The haters disappeared after the awesome opening ceremony. They've been in hiding as the days go by and the medals keep flowing. Hopefully they'll stay hidden. It's perfectly fine to be concerned about costs, but the attitude of "who cares?" or "I'll be avoiding the Olympic coverage entirely!" is piss poor and obnoxious.
I'm not commenting on his train of thought. I actually disagree with him wholeheartedly but he has a right to say it.
The problem is, the only way he can get in the news these days is to make deliberately provocative comments. It's quite sad that the man who was part of one of the most innovative bands of the 1980's has lost so much of the musical credibility he once had and an irrelevance these days.
Thats why you can't take anything he says seriously, cause it's all rubbish I doubt he himself believes, just something to try and get him noticed. I find it particularly interesting that someone whose own views at times have been interpreted as being pro-bnp, much to his anger, would have the nerve to compare the public reaction to Britain’s medal victories to emotions in Nazi Germany.
The haters disappeared after the awesome opening ceremony. They've been in hiding as the days go by and the medals keep flowing. Hopefully they'll stay hidden. It's perfectly fine to be concerned about costs, but the attitude of "who cares?" or "I'll be avoiding the Olympic coverage entirely!" is piss poor and obnoxious.
No, not gone to ground exactly, more like trying to avoid the whole overblown circus, which is virtually impossible to do since every news bulletin leads with games stories until we get a bit of real news towards the end. And just because some people have no interest in watching the coverage that does not make them "piss poor" or "obnoxious".
No, not gone to ground exactly, more like trying to avoid the whole overblown circus, which is virtually impossible to do since every news bulletin leads with games stories until we get a bit of real news towards the end. And just because some people have no interest in watching the coverage that does not make them "piss poor" or "obnoxious".
No it doesn't but I do feel sorry for them. It's great to have 2 weeks of pure National pride and being housebound with a broken foot it has cheered me up immeasurably.
Not that I've tried, it's wall to wall Olympics at Tally Towers, but I managed to get through the World and European Cup without watching a second of football. Is it possible to avoid coverage by sticking to cable/satellite channels.
Because I do empathise with people who hate sport and cant get away from it..
No, not gone to ground exactly, more like trying to avoid the whole overblown circus, which is virtually impossible to do since every news bulletin leads with games stories until we get a bit of real news towards the end. And just because some people have no interest in watching the coverage that does not make them "piss poor" or "obnoxious".
News is news and the Olympics IS news! Why do people dislike the content of a programme showing news....unless of course you think that news should only contain news you consider newsworthy? Syria is (bad?) news. Iran is (bad?) news. The recession is (bad?) news.....and yes, like it or not, the Olympics, a global event is also (good?) news.
If you've figured out that the news starts with Olympic stuff....then why not, y'know, tune in 10 minutes or so after it starts?
News is news and the Olympics IS news! Why do people dislike the content of a programme showing news....unless of course you think that news should only contain news you consider newsworthy? Syria is (bad?) news. Iran is (bad?) news. The recession is (bad?) news.....and yes, like it or not, the Olympics, a global event is also (good?) news.
If you've figured out that the news starts with Olympic stuff....then why not, y'know, tune in 10 minutes or so after it starts?
Sports news is generally held back till later in the bulletin, I don't see why games results should be any different (and there are so many of them). I find other events currently happening at home and abroad far more newsworthy than anything in E20 or SE10.
Sports news is generally held back till later in the bulletin, I don't see why games results should be any different (and there are so many of them). I find other events currently happening at home and abroad far more newsworthy than anything in E20 or SE10.
With 205 nations sending more than 10,000 people to London to compete at the Olympics, do you not think it's considered newsworthy? Knowing that 2,000,000 people applied for tickets in the ballot to just one athletics session (Sunday night) must surely demonstrate the interest.
It's the biggest single sporting event on the planet and irrespective of your personal thoughts on it, you cannot deny it's newsworthiness....therefore you have to accept it's place in the news.
Well, those poor, deprived inner city Eton kids have a lovely new rowing facility.
What a silly post - they chose the best bit of river, that being rather an essential for rowing events. Most of it was already there. Might as well compare it to Weymouth getting a sailing facility. Portland is listed as an EU area of social deprivation.
Why is the "legacy" always seen in terms of how it affects children?
What about the legacy these games will leave with adults who may be inspired to take up some sporting activity, get fit ect.?
What's the thinking here?
Only for children as it can only be measured in terms of numbers going onto professional sporting careers?
We have an obesity crisis in the country, if the olmpics manage to change opinions/thinking amongst adults about their fitness levels that would be a huge legacy.
Although legacy can absolutely include adults, it has been positioned towards the young right from the start.
Sport England's participation surveys track adult participation in many sports, so this factor can be measured.
I don't think that legacy was ever defined as far as youngsters are concerned only by how many will become elite athletes.Quite the opposite (for the general health reasons you mentioned).
As I posted above, the usual rationale is to build from the base. get more people, especially kids but including adults doing something and the more you have active, the more you are likely to have rising to the top through the elite route as well.
With 205 nations sending more than 10,000 people to London to compete at the Olympics, do you not think it's considered newsworthy? Knowing that 2,000,000 people applied for tickets in the ballot to just one athletics session (Sunday night) must surely demonstrate the interest.
It's the biggest single sporting event on the planet and irrespective of your personal thoughts on it, you cannot deny it's newsworthiness....therefore you have to accept it's place in the news.
No, I don't accept the games' prime place in the news, I just have to put up with it. Apparently 18 hours per day on BBC1, 14 hours on BBC3, a couple of hours on BBC2, plus all the red button channels just isn't enough coverage for some.
No, I don't accept the games' prime place in the news, I just have to put up with it. Apparently 18 hours per day on BBC1, 14 hours on BBC3, a couple of hours on BBC2, plus all the red button channels just isn't enough coverage for some.
What should take "prime place" in the news then? The struggles in Syria?
I'm going to wager a small bet with you - I bet when I get home tonight, I'll be able to find news programmes which will concentrate only a little bit on the Olympics.
What should take "prime place" in the news then? The struggles in Syria?
I'm going to wager a small bet with you - I bet when I get home tonight, I'll be able to find news programmes which will concentrate only a little bit on the Olympics.
The 'can't escape it' is nonsense. When we only had 3 channels you might have had a point but in todays digital world you can't be trying very hard.
I've fallen out of love with football and amazingly enough managed to avoid all highlights/live showings of the Euro championships. I did see some of it on the news though because funnily enough, it was news.
The 'can't escape it' is nonsense. When we only had 3 channels you might have had a point but in todays digital world you can't be trying very hard.
I've fallen out of love with football and amazingly enough managed to avoid all highlights/live showings of the Euro championships. I did see some of it on the news though because funnily enough, it was news.
I think I'm actually starting to fall out of love with football too. There's just too much simulation/diving for my liking now.
With 205 nations sending more than 10,000 people to London to compete at the Olympics, do you not think it's considered newsworthy?................................... you cannot deny it's newsworthiness....therefore you have to accept it's place in the news.
It would only be newsworthy if less than 10,000 went home again. Of course I can deny it's newsworthiness ... to me. Is there some objective measure of what's newsworthy?
And of course sport has a place in the news - at the end. So that I know when to switch it off.
I'm going to wager a small bet with you - I bet when I get home tonight, I'll be able to find news programmes which will concentrate only a little bit on the Olympics.
Did you find any? I only have Freeview, so didn't have much success.
No, not gone to ground exactly, more like trying to avoid the whole overblown circus, which is virtually impossible to do since every news bulletin leads with games stories until we get a bit of real news towards the end. And just because some people have no interest in watching the coverage that does not make them "piss poor" or "obnoxious".
I'd prefer the "circus" which at least is filled with more positivity than endless coverage of Syria ripping itself apart.
And yes it DOES make them obnoxious, since they seem to make a point to tell everyone ad nauseum how much they won't be watching it (which I suspect they do anyway).
It's the "Outraged from Tunbridge Wells" syndrome from Points of View.
Did you find any? I only have Freeview, so didn't have much success.
Sorry for not replying....but, yes I did. Probably available on Freeview too. Aljazeera wasn't too bad and if you timed it right, Sky News and BBC News channels were okay too.
Comments
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/0807/1224321632601.html
Morrissey is a proven twit who cares what he thinks, exactly? :rolleyes:
I'm not commenting on his train of thought. I actually disagree with him wholeheartedly but he has a right to say it.
The problem is, the only way he can get in the news these days is to make deliberately provocative comments. It's quite sad that the man who was part of one of the most innovative bands of the 1980's has lost so much of the musical credibility he once had and an irrelevance these days.
Thats why you can't take anything he says seriously, cause it's all rubbish I doubt he himself believes, just something to try and get him noticed. I find it particularly interesting that someone whose own views at times have been interpreted as being pro-bnp, much to his anger, would have the nerve to compare the public reaction to Britain’s medal victories to emotions in Nazi Germany.
Like I said, the mans a twit.
No, not gone to ground exactly, more like trying to avoid the whole overblown circus, which is virtually impossible to do since every news bulletin leads with games stories until we get a bit of real news towards the end. And just because some people have no interest in watching the coverage that does not make them "piss poor" or "obnoxious".
Not that I've tried, it's wall to wall Olympics at Tally Towers, but I managed to get through the World and European Cup without watching a second of football. Is it possible to avoid coverage by sticking to cable/satellite channels.
Because I do empathise with people who hate sport and cant get away from it..
News is news and the Olympics IS news! Why do people dislike the content of a programme showing news....unless of course you think that news should only contain news you consider newsworthy? Syria is (bad?) news. Iran is (bad?) news. The recession is (bad?) news.....and yes, like it or not, the Olympics, a global event is also (good?) news.
If you've figured out that the news starts with Olympic stuff....then why not, y'know, tune in 10 minutes or so after it starts?
Sports news is generally held back till later in the bulletin, I don't see why games results should be any different (and there are so many of them). I find other events currently happening at home and abroad far more newsworthy than anything in E20 or SE10.
With 205 nations sending more than 10,000 people to London to compete at the Olympics, do you not think it's considered newsworthy? Knowing that 2,000,000 people applied for tickets in the ballot to just one athletics session (Sunday night) must surely demonstrate the interest.
It's the biggest single sporting event on the planet and irrespective of your personal thoughts on it, you cannot deny it's newsworthiness....therefore you have to accept it's place in the news.
What a silly post - they chose the best bit of river, that being rather an essential for rowing events. Most of it was already there. Might as well compare it to Weymouth getting a sailing facility. Portland is listed as an EU area of social deprivation.
Although legacy can absolutely include adults, it has been positioned towards the young right from the start.
Sport England's participation surveys track adult participation in many sports, so this factor can be measured.
I don't think that legacy was ever defined as far as youngsters are concerned only by how many will become elite athletes.Quite the opposite (for the general health reasons you mentioned).
As I posted above, the usual rationale is to build from the base. get more people, especially kids but including adults doing something and the more you have active, the more you are likely to have rising to the top through the elite route as well.
No, I don't accept the games' prime place in the news, I just have to put up with it. Apparently 18 hours per day on BBC1, 14 hours on BBC3, a couple of hours on BBC2, plus all the red button channels just isn't enough coverage for some.
What should take "prime place" in the news then? The struggles in Syria?
I'm going to wager a small bet with you - I bet when I get home tonight, I'll be able to find news programmes which will concentrate only a little bit on the Olympics.
Al Jazeer for one
I've fallen out of love with football and amazingly enough managed to avoid all highlights/live showings of the Euro championships. I did see some of it on the news though because funnily enough, it was news.
I think I'm actually starting to fall out of love with football too. There's just too much simulation/diving for my liking now.
It would only be newsworthy if less than 10,000 went home again. Of course I can deny it's newsworthiness ... to me. Is there some objective measure of what's newsworthy?
And of course sport has a place in the news - at the end. So that I know when to switch it off.
Did you find any? I only have Freeview, so didn't have much success.
:cool: CBeebies or The Disney Channel? I'm sure they'll be Olympic free.
I'm told Australian TV is now Olympic-free.
I'd prefer the "circus" which at least is filled with more positivity than endless coverage of Syria ripping itself apart.
And yes it DOES make them obnoxious, since they seem to make a point to tell everyone ad nauseum how much they won't be watching it (which I suspect they do anyway).
It's the "Outraged from Tunbridge Wells" syndrome from Points of View.
Sorry for not replying....but, yes I did. Probably available on Freeview too. Aljazeera wasn't too bad and if you timed it right, Sky News and BBC News channels were okay too.