Yep, a phrase that is far more relevant is:Seen this shite phrase used so many times to justify poor management and profligacy.
Never ends well.
What makes it all the better is that every transfer and manager was greeted like the second coming with glory now visible on the horizon, only for it all to turn to shit - absooooolutely wonderful :-)Get the Norwich scarves out boys n girls!
Yep, a phrase that is far more relevant is:
“Look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves”
It’s really true in business as once limitless small money is spent on minor needless items/services it snowballs and expenses can run out of control.
Serious question - Do they send different reporters from each channel i.e BBC1, Radio 1, Radio 2, Radio 4, Radio 5 live etc because the story has to be packaged/dumbed down to each level?She wouldn't, that decision would have been made at an editorial level and would have come from a specific budget. My wife's pretty amazing but I'm not sure she would be capable of being across every single penny spent in the BBC!
I'm sure it goes without saying that it's outside of her remit to decide what is news worthy. She's great with a spreadsheet but not so good at recommending good movies to watch ;)
TBH what your talking about is insignificant in the grand scheme of things. For example when a news story breaks the BBC don't send just one journalist they send one for news, one for BBC news, one for radio 1, radio 2 etc. one from local news etc. etc. etc. That shit happens every day so sending just one journalist to Getafe really is small fry.
My wife introduced the value "more money for programmes" so if savings are made on non-content that is subsequently spent on programming she's happy.
There is bias in bias. The BBC actually receive the most bias complaints from Rags and Liverpool fans who are convinced they are biased against them and quite often that they are pro City! I suspect that as a percentage of fanbase all bias complaints are about even. "Smaller" clubs tend to complain they are biased against them in favour of any and all "big" clubs.I think it goes hand in hand with how the bbc choose their stories along with the chosen narrative. A whole different story but I saw a brilliant John Pilger documentary where he interviewed BBC producers why they chose the narrative, you won’t be surprised that they had answer along the lines of the complaint responses.
So it’s not important in the scheme of things if they choose to watch & report on Greenwood, improve his public profile not when you compare how they report on foreign policy but it’s very similar. Incredibly biased.
When the bbc show bias in sports & lie & play the audience for fools then I don’t trust them with important issues & im sure many others feel the same way.
It isn’t really, when you think about it. Mendy was tried and found not guilty. He’s not English and has gone home to resurrect his career. (Not at the high court though)Ask if they sent one of their so called top reporter's to report on Benjamin Mendy's debut for Lorient? A man who spent God knows how long in prison, only to be found not guilty at the high court. In the grand scheme of things, the Mendy story is far bigger than the Greenwood story.
It’s a shocking organisation, a clear example of being funded rather than standing on its own economic feet. It’s shameful how they waste money.Serious question - Do they send different reporters from each channel i.e BBC1, Radio 1, Radio 2, Radio 4, Radio 5 live etc because the story has to be packaged/dumbed down to each level?
This rhetoric behind the BBC sending people to places to report on news is getting fucking weird.BT Sport didn’t even send commentators to the London Stadium for West Ham’s home game in the Europa League last night. They were clearly in a studio watching the game on a tele. Yet the BBC sent Stone to Madrid to watch Mason ‘open your fucking legs you twat I want to fuck you’ Greenwood?
Oh their is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that the BBC wastes vasts amount of money (did you not see my post regarding the amount of journalists sent to cover one story?) which proves my point, the amount of money wasted covering this story is insignificant in the grand scheme of things.Yep, a phrase that is far more relevant is:
“Look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves”
It’s really true in business as once limitless small money is spent on minor needless items/services it snowballs and expenses can run out of control.
Indeed that's one of the reasons, their reporting has to be appropriate to the demographic they are broadcasting to. I don't suppose any of us would expect BBC News to simply replay a piece that was originally aired on Newsround rather than do their own.Serious question - Do they send different reporters from each channel i.e BBC1, Radio 1, Radio 2, Radio 4, Radio 5 live etc because the story has to be packaged/dumbed down to each level?