All that Jaz
 

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

On 29/12/2013 16:12, Bill Wright wrote:
Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

Bill



because they paid for it.

--
Gareth.
That fly.... Is your magic wand.

All that Jaz
 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources of news can
only be a good thing.

All that Jaz
 

Bill Wright wrote:

Does anyone know [...] why Al Jazeera occupies one of the prized HD
slots on UK terrestrial TV?

Prized? AIUI COM7 isn't full yet, COM8 is (or will soon be) available,
channels like Five and Film4 that arguably would benefit more from HD
aren't queueing up to pay ...

All that Jaz
 

In message , Scott
writes
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources of news can
only be a good thing.

There is quite a lot of alternative news and other items on Al Jazeera
(and on Russia Today) - stuff you (will) never get on the BBC or ITV.
--
Ian

All that Jaz
 

"the dog from that film you saw" wrote in
message ...
On 29/12/2013 16:12, Bill Wright wrote:
Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

Bill



because they paid for it.#

and more to the point

they offered to pay more than the next contestant, for it

All that Jaz
 

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV?

That's capitalism for you.

-- Richard

All that Jaz
 

Scott wrote:
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources of news can
only be a good thing.

You are obviously a Reithian, and to some extent so am I. "Don't give
them what they want, give them what (we the intelligensia) believe they
need."

However if you think the masses should be offered diverse news sources I
would have thought you'd want to spread the sources across the political
spectrum. I wonder if Fox News would be prepared to produce a UK
version, to balance the BBC News? Nothing too extreme of course:
'Telegraph' to balance 'Guardian'.

I wonder where Al Jaz would have figured if one of the TV listings mags
had conducted a poll of their readers: What extra channels would like
like in HD?

I must say Al Jaz's picture quality puts some other HD channels to shame.

It remains though, astonishing to someone brought up with the principles
of public service broadcasting that a minority interest foreign channel
gets such prominence.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

Andy Burns wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

Does anyone know [...] why Al Jazeera occupies one of the prized HD
slots on UK terrestrial TV?

Prized? AIUI COM7 isn't full yet, COM8 is (or will soon be) available,
channels like Five and Film4 that arguably would benefit more from HD
aren't queueing up to pay ...


And yet according to OFCOM spectrum is so very scarce. Like gold it is.
Hence we have no mux 7 or 8 on many transmitters for fear of CCI.

I think (incidentally) that Five will have to provide free HD before too
long. As more and more people get HD tellys they are going to lose
audience. I don't bother looking what's on Five (except I look for
fishing progs for father) because I can't see the point of watching SD
when there's more HD progs on than I have time for.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

tim..... wrote:

they offered to pay more than the next contestant, for it

And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 18:56:31 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Scott wrote:
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources of news can
only be a good thing.

You are obviously a Reithian, and to some extent so am I. "Don't give
them what they want, give them what (we the intelligensia) believe they
need."

Indeed, though I would not take it to extremes. There is room for
some light entertainment but not on a Sunday :-)

However if you think the masses should be offered diverse news sources I
would have thought you'd want to spread the sources across the political
spectrum. I wonder if Fox News would be prepared to produce a UK
version, to balance the BBC News? Nothing too extreme of course:
'Telegraph' to balance 'Guardian'.

Actually, I think such a channel would perform a more useful function
than some of the shopping channels!

I wonder where Al Jaz would have figured if one of the TV listings mags
had conducted a poll of their readers: What extra channels would like
like in HD?

I must say Al Jaz's picture quality puts some other HD channels to shame.

It remains though, astonishing to someone brought up with the principles
of public service broadcasting that a minority interest foreign channel
gets such prominence.

I would argue that Aljazeera qualifies as public service broadcasting.
After all, I am sure we would consider the BBC World Service to be a
public service broadcaster.

All that Jaz
 

On 29/12/2013 16:12, Bill Wright wrote:
Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.


It counters then BBCs very biased reporting and therefore plays a very
important part in British broadcasting.




--
mailto:news{at}admac(dot}myzen{dot}co{dot}uk

All that Jaz
 

Scott wrote:

Actually, I think such a channel would perform a more useful function
than some of the shopping channels!

They should be taken off.

I would argue that Aljazeera qualifies as public service broadcasting.
After all, I am sure we would consider the BBC World Service to be a
public service broadcaster.

It will be interesting to see what audience they get. Also, very
interesting to see if opinions about bias on the various news channels
start to develop amongst the great British public. At present I think
the majority take the BBC line as gospel, scarcely ever stopping to
wonder why the BBC news they are served sometimes seems at odds with the
world as they experience it (eg: the BBC's line on immigration 'it's a
good thing' versus everything their friends, relations and workmates say
'it's ruining the country'.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 19:09:53 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Scott wrote:

Actually, I think such a channel would perform a more useful function
than some of the shopping channels!

They should be taken off.

I would argue that Aljazeera qualifies as public service broadcasting.
After all, I am sure we would consider the BBC World Service to be a
public service broadcaster.

It will be interesting to see what audience they get. Also, very
interesting to see if opinions about bias on the various news channels
start to develop amongst the great British public. At present I think
the majority take the BBC line as gospel, scarcely ever stopping to
wonder why the BBC news they are served sometimes seems at odds with the
world as they experience it (eg: the BBC's line on immigration 'it's a
good thing' versus everything their friends, relations and workmates say
'it's ruining the country'.

Indeed, I have concerns about the BBC though I think they are probably
more selective than biased. I like to get my news from more than one
source.

All that Jaz
 

And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

You may well think so but Parliament is not obliged to agree - eg if you
decide to start broadcasting "Wright is Right" 24/7 on all muxes ;)

In any event, I am a little surprised you subscribe to the "public
ownership of the airwaves" concept which I thought largely an invention
of the left who wanted public funding of broadcasting in an attempt to
balance what they perceived (with some justification) as a largely
right-wing press.



--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

All that Jaz
 

"Ian Jackson" wrote
in message ...
In message ,
Scott writes
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright

wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why
Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV?
Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with
the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality
journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public
follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources
of news can
only be a good thing.

There is quite a lot of alternative news and other items
on Al Jazeera (and on Russia Today) - stuff you (will)
never get on the BBC or ITV.


+1 and Euronews as well.


--
Woody

harrogate three at ntlworld dot com

All that Jaz
 

Bill Wright wrote:

Prized? AIUI COM7 isn't full yet, COM8 is (or will soon be)
available, channels like Five and Film4 that arguably would benefit
more from HD aren't queueing up to pay ...


And yet according to OFCOM spectrum is so very scarce. Like gold it is.
Hence we have no mux 7 or 8 on many transmitters for fear of CCI.

Muxes (aka COM) 7 and 8 are just a means to promote the sale of DVB-T2
equipped receivers, because in a few years, when even more spectrum has
been flogged off, the remaining services will probably need to migrate to T2,
thus obsoletifing [1] T1 kit.

I don't really understand the logic, because to date, we've not exactly
received any 'hard sell' for the services, in fact there's been virtually
no publicity at all.

Anyway, all the BBC TV channels (except BBC Parliament and Alba) are now
duplicated in HD, so it's not as if Al J is displacing them in any way ?

[1] Made up word


--
Mark
Please replace invalid and invalid with gmx and net to reply.

All that Jaz
 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 20:11:53 +0000, Mark Carver
wrote:

Bill Wright wrote:

Prized? AIUI COM7 isn't full yet, COM8 is (or will soon be)
available, channels like Five and Film4 that arguably would benefit
more from HD aren't queueing up to pay ...


And yet according to OFCOM spectrum is so very scarce. Like gold it is.
Hence we have no mux 7 or 8 on many transmitters for fear of CCI.

Muxes (aka COM) 7 and 8 are just a means to promote the sale of DVB-T2
equipped receivers, because in a few years, when even more spectrum has
been flogged off, the remaining services will probably need to migrate to T2,
thus obsoletifing [1] T1 kit.

I don't really understand the logic, because to date, we've not exactly
received any 'hard sell' for the services, in fact there's been virtually
no publicity at all.

I don't think it's as well conceived as your first paragraph. As only
some transmitters will carry the new multiplex, any publicity is
likely to antagonise those outside the coverage area therefore the
scope for promotion must be limited.

Anyway, all the BBC TV channels (except BBC Parliament and Alba) are now
duplicated in HD, so it's not as if Al J is displacing them in any way ?

[1] Made up word

All that Jaz
 

On 29/12/2013 17:19, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Scott
writes
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources of news can
only be a good thing.

Agreed, it's a more comprehensive and interesting service than BBC News.
Russia Today however is a completely differnt kettle of borscht.

All that Jaz
 

On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 21:07:21 +0000, Mike O'Sullivan
wrote:

On 29/12/2013 17:19, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Scott
writes
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 16:12:21 +0000, Bill Wright
wrote:

Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.

How do you know? I think it provides good quality journalism with no
obvious signs of bias. Educating and informing the public follows the
best traditions of broadcasting and a plurality of sources of news can
only be a good thing.

Agreed, it's a more comprehensive and interesting service than BBC News.
Russia Today however is a completely differnt kettle of borscht.

Kaiser Report is quite entertaining though!

All that Jaz
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
tim..... wrote:

they offered to pay more than the next contestant, for it

And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

Yes and their elected government decided to sell them off to the highest
bidder...


Bill

PS when they sold the 3G band they got ~£22,500,000,000

All that Jaz
 

In article ,
R. Mark Clayton wrote:

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
tim..... wrote:

they offered to pay more than the next contestant, for it

And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

Yes and their elected government decided to sell them off to the highest
bidder...


Bill

PS when they sold the 3G band they got ~£22,500,000,000

of course they "they" is actually the taxpayers. Income from these
"sideshows" means less needed from general taxation.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

All that Jaz
 

R. Mark Clayton wrote:

when they sold the 3G band they got ~£22,500,000,000

And how did those high costs affect telco profits and corresponding
corporation tax?

All that Jaz
 

Scott wrote:

Indeed, I have concerns about the BBC though I think they are probably
more selective than biased.

It's called bias by omission. The BBC didn't tell a single fib about the
ship stuck in the Antarctic, but they didn't tell the truth.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

Robin wrote:
And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

You may well think so but Parliament is not obliged to agree - eg if you
decide to start broadcasting "Wright is Right" 24/7 on all muxes ;)

One person isn't 'the people'.


In any event, I am a little surprised you subscribe to the "public
ownership of the airwaves" concept which I thought largely an invention
of the left who wanted public funding of broadcasting in an attempt to
balance what they perceived (with some justification) as a largely
right-wing press.

Not everything or everyone fits neatly along the left-right continuum.
Those of us who think for ourselves don't consult the policies of the
major parties or the Students' Union before deciding what to think.
Despite my views on the alien hordes we now have attempting to take over
our country — views which you would pigeon-hole as extreme right wing —
I have many opinions which you would regard as left wing. This puzzles
and confuses many people, who like to think that everyone who regrets
Labour's period of unrestricted immigration and who believes that
benefit- and NHS-tourists should be unceremoniously booted out of the
country is an evil fascist who by definition must be a racist; must
believe in unrestricted capitalism; and must eat babies.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

Mark Carver wrote:

Muxes (aka COM) 7 and 8 are just a means to promote the sale of DVB-T2
equipped receivers, because in a few years, when even more spectrum has
been flogged off, the remaining services will probably need to migrate
to T2, thus obsoletifing

I think you mean discardificated there, Mark.

[1] T1 kit.

I don't really understand the logic, because to date, we've not exactly
received any 'hard sell' for the services, in fact there's been virtually
no publicity at all.

No it's very odd. Unless people do a retune it doesn't happen. We have a
lot of communal systems that will need alteration to carry the new
muxes. There have been no requests for this work to be done.


Anyway, all the BBC TV channels (except BBC Parliament and Alba) are now
duplicated in HD, so it's not as if Al J is displacing them in any way ?

No, but what about a good channel like, err... OK, you win.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

R. Mark Clayton wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
tim..... wrote:

they offered to pay more than the next contestant, for it
And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

Yes and their elected government decided to sell them off to the highest
bidder...

A demonstration of the limitations of democracy.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

You may well think so but Parliament is not obliged to
agree - eg if you
decide to start broadcasting "Wright is Right" 24/7 on
all muxes ;)

One person isn't 'the people'.


In any event, I am a little surprised you subscribe to
the "public
ownership of the airwaves" concept which I thought
largely an invention
of the left who wanted public funding of broadcasting in
an attempt to
balance what they perceived (with some justification) as
a largely right-wing press.

Not everything or everyone fits neatly along the
left-right continuum. Those of us who think for ourselves
don't consult the policies of the major parties or the
Students' Union before deciding what to think. Despite my
views on the alien hordes we now have attempting to take
over our country — views which you would pigeon-hole as
extreme right wing — I have many opinions which you would
regard as left wing. This puzzles and confuses many
people, who like to think that everyone who regrets
Labour's period of unrestricted immigration and who
believes that benefit- and NHS-tourists should be
unceremoniously booted out of the country is an evil
fascist who by definition must be a racist; must believe
in unrestricted capitalism; and must eat babies.




My wife, who often doesn't contribute to discussion on these
sort of things, came out the other day with some very valid
comments about the immigration issue. She said that it is
presenting three problems:-

1) Most concerningly it is diluting our national
heritage/history to the extent that the indigenous
Englishperson/Brit will cease to exist in a few decades time
because of the cross pollination. You only have to look at
what has happened in Boston Lincs which has almost been
overrun by Polish immigrants to see how it has completely
changed the face of the town - and yes, I have been there
recently.

2) The health standards of many immigrants are an unknown
quantity so who knows what diseases etc they are bringing
with them to which the indigenous population have no
resistance and which the NHS will have to treat.

3) Ghettos are already starting to develop in some places
which are becoming no-go for the authorities and police not
only in the UK but elsewhere in Europe, parts of Paris for
example. If any attempt is made to take action of any sort
in these areas - be that health, environmental, or legal for
instance - the occupants immediately start screaming about
racial discrimination and/or make physical attempts to stop
it so the powers that be have no alternative but to back
off. The classic example here is Romas (as we now seem to be
calling them.)

I was reading a newspaper yesterday in a retail shed whilst
waiting for Management. It seems that the German police
stopped a vehicle in Bavaria a few days ago - a nine-seater
mini bus containing 34 people from Romania en route to an
undisclosed western European destination. If they are that
intent on getting across Europe what hope have we of
stopping them invading the UK whether Cameron leaves the
immigration limits in place or not?

All that Jaz
 

Well they are award winning apparently.
I have no issue with the station, did not Ch 5 decline to use theirs, so I
guess it was fair game.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best possible
service.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

Ha, belong to the people? Who told you that?

I'm surprised we are not charged for the oxygen we breathe since its no
doubt gone around a lot of other organisms and substances over the years.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
tim..... wrote:

they offered to pay more than the next contestant, for it

And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

Ah this is precisely the argument I've been giving for years about why
political parties are not needed. Most people would perhaps agree with some
things andnot others, but it seems that our politics in this country is a
kind of if you like this idea they how dare you like this one over here.
Its utterly madness.
Or shouldhat be uttely mad, or just madness.
Anyway, I find more and more that I disagree with all parties on some
things, so they wonder why turn out at elections is low?

Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Robin wrote:
And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

You may well think so but Parliament is not obliged to agree - eg if you
decide to start broadcasting "Wright is Right" 24/7 on all muxes ;)

One person isn't 'the people'.


In any event, I am a little surprised you subscribe to the "public
ownership of the airwaves" concept which I thought largely an invention
of the left who wanted public funding of broadcasting in an attempt to
balance what they perceived (with some justification) as a largely
right-wing press.

Not everything or everyone fits neatly along the left-right continuum.
Those of us who think for ourselves don't consult the policies of the
major parties or the Students' Union before deciding what to think.
Despite my views on the alien hordes we now have attempting to take over
our country — views which you would pigeon-hole as extreme right wing — I
have many opinions which you would regard as left wing. This puzzles and
confuses many people, who like to think that everyone who regrets Labour's
period of unrestricted immigration and who believes that benefit- and
NHS-tourists should be unceremoniously booted out of the country is an
evil fascist who by definition must be a racist; must believe in
unrestricted capitalism; and must eat babies.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
o.uk...
R. Mark Clayton wrote:

when they sold the 3G band they got ~£22,500,000,000

And how did those high costs affect telco profits and corresponding
corporation tax?


I would estimate that for the first few years the loss of CT due to the
interest on the money was around £1billion per year.

Initially the losses were higher as the telco's also had the cost of
installing all the 3G base stations and rugged infrastructure as well.

Initial sales were poor, but now most people have smart phones so are on
more expensive tariffs and have often bought phones from the telco's as
well. For instance I am paying more than double what I was paying ten years
ago, but OTOH almost never go outside the bundle.

All that Jaz
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
R. Mark Clayton wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
tim..... wrote:

they offered to pay more than the next contestant, for it
And yet those airwaves belong to the people.

Yes and their elected government decided to sell them off to the highest
bidder...

A demonstration of the limitations of democracy.

So what would you have a continuation of 405 line monochrome TV?


Bill

All that Jaz
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Scott wrote:

Indeed, I have concerns about the BBC though I think they are probably
more selective than biased.

It's called bias by omission. The BBC didn't tell a single fib about the
ship stuck in the Antarctic, but they didn't tell the truth.

You mean dissembling.

Example - you go to your local used car dealer and he shows you a car and
says "one careful lady owner" - well indeed, but does he mention the three
boy racers who have had it since, well of course not..., but he isn't lying.


Bill

All that Jaz
 

"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
Andy Burns wrote:
Bill Wright wrote:

Does anyone know [...] why Al Jazeera occupies one of the prized HD
slots on UK terrestrial TV?

Prized? AIUI COM7 isn't full yet, COM8 is (or will soon be) available,
channels like Five and Film4 that arguably would benefit more from HD
aren't queueing up to pay ...


And yet according to OFCOM spectrum is so very scarce. Like gold it is.
Hence we have no mux 7 or 8 on many transmitters for fear of CCI.

I think (incidentally) that Five will have to provide free HD before too
long. As more and more people get HD tellys they are going to lose
audience. I don't bother looking what's on Five (except I look for fishing
progs for father) because I can't see the point of watching SD when
there's more HD progs on than I have time for.

I still can't see the point in bothering with HD if all I want to watch is a
science documentary

tim

All that Jaz
 

In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.


Depends what you mean by 'public'. Are those who view it not members of
the public? Or do you consider you and you alone speak for the public?
Some form of community spokesman?

BTW, who appoints these community spokes persons we continually see being
interviewed? I dunno anyone who's been asked to vote for one.

--
*It ain't the size, it's... er... no, it IS ..the size.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

All that Jaz
 

On Mon, 30 Dec 2013 09:09:41 -0000, "Woody"
wrote:

My wife, who often doesn't contribute to discussion on these
sort of things, came out the other day with some very valid
comments about the immigration issue. She said that it is
presenting three problems:-

1) Most concerningly it is diluting our national
heritage/history to the extent that the indigenous
Englishperson/Brit will cease to exist in a few decades time
because of the cross pollination. You only have to look at
what has happened in Boston Lincs which has almost been
overrun by Polish immigrants to see how it has completely
changed the face of the town - and yes, I have been there
recently.

2) The health standards of many immigrants are an unknown
quantity so who knows what diseases etc they are bringing
with them to which the indigenous population have no
resistance and which the NHS will have to treat.

2) (a) In parts of London it is now commonplace to see persons hawking
and spitting in the street. I do not recall seeing this in the UK
until relatively recently, and I would certainly have remembered such
a disgusting activity. The persons guilty of this behaviour generally
have the appearance of not being native British.

3) Ghettos are already starting to develop in some places
which are becoming no-go for the authorities and police not
only in the UK but elsewhere in Europe, parts of Paris for
example. If any attempt is made to take action of any sort
in these areas - be that health, environmental, or legal for
instance - the occupants immediately start screaming about
racial discrimination and/or make physical attempts to stop
it so the powers that be have no alternative but to back
off. The classic example here is Romas (as we now seem to be
calling them.)

I was reading a newspaper yesterday in a retail shed whilst
waiting for Management. It seems that the German police
stopped a vehicle in Bavaria a few days ago - a nine-seater
mini bus containing 34 people from Romania en route to an
undisclosed western European destination. If they are that
intent on getting across Europe what hope have we of
stopping them invading the UK whether Cameron leaves the
immigration limits in place or not?

All that Jaz
 

R. Mark Clayton wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
R. Mark Clayton wrote:
"Bill Wright" wrote in message
...
tim..... wrote:

they offered to pay more than the next contestant, for it
And yet those airwaves belong to the people.
Yes and their elected government decided to sell them off to the highest
bidder...
A demonstration of the limitations of democracy.

So what would you have a continuation of 405 line monochrome TV?

The successive stages of development of PSB in the UK were not, until
quite recently, determined exclusively by market forces.

Bill

All that Jaz
 

tim..... wrote:

I still can't see the point in bothering with HD if all I want to watch
is a science documentary

If your glasses weren't right would you go to the optician, or not bother?

Bill

All that Jaz
 

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Bill Wright wrote:
Does anyone know the political and financial reasons why Al Jazeera
occupies one of the prized HD slots on UK terrestrial TV? Its presence
seems to have little to do with proving the public with the best
possible service.


Depends what you mean by 'public'. Are those who view it not members of
the public?

Yes, but how many are there compared to the numbers who would prefer
some other channel in HD?

Or do you consider you and you alone speak for the public?
Some form of community spokesman?

What gives you that idea? Your illogical leaps are astounding.

Bill