remember lots of big noises coming out of the Chief Gammon banging on about how different the shows would be, abour how they get into the 'real' issues that people want to hear about, being the voice of the Nation currently ignored by the mainstream media blah blah blah. Less than a month ago said person was venomously defending all these rumours and gossips and speculations about him not returning. Fully supporting the station and what it stood for Just what exactly did the Moron think was going to happen when you start recruiting right wing, inexperienced or confrontational presenters and 24 hours of non stop talking and opinion without any actual news bulletins. I think coward is a perfect choice of word for him. He thought he was going to be Mr Big bringing the alternative and giving a real shake up to the mainstream platforms and fell on his backside. Neil was happy to heavily criticise his former employers (despite the fact he made good money out of them for decades). Now his little pet project spectacularly failed and he doesn't even have the guts to admit it's gone wrong. Even now still making pathetic excuses that he is not walking fully away and will still be on screen occasionally. It's embarrassing. I feel really sorry for the couple of legitimate journalists who followed Neil and we're talked into going to that shower. McCoy has got to be next to ditch them.
  8. The people are consenting to it. They consent to it everytime they sign up to a newsletter to get a 20% discount. They consent to it everytime they sign up to a free Wi-Fi service in a store or train station or shopping centre. They consent to it through their home broadband service..... oh, they may think that they have a right to privacy but at the end of the day it is not their network - it is not there server - it is not their broadband. They are renting it from somebody else who behind the scenes has full control to track monitor and observe anything that happens on that network. It's all there in black and white. Set out in the contract information. All explained in the terms and conditions agreement. But I bet most people don't bother looking at it before they hit the big green accept button. Many years ago they tried to restrict what companies could do with their use of sneaky cookies. When GDPR came into force they actually took quite a hard line over here and msde it very clear that companies have to get your consent for when they want to use tracking. That resulted in every single website and every single page popping up with annoying banbers asking you to consent or opt-out or select what levels of cookies and tracking you wish them to have..... what happened after 5-minutes, people got so fed up with it they just fell back into the habit of just hitting the I accept all button. Trying to control companies is one thing but actually getting joe public to pay attention and give a toss is an even bigger thing.
  9. The redeveloped Market Hall. It's on the main street and replaced the old Metropolitan Centre building. It's had its soft opening but is still a long way from finished with many of its leisure facility still to be built. Also as with most of these redevelopments, four or five of the shops I have seen on the tenant list are simply moving from other locations in the town including Next, TK Maxx and SportsDirect. That's some quite big hole being left elsewhere. From what I've seen it is nice enough and a freshening up of the area but I wouldn't be making any special trip to it yet unless you are in town anyway. It's really not worth it.
  10. What you mean like condensing the market and shops together into one place? Last time I looked that's exactly what they've done in the city. It was the entire plan of the new retail quarter and new market hall, which lets not forget, opened way back in 2013. Something which for some bizarre reason you have done nothing but moan about because it's not in your precious Castlegate. Seems to me like Barnsley is just playing catch up in the redevelopment game.
  11. THEY chose the time and date when to stage their protest. They only have themselves to blame for it turning out to be an embarrassing, pathetic flop which completely failed to have any impact. Enough with the excuses.
  12. Absolutely tragic. Seemed to be more journalists than protesters. I bet for most people who wandered by they will barely notice what was happening. So much for his 30,000 or so petition supporters. "....where are you..... let's be having you" as Delia used to shout. 0.06% turnout 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣. To think there are still people on this thread who remain in denial that all these so-called supporters were doing nothing that jumping on the bandwagon.
  13. What do you propose to do about it then? You say the public by their choice of government dictates what's a fair amount of tax that should be paid by a corporation....however you also complain that the public vote in their self-served interests. Do you propose morally blackmailing and harassing the public to vote the way that you deem is right? What makes your choice superior to anyone else's? Are you going to continue your cycle of enforcement and dictatorship on the rest of the world or does it just happen to our country. In which case, as I explained before, we risk fading into the background and getting overruled and overlooked by a different nation just ready and waiting to dominate and takeover our place on the global market.
  14. No no no. Let's not start muddling the issues. It is not about what someone arbitrary deems is fair or what someone morally believes these corporations should be paying. It is a simple response to matters of fact that these corporations do get taxed, pay their tax and therefore should not be shamed or blackmailed into paying more than what their legal duties says they have to do just because someone comes along and personally decides what they are paying isn't enough. Put bluntly, unless that someone is HMRC what the hell has it got to do with them. Yes of course they use reduction schemes or take advantage of multi-jurisdictional status. It's good business practice. They are there to make money. Businesses don't survive by handing over more money than they need to. Just exactly the same way that most average men and women in the street dont choose to overpay unless they had two. Consumers on the street shop around or go online to import from different countries or take advantage of sweatshop labour producing their bargain basement goods quite happily so what right do we got to be criticising corporations doing the same principles.
  15. They are taxed. It has been explained multiple times. You're deluded fantasy of some global utopia where all are equal and there is no competition and no advantages and no dominance it's quite frankly child dreams. It's business. In fact it's what all of us do all the time. We all take advantage of tax incentives, cheap labour, cheap deals, cheap products, savings schemes, charity donations, lotteries, gambling, employee benefits, carbon offset, home insulation and solar schemes, electric vehicle incentives, just a handful of the ways we all are at it. All jumping at the chance to reduce our liabilities to the taxman. Not a single one of us have a problem with exploiting the resources, materials, labour nor location if it means we can obtain service, goods or commodity for a reduced impact on our personal outlay. The amount of monies may be vastly different but the principles are still exactly the same between Joe Bloggs on the streets and the corporation of Amazon. These corporations became successful by being good businesses. The billionaire's became that way because they are good businessman. No matter how much you try and propose it nobody is going to be morally blackmailed into paying more than the law requires them to do so. No global nation is going to give up there chance of dominance by conforming to some universal, all equal, shared, flat rate circumstance. This is even more more prevalent in the developing Nations, where after years in the shadows, they are now rising an emerging as dominant powers of their own with some even starting to take over the established West. Do you think for one second they are going to give up such position after all these years and effort. Wealth is power. Money does make the world go around. Some people need to wake up and realise that.
  16. I think it's pretty obvious they wouldn't. Given capacity of the city hall is just over 2000 people that will be an awful lot of consecutive nights to fulfill the demand - which of course there isn't. I say again. Nothing more than a load of people jumping on the bandwagon because all they had to do was click on a mouse. It happens all the time of these online petitions. A tiny tiny number of people who actually give a toss, but then the media get hold of it and suddenly there's a surge of people all piling on.
  17. No. It makes the business liable for tax here. You talk as if the global corporation of Amazon is his own private business as a sole trader. It is ridiculous. Amazon are liable and have paid taxes here. A sum of over £18 million corporation tax alone. Add on all other taxes and its reported to be over £492 million. But of course there are plenty of those screaming it's never enough. Plenty of those demanding that somehow they should be morally blackmailed into paying more than the law dictates, just like the rest of us don't.
  18. The point is that a real fans will travel to see him so him losing out a Sheffield venue shouldn't be a problem they just go somewhere else. If they like his act that much they will put the effort in. They would have also been included in those early purchases, knowing that if he is so popular, as it is claimed to be, there would have been a real risk of him selling out. Morons clicking some link on the internet and creating a load of hot air about wokeness and political correctness and free speech are not doing any of the above. They are just using it to some bandwagon to further their own agenda. That is the difference.
  19. No he hasn't. He has 28000 people clicking some online form as a pathetic lazy protest about what they determine is a "ban on free speech" or "political correctness gone mad" or a load of "woke nonsense". Real fans buy tickets. They go to the gigs. They travel to see their favourite artists. As others have pointed out, the numbers of genuine fans i.e. those being given a refund are a world apart from the number of slacktivists online clicking some petition. 28k fans my backside.
  20. Do they? Where? How come they are still mega rich with their completely legal offshore arrangements, multi jurisdiction accounts and complex global corporate structures and subsidaries if its all so easy..... Anyone can sit there squawking "tax the rich". They do tax them. Anyone can demand "make them pay". They do make them. They pay what they law mandates they have to. Anyone can make pointless petitions to change the laws ......but think little of the consequences of such corporations being totally free to up sticks and go elsewhere....impacting our economy and decreasing our position on the global market. Anyone can demand a company "cuts their profits", but then what happens when such is followed by job cuts or slower growth..... how does that impact other parts of supply chain, other companies relying on supplying products to a larger one, their subsequent employees........on it goes Too many don't have the faintest idea of the complexities and potential wider fallout involved when they start spouting such simplistic gesturing.
  21. How does a hearing in a court of law in front of a judge with legal representation for both parties "cover up" mistakes from social services??? Both parties to the matter are present (either directly and/or through their nominated legal representative). Just because a judicial decision doesn't go someone's way is not automatically a cover up. I think you seem to be getting confused between a court of law and some sort of internal or government body enquiry. Despite what some people try to portray or the conspiracy theorists keep banging on, there is still separation between judiciary and government. Its for that reason why, for example, the might of the Home Office gets a dressing down when one of their key policies approved by Parliament suddenly gets cancelled by the judgement of say the Supreme Court. Yes I admit there are occasions in the family court where the parents are excluded but again, that is because the decision is being made on a very very complex issue regarding the welfare of a child. It needs to be done by a qualified professional without influence and emotive reactions from the parents. That is why these parties have legal representatives who can deal with such difficult circumstances without any such emotional interest. Transparency is all well and good but who exactly should have a right to know and more importantly why do they think they need to know. Reasonable knowledge of what is going on within such hearings in a can of worms. Does it extend to the grandparents, step parents, the cousins, the neighbours, the school teachers, the baby sitters, the seed donor... Where is actually does the end. "Interested parties" has already been well established in court policy.
  22. That I certainly would agree with. Bottomless pit is an understatement. I always find it quite interesting to do a quick google search of the words NHS crisis or NHS funding or or NHS pay strike or NHS privatisation threat or NHS brink of collapse....just to see how far back in time and how often we see the same regurgitated headlines, the same staged sad face photos from doctors and nurses, the same overdramatic narrative wording, the same hot air from talking head politicians and the same vox pops from morons in the street squawking ridiculous childish solutions like "tax the rich" Boy Who Cried Wolf syndrome. The whole organisation is massively overblown, overused, abused, mismanaged and quite frankly overprotected. Its needs an overhaul from top to bottom. A complete clear out of dead wood personnel, a tightening and penalisation of patients who deliberately or neglectful abuse their free healthcare privileges, a complete rollback of any ridiculous expensive partnership quangos or auxiliary services and stripping completely back to its original purpose of providing basic essential healthcare provisions. But of course, God help any government even attempting to hypothesise such ideas. They would be shouted down and burried before the words could even get out their mouths.
  23. I don't see the problem? Family courts are often dealing with extremely sensitive issues involving extremely vulnerable people. It shouldn't be open to the world to be coming in, intruding and likely disrupting what are already very contentious and often highly emotional proceedings. Family court is totally different to criminal or civil hearing. There is no public involvement or jury. It is down to a qualified and experienced judge to make a decision what is best for the parties' welfare free from any sort of influence, emotive or reactionary events surrounding. There are no 'secrets' to the parties actually involved. Closed hearings are not some great conspiracy. As far as anyone else not directly connected is concerned it should be none of their business. Sometimes hearings remain private for good reason.
  24. Yeah let's bring back Noel's House Party, 3-2-1, and Pets Win Prizes. That's the sort of highbrow quality productions we are all missing......not. It is not my taste but I certainly don't think Strictly is anywhere near the worst production at all. Particulararly having a look at some of ITVs output over the past few years. Let's not also not forget that Strictly is just a modernized version of itself, something that was equally extremely popular just as much back then. It is almost one of the anomalies. Personally I doubt that Saturday and Sunday night telly was much better back in the 'good old' days. We might have some familiarity and sweet nostalgia but was it really that good? Given that most of us had no choice but to watch it with only three or four channels it's bound to have some warping of whether it was actually decent. Ask yourself this, if back in the 80s and 90s you had streaming services and the internet offering the world at the click of a mouse - would really sit there and enjoy an episode of say, Game for a Laugh or Beedles About or Cannon and Ball or Bobby Davro show.
  25. Well you must like a lot of organ music and brass bands cos I've had a quick glance at the line up at Leeds Town Hall. Perhaps instead you are taking a broad brush approach and talking about all the venues in a city. Well I'm certainly not going to spend my evening trawling through all the listings for the arena and the theatres and the music venues but from my past experience most of the acts performing in Sheffield venues are mirrored across loads of other cities and vice versa. With the exception of perhaps Manchester and Birmingham who do get the odd exclusive headliners, most of the rest of the entertainment offerings across the country are pretty similar. That's why most comics or bands or plays have a tour date list which covers the same venues year after year. Ps. I note that neither your precious Leeds or Nottingham are showing your favourite comedian. Are you going to boycott them too?
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.