Carl Waring

Because, unlike the US, TV and radio news in the UK has "due impartiality" guidelines it must follow. You should try that sometime.

It was obviously not as earth-shattering as he suspected. Or he was bluffing. Or something🤷‍♂️ 😁

Guessing this is not what that Tice bloke meant when he said he was "going to reveal" something about Ms Reeves at 8:30am today? 🤷‍♂️🤣 (Did he do that yet or did he not?!)

Oh good. When I said it broke me, I meant from laughter. Was a great line.

I really hope you're right. That last line broke me!

Actually no I'm not.
share.google/aimode/KKdqY...

There were no such words IN the speech. I assume you don't know or understand what actually happened.

I don't know. I was only making a suggestion. What's the point in broadcasting an awards show and then muting the winning speeches?

There may well be a venn diagram of some description here 😁

Simple question. Why should someone apologise for something that they cannot control?

He DOES feel bad, though. He has already explicitly stated that. Yes, of course he *could* apologise. But, as I said, I don't see the point in apologising for doing something that you have literally no control over. "I'm sorry I have Tourettes." Really?

Still a stupid analogy.

Not sure what purpose it would serve for him to apologise for something that is totally and completely out of his control.

Yet still a stupid analogy.

Not being a ghoul. Just a realist. But sure, block someone just because you disagree with them. Don't want to be exposed to opinions you disagree with.

Still a stupid analogy.

There were (apparently, I didn't watch it) TWO announcements stating that might happen. Also, Tourettes and, unless you're particularly ignorant, you know the basics of what that is about. Also, at least one was right in the middle of a acceptance speech! Think of the complaints if that were muted!

He has nothing to apologise for. That would be like you apoligising for breathing.

If you had did so involunatiry due to mental illness (or whatever Tourettes is classified as) then maybe. But you might want to try for a better analogy as Tourettes doesn't have even the slightest possibilty of killing you. They're only words 🤦‍♂️

One of the best TV shows ever.

Oh FFS 🤦‍♂️🤣

In the days before he went more than a little dolally.

Really? Wow. Okay.

Don't remember it being on BBC1. Only ever remember it being on ITV. Though I do remember this, of course.

LOL!No problem, my friend. All good. I disagree with you, but that's okay too. 🙂

It's £18 of monthly subs cost FOR NOTHING. They aren't forcing anyone to use them. They're there if you want and not if you don't. Really not seeing the problem. 🤷‍♂️

I am already paying for Sky. These services are being included at no *extra* cost. That's fine with me. It's also certainly a good deal for those people who don't already have those services. They're there if they want to use them *at no extra cost*. There is no downside here. (Other than the ads!)

Which is fine. But there's no need to insult those of us who choose to subscribe to Sky for whatever reason.

As is Paramount+ for those with the Cinema channels.

True. But I'm not sure the services would have let them have ther "ad-free" tiers without charging them more, which Sky would then probably have passed on to its subscribers instead of "at no extra cost".

It's actually good news for my as I will be able to save £48 a year on my Disney+ sub. Not a huge amount, but I'll take it.