figure of speech
noun, plural figures of speech. Rhetoric .
any expressive use of language, as a metaphor, simile, personification, or antithesis, in which words are used in other than their literal sense, or in other than their ordinary locutions, in order to suggest a picture or image or for other special effect. Compare trope ( def 1 ) .
sar·casm
[sahr-kaz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
harsh or bitter derision or irony.
2.
a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark: a review full of sarcasms.
No, not because I'm right, but because you constantly contradict yourself. You openly admitted to being sarcastic, then changed your mind.
Nope.
I said this:
And, in truth, it was simply a figure of speech. In other words, not to be taken literally (as George seemed to).
Yes, I admitted to a figure of speech! As per the definition already posted (and seemingly ignored):
figure of speech
noun, plural figures of speech. Rhetoric .
any expressive use of language, as a metaphor, simile, personification, or antithesis, in which words are used in other than their literal sense, or in other than their ordinary locutions, in order to suggest a picture or image or for other special effect.Compare trope ( def 1 ) .
Where as the definition of sarcasm:
sar·casm
[sahr-kaz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
harsh or bitter derision or irony.
2.
a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark: a review full of sarcasms.
But carry on, you are simply highlighting your lack of understanding.
This might get me some stick, but I will say it anyway. I know GMB, is a family show, but why o' why do they have to have a feature or story every flippin day about kids or babies. They treat people like myself who aren't in a relationship and childless out of choice like we are some sort of outcasts of society. I love kids I just don't want any, my brothers kids and my mates kids are enough for me, and they are great, but it's my choice. Everyday they have to have something on about kids, like it's the most important thing to have that for a validated life. Sorry it just pees me off something chronic.
This might get me some stick, but I will say it anyway. I know GMB, is a family show, but why o' why do they have to have a feature or story every flippin day about kids or babies. They treat people like myself who aren't in a relationship and childless out of choice like we are some sort of outcasts of society. I love kids I just don't want any, my brothers kids and my mates kids are enough for me, and they are great, but it's my choice. Everyday they have to have something on about kids, like it's the most important thing to have that for a validated life. Sorry it just pees me off something chronic.
So Breakfast gained 100,00 viewers based on last week's quoted figure.
And as I said (George's panic time again) Breakfast regularly fluctuates between 1.4m and 1.6m
As for 460,000 for GMB - not good. Less than a third of what Breakfast is now getting, and there was a time when Daybreak would get a half of what BBC Breakfast would get.
According to the ratings thread, Daybreak had 500,000 viewers on 30th July 2013. That was the closest year on year comparison I could find. 460k is just an indicator of the summer holidays. Remember ITV Breakfast's core audience is housewives with children, so that audience will obviously collapse during holidays whereas BBC Breakfast's won't. If it was 460k in the middle of November, then theres a problem. So it's also a third of what Breakfast was getting.
This might get me some stick, but I will say it anyway. I know GMB, is a family show, but why o' why do they have to have a feature or story every flippin day about kids or babies. They treat people like myself who aren't in a relationship and childless out of choice like we are some sort of outcasts of society. I love kids I just don't want any, my brothers kids and my mates kids are enough for me, and they are great, but it's my choice. Everyday they have to have something on about kids, like it's the most important thing to have that for a validated life. Sorry it just pees me off something chronic.
Thats why, because it's aimed at hassled mums. And I get the view, and I got the same with GMTV is that they think everyone is in their mid 30-40s and has children and are married.
Thats why, because it's aimed at hassled mums. And I get the view, and I got the same with GMTV is that they think everyone is in their mid 30-40s and has children and are married.
This is what I find puzzling - why would TV executives think that "hassled mums" would have time to watch breakfast telly.
I am not a hassled mum and I watch Breakfast while still in bed, (for the news) then get up when the comedy starts on Channel 4.
These are old repeats so I can have them on in the background without having to pay too much attention.
Surely "hassled mums" are more likely to have the radio on in the background while they pack their little darlings off to school.
I think it's become pretty obvious that ITV have got their whole breakfast strategy wrong - ''hassled mums'' on council estates don't really have money to spend in any case which is what advertisers want just as they target young men with expendable income watching football (although there will be precious little of that on ITV from next season).
Said it before on a thread . they need to drop the competition . drop the regional news or at least that hideous fake handover . cut the ad breaks . stop doin one liners all over the place . just be normal and stop all the . sad face .sincere face . concerned face stuff and bring in things like a paper review
Said it before on a thread . they need to drop the competition . drop the regional news or at least that hideous fake handover . cut the ad breaks . stop doin one liners all over the place . just be normal and stop all the . sad face .sincere face . concerned face stuff and bring in things like a paper review
And get rid of the no-talent 'oh look,at me and my legs' SR, simple question, if she did not show her legs etc, how many who are praising her on here would still be doing so, look past that, and be honest there are much better presenters out there, who don't nod like a donkey, pull funny faces every 5minutes and can present and head a programme that works.
And get rid of the no-talent 'oh look,at me and my legs' SR, simple question, if she did not show her legs etc, how many who are praising her on here would still be doing so, look past that, and be honest there are much better presenters out there, who don't nod like a donkey, pull funny faces every 5minutes and can present and head a programme that works.
Thats harsh I dont remember reading comments like this when she was on Breakfast and I can see why ITV brought her in as she was very popular on Strictly
Thats harsh I dont remember reading comments like this when she was on Breakfast and I can see why ITV brought her in as she was very popular on Strictly
With respect hardly a qualification for presenting what I believe is meant to be a newsy breakfast show (although their coverage of Gaza this morning consisted of inaudible telephone clips with captions while the BBC had a correspondent reporting live in vision as the shells rained down).
And get rid of the no-talent 'oh look,at me and my legs' SR, simple question, if she did not show her legs etc, how many who are praising her on here would still be doing so, look past that, and be honest there are much better presenters out there, who don't nod like a donkey, pull funny faces every 5minutes and can present and head a programme that works.
I would, I don't care about her legs lol. I think she's a good presenter and she's one of the things I like most when I watch.
Comments
figure of speech
noun, plural figures of speech. Rhetoric .
any expressive use of language, as a metaphor, simile, personification, or antithesis, in which words are used in other than their literal sense, or in other than their ordinary locutions, in order to suggest a picture or image or for other special effect. Compare trope ( def 1 ) .
sar·casm
[sahr-kaz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
harsh or bitter derision or irony.
2.
a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark: a review full of sarcasms.
Back to school, Mossy! Or do we have another six weeks of your gibberish to look forward to?
Oh dear
Take a look at the added definitions (I cannot keep up with your quick-fire replies)
Anyone who thinks that sarcasm is the same as figure of speech needs to go back to school.
You will of course have the last word, just to win that important point
No, not because I'm right, but because you constantly contradict yourself. You openly admitted to being sarcastic, then changed your mind.
I said this:
And, in truth, it was simply a figure of speech. In other words, not to be taken literally (as George seemed to).
Yes, I admitted to a figure of speech! As per the definition already posted (and seemingly ignored):
figure of speech
noun, plural figures of speech. Rhetoric .
any expressive use of language, as a metaphor, simile, personification, or antithesis, in which words are used in other than their literal sense, or in other than their ordinary locutions, in order to suggest a picture or image or for other special effect.Compare trope ( def 1 ) .
Where as the definition of sarcasm:
sar·casm
[sahr-kaz-uhm] Show IPA
noun
1.
harsh or bitter derision or irony.
2.
a sharply ironical taunt; sneering or cutting remark: a review full of sarcasms.
But carry on, you are simply highlighting your lack of understanding.
Is Susannah on holiday
Yeah I'm guessing she gets the Summer off like Lorraine.
I hope she is only away a couple of weeks and not for the full summer
Same here. Charlotte just doesn't cut it as main presenter for me.
You'll get no stick for that.
According to the ratings thread, Daybreak had 500,000 viewers on 30th July 2013. That was the closest year on year comparison I could find. 460k is just an indicator of the summer holidays. Remember ITV Breakfast's core audience is housewives with children, so that audience will obviously collapse during holidays whereas BBC Breakfast's won't. If it was 460k in the middle of November, then theres a problem. So it's also a third of what Breakfast was getting.
Thats why, because it's aimed at hassled mums. And I get the view, and I got the same with GMTV is that they think everyone is in their mid 30-40s and has children and are married.
Only if you're an MP with an explosive peado dossier.
This is what I find puzzling - why would TV executives think that "hassled mums" would have time to watch breakfast telly.
I am not a hassled mum and I watch Breakfast while still in bed, (for the news) then get up when the comedy starts on Channel 4.
These are old repeats so I can have them on in the background without having to pay too much attention.
Surely "hassled mums" are more likely to have the radio on in the background while they pack their little darlings off to school.
And get rid of the no-talent 'oh look,at me and my legs' SR, simple question, if she did not show her legs etc, how many who are praising her on here would still be doing so, look past that, and be honest there are much better presenters out there, who don't nod like a donkey, pull funny faces every 5minutes and can present and head a programme that works.
Thats harsh I dont remember reading comments like this when she was on Breakfast and I can see why ITV brought her in as she was very popular on Strictly
With respect hardly a qualification for presenting what I believe is meant to be a newsy breakfast show (although their coverage of Gaza this morning consisted of inaudible telephone clips with captions while the BBC had a correspondent reporting live in vision as the shells rained down).
I would, I don't care about her legs lol. I think she's a good presenter and she's one of the things I like most when I watch.