this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2023
51 points (98.1% liked)

United Kingdom

4114 readers
222 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Days after publication, the newsreader is in hospital with mental health issues and the paper is rapidly backtracking

top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago

Remember, decent people Never buy The Sun.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Mr Burns? Is that you?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago

Fuck the sun!

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

The Sun deserves to go away permanently

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

Fuck the sun. Fuck the express. Fuck the telegraph.

You all lied about brexit and are a scourge on public discourse.

Fuck you all, and add meta for good measure.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

I blame people’s parents. My mum was adamant I should never look directly at the sun, and I think that we’d be better if if more people were taught that.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Eating worms is preferable to "reading" that particular shitrag.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Had this been a Tory MP, the responses would be very different here.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

By virtue of them being an MP though, not a Tory.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I am forced to pay Huw Edward's wages under the threat of state sanctioned violence. Just like I am with an MPs.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Actually you're not. There is no requirement for everyone to have a TV licence. Plenty of people choose not to watch or record live TV or BBC iPlayer and therefore don't need to pay the licence fee.

Your argument would apply better to one of the UK's 5.8 million public sector workers, whose wages you are forced to pay for through taxation, and which illustrates how absurd it is for you to think you should have an individual veto on the personal conduct of each one of them.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I can't watch live TV without a TV license. Even if I don't watch the BBC, I have to pay for it. If Sky started hiring sexual predators, I could stop watching and paying for Sky. I can't with the BBC unless I want to stop all broardcast television.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Ace_of_spades @theinspectorst
You can stop watching the BBC
Also listening to it.
(As long as you don't aspire to command an RN SSBN)

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I can stop watching it. I still need a TV license if I want to watch Dave, QVC or even Sky. Even if I stop watching the BBC.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@Ace_of_spades
In various Wireless Telegraphy Acts for the UK the licencing of reception and transmission, control of permitted bands, for both, and exceptionally reception or transmission of certain signals in certain bands has been regulated since shortly after it became feasible.

There are reasons.

However the BBC thing is a small part of it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

.

That doesn't disprove what I said. I don't need a license fee in other countries, despite all these laws.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Dave is owned by the BBC pretty sure

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No you're not. You are, however, forced to pay for Ant & Dec, Nigel Farage and Piers Morgan since they all work on commercial channels paid for by the products you buy every day. License Fee by a million cuts.

Feel free to stop paying for the BBC if you like - it's always been your choice - but if you find a way to stop paying for ITV, Sky, GB News, Capital Radio, Metro and Talk TV please do let me know.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I cannot watch ITV without a TV license. Nor can I watch Dave or any other channel. You're being disingenous. Ant and Dec and the like are paid for by companies in order to advertise their products. If Ant or Dec got caught noncing around, they'd lose all sponsorship and relationships with their sponsors. They wouldn't be getting protection from all their other noncey mates like countless BBC hosts and employees.

You shouldn't have to lie if you have a valid point to make.

I don't pay for GB News, Metro or whatever and I have a choice not to support their sponsors. The BBC is only allowed to pump out its shite because the state forces me to pay for it. ITV don't send detector vans around or get court orders to break into people's homes. The BBC does.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Now you're arguing about straw men. The police have looked into the matter and publicly stated there's no evidence that merits any investigation of law-breaking, so I don't know where your 'caught noncing around' straw man is coming from.

If there was illegality at play then people would be looking at this situation differently.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

@Ace_of_spades @rmuk

Your resolution to do no business with any company who have ever employed a criminal, even if modified to specify a restricted class if crimes, is interesting, but I think you will starve, unamused, and self-unemployed.

If of course any crime is shown to have been committed, and you may have implies, if employment then continues.