Su Moo Nein The Belgium Comeex Foliatet Hist Wat Is Leepking Ingin Thes Tifler
-
When have I ever claimed that?
-
In the United States, we would never stand for anyone holding a government office just because some other member of their family held that office. Especially if we're talking about the presidency.
-
sounds like some sort of conspiritard bullshit
-
-
I think you forgot a sarcasm tag somewhere in there.
cough BushJohnsonRooseveltAdams cough
-
because their ancestor convinced your dumb shit ancestor that God loved him more.
They could go on and kill all the opposition perhaps, but that would be Syria. They are rewarded for their civility.
-
@blakeyrat said:
Which to be honest would give them the uncontested right to rule. Democracy is basically an extended overpriced pr campaign in the states. You're winning a popularity contest for the right to rule. To be declared King you have to slaugher the opposition and make a crown from their rib-cages to rule.because their ancestor convinced your dumb shit ancestor that God loved him more.
They could go on and kill all the opposition perhaps, but that would be Syria. They are rewarded for their civility.
So the problem with the English royal family is that they've become fat and lazy...
-
But why should I pay the BBC for the 'privilege' of watching ITV?
For BBC to get their money.Funnily enough, you just described Channel 4
What is Channel 4?Her position is pretty much entirely ceremonial
Still, she's the government.You have to keep in mind that in some countries, a
n educatedbrainwashed populace and misinformed voters is considered beneficial to society, and so it's worthwhile to spend public money onan organization such as the BBCfriends.
FTFYThey could go on and kill all the opposition perhaps, but that would be Syria.
It worked for several hundred years though.To be declared King you have to slaugher the opposition and make a crown from their rib-cages to rule.
Actually, to not be killed yourself after that, you still had to have popularity with people. So modern democracy isn't that much different from medieval monarchy, except now there's no single person to blame for anything, so it's easier to get away with whatever shit you do.
-
I actually admire that they did not crush the opposition, and if they earned an eternal rich and fame so be it. I hope other tyrants could get a clue and do the same.
It worked for several hundred years though.
The one who stopped it has finally reached an eternal dynasty (or a very long one)
-
@RaceProUK said:
But why should I pay the BBC for the 'privilege' of watching ITV?
For BBC to get their money.
So when I go to Burger King, I should pay McDonalds?@RaceProUK said:
Funnily enough, you just described Channel 4
What is Channel 4?
A commercially-funded state broadcaster@RaceProUK said:
Her position is pretty much entirely ceremonial
Still, she's the government.
No, the government is here:
Not here:
-
-
Regarding the points made by @blakeyrat, I think I have some comments to make.
- Not every damm nation in the world needs to have the same government type. It is perfectly damm fine for every nation not to be a Glorious Presidential/Republican Democracy. Monarchies (so long as they aren't absolute) are also perfectly damm fine.
- The BBC is pretty sweet. It provides fairly unbiased coverage and a number of good shows e.g Doctor Who. I'd rather have it over having every station be a biased corporate mouthpiece showing shitty commercials to get us to let other screw us over.
- It's also okay for the government to essentially be paying for and sponsoring things. Socialism is sweet, and in some cases better than communism (Corporations can, and will screw you/everyone over in the pursuit of Glorious Infinite Money.)
-
So when I go to Burger King, I should pay McDonalds?
McDonald's would surely like it.A commercially-funded state broadcaster
And is there anything wrong with Channel 4?No, the government is here: (pic) Not here: (pic)
Government in the broad sense of official (co)ruler of the state. Whether it can actually do anything or not is irrelevant here. Besides, who do you think tells the queen who to appoint?
-
@RaceProUK said:
A commercially-funded state broadcaster
And is there anything wrong with Channel 4?
They did Big Brother; nothing else needs to be said
-
Why the fuck is the government funding TV?
Cause there are no public stations in the US. Blakey, do your research sometimes.
Plus, some of the best British procedurals were made made by the BBC (and House of Cards). Fucking impressive, if you ask me.
-
In the United States, we would never stand for anyone holding a government office just because some other member of their family held that office. Especially if we're talking about the presidency.
Well, you have. Before there was the presidency. And there were some, who wanted it even then.
Oh, sorry, I forgot that US is SO MUCH BETTER AND SANER than the UK, cause everything is nice and everybody's friendly, like at the MessyJoe's.
-
They did Big Brother; nothing else needs to be said
And our TV license-funded broadcaster produced several seasons of localized Dancing on Ice. So I don't see how license changes anything.
-
And our TV license-funded broadcaster produced several seasons of localized Dancing on Ice. So I don't see how license changes anything.
Yup. On the other hand, they're also running a great culture-oriented station called nomen est omen TVP Culture. You don't see commercial broadcaster undertaking such enterprises.
-
Whatever, it's still wrong.
Doing anything about it would mean switching to an elected head of state. There's a three word reason why that's an unpopular idea:
President Tony Blair
-
Yup. On the other hand, they're also running a great culture-oriented station called nomen est omen TVP Culture. You don't see commercial broadcaster undertaking such enterprises.
I don't watch this kind of stuff often, so of course I don't know much about it, but IIRC Kino Polska has similar stuff, and I'm sure there are more channels like this.
-
I don't watch this kind of stuff often, so of course I don't know much about it, but IIRC Kino Polska has similar stuff, and I'm sure there are more channels like this.
Nope, they don't, they just run Polish movies/TV series. TVP Kultura create their own shows: about architecture, folk music, books. If you're in the country, you should check out their VOD. Truly, it's a goldmine that could not have been created by any of the commercial stations. And that's why I don't buy into this whole "everything should be privatized and commercialized" bullshit. Sure, those shows definitely don't make money, I doubt they even pay for themselves. But what is the alternative? MTV? And no Jim Jarmusch?
-
about architecture
DOMO has it too. And of course various Discovery channels.folk music
I'm pretty sure some history channels do that once in a while, but can't name any off the top of my head.books
I think I saw TVN Style having those too.If you're in the country, you should check out their VOD.
Why would I? I'm not at all interested in that shit.And that's why I don't buy into this whole "everything should be privatized and commercialized" bullshit.
And I don't buy this whole "publicly owned companies are better than privately owned" bullshit.
-
I'm pretty sure some history channels do that once in a while, but can't name any off the top of my head.
Well, this one is quite unique. Recognized Polish musicians go learn from and play with folk (like deep country, no electricity folk) musicians. Pretty sweet.I think I saw TVN Style having those too.
Not of such quality. Really. TVN Style runs book shows like "book of the month that will sell well".And I don't buy this whole "publicly owned companies are better than privately owned" bullshit.
Don't know where you got that idea it was my point. Just that being subsidized gives more freedom to do some high-quality cultural shows and that it's valuable.Why would I? I'm not at all interested in that shit.
So you can see the difference. And it's huge. It's reaaaly huge.
Sure, you can go on saying "commercial TV stations are just as good" with no evidence. That's cool, too.
-
Don't know where you got that idea it was my point. Just that being subsidized gives more freedom to do some high-quality cultural shows and that it's valuable.
So if not for subsidies, people wouldn't be able to watch these kinds of programs, because non-subsidizes TV need to make money out of commercials, and they only can get enough money out of commercials if there are enough people watching your station, which is impossible for TVP Kultura because people don't want to watch these kinds of programs... oh wait.So you can see the difference.
Between what? The shit I have no interest in and another shit I have no interest in?
-
So if not for subsidies, people wouldn't be able to watch these kinds of programs, because non-subsidizes TV need to make money out of commercials, and they only can get enough money out of commercials if there are enough people watching your station, which is impossible for TVP Kultura because people don't want to watch these kinds of programs... oh wait.
I see what you did there. You went from "enough people need to watch" to "no one wants to watch".
Aside from that, "oh wait" what? Not enough? Sure, or maybe enough, but otherwise (other shows) could be more. Sure. That's exactly my point.
Plus, commercial stuff is subsidized, too.
-
I see what you did there. You went from "enough people need to watch" to "no one wants to watch".
There are people who genuinely enjoy watching things like 2 Girls 1 Cup. There aren't enough to make Scat Sex TV a profitable business, but there are nonetheless. Should we subsidize such channel?Aside from that, "oh wait" what? Not enough?
If ~1% of Polish population were to watch my channel regularly, I think it would be enough for it being self-sustaining. What you're arguing is that because there aren't enough people watching TVP Kultura for it being profitable (in other words, less than 1% of population watch it), it ought to be subsidized (in other words, part of tax money should go to it - in yet other words, all people should be forced to pay for it) because otherwise there would be no such programs at all (about which, over 99% of people don't give a fuck). The question is, is it really okay to force 99% of people to give away their money for the benefit of 1%?
-
OK, now we're way down the "I think" road.
I don't know if TVP Kultura is self-sustaining or not. I think it might not be but then again: it might be.
You think that ~1% would suffice. Maybe it would, maybe it wouldn't.So your claim that 99% don't give a shit is another "I think". Plus, it leaves a reader with the impression, that 100% people (not viewers) give a shit about the commercial stuff, whereas it's a much much lower number (probably in low tens).
I don't like being in the "I think" realm, so let's get some stats. E.g. the 2013 media shares stats: group 4+: 22nd place, group 16-49: 30th place. All around: 0,5% of the whole media market with, wait for it..., a higher than 100% growth since 2012. So they are (were) growing fast, they are being watched and the number should even be higher, since they're also available on the VOD website with ads.
Heck, it has more viewers than HBO!
So, well, yeah, what I was really trying to say when I was saying that "the probably don't even pay for themselves" was: I don't really care if they pay for themselves or not. Those stats don't really point into neither direction, but they certainly show that when it comes to the number of viewers, it's in the top 25%.
And now: why didn't any commercial network launch this type of station? Because they don't care, because they don't see culture as being profitable at all. So even if Kultura is bringing home the bacon, it wouldn't have been given a change, if not for the fact that TVP was subsidized and that they are required by law to offer cultural shows (that's one of the reasons why TVP Kultura was created in the first place: so that TVP 1 can stop offering them).
Plus, yes, when it comes to culture I am a leftist. I do believe that theaters, museums, TV stations as TVP Kultura, independent filmmakers and such should be subsidized, so that they don't die because people prefer Braking Bad.
On another note: most of the good Polish movies of late were subsidized.
EvenMost notably, the Oscar-winning Ida was.
-
OK, now we're way down the "I think" road.
300k regular viewers is pretty good audience.I don't know if TVP Kultura is self-sustaining or not.
Your whole argument is based on it being not self-sustaining. If it were self-sustaining, then subsidies would be even more pointless.And now: why didn't any commercial network launch this type of station?
Might be bad market research. Might be random factor. There are many reasons why they didn't do it, just like with everything else - widescreen TVs in the early 2000s, health regeneration in FPS games, trackpoint, autogas...So even if Kultura is bringing home the bacon, it wouldn't have been given a change, if not for the fact that TVP was subsidized and that they are required by law to offer cultural shows
That, or someone was crazy enough to make an entire channel dedicated to culture because fuck you, that's why. And don't tell me it doesn't happen because it does happen. Many successful companies were made out of crazy ideas. Hell, even in Poland we used to have entire TV channel dedicated solely to video games!Plus, yes, when it comes to culture I am a leftist. I do believe that theaters, museums, TV stations as TVP Kultura, independent filmmakers and such should be subsidized, so that they don't die because people prefer Braking Bad.
If Breaking Bad had barely any publicity, would you subsidize it so it wouldn't die?
-
@boomzilla said:
We've arrested people who were planning to join ISIS life al-shabob our whatever that Ethiopian terrorist group is.
Who the fuck is "we" in this context? I haven't arrested anybody.
The US, you dickhead. Man, what a horrible nationalist troll you are.
-
On another note: most of the good Polish movies of late were subsidized.
Related: there were more subsidized bad Polish movies than good Polish movies in total.EvenMost notably, the Oscar-winning Ida was.
There are so many conspiracy theories about this movie that I don't really want to discuss it in any extent.
-
Related: there were more subsidized bad Polish movies than good Polish movies in total.
-
Over here on our side of the Atlantic, an educated populace and informed voters are considered Un-American.
And we created teachers' unions to make sure it stays that way.
-
Sturgeon's law
Yeah, that. I wanted to put a link to it in my post but couldn't remember what it was named after.
-
people prefer Braking Bad.
Breaking Bad: American crime drama TV series
Braking Bad: Russian dashcam videos on YouTube
-
-
The US, you dickhead.
Dude, there is no "we" that has no you and me in common. And I didn't arrest anybody, because the "we" that includes me certainly doesn't include the Federal Government, which I only have a vague tolerance of.
You can't just introduce a "we" out of thin air without telling the audience who "we" is. I mean, didn't you learn this in 4th grade? Back in 1837?
-
You can't just introduce a "we" out of thin air without telling the audience who "we" is.
Sorry, forgot you are the context free troll.
-
[Citation needed]
-
There was no previous context that would have established "the US" as "we".
-
There was no previous context that would have established "the US" as "we".
Yes, that's true enough. You have never read any of my posts and have no idea who I am.
-
-
You could be a figment of his imagination. An easy way to check would be to see if you're inexplicably wearing a bra.
-
No, I deny your reasoning that ensuring teachers are motivated to do their jobs somehow makes our school system worse.
-
An easy way to check would be to see if you're inexplicably wearing a bra.
A lady never tells...
-
You have never read any of my posts and have no idea who I am.
LIKE I ALREADY SAID there is no "we" that includes both you and me.
-
Now you deny the existence of teachers' unions‽
This is probably more a question of goals. Teachers' unions, and the education system in general, actually do a good job of forwarding the SJW agenda by
indoctrinating students inintroducing students to the progressive ideology. So they are furthering education (for some definition of education) as far as Fox is concerned.I'm guessing you expected them to teach facts and skills. That is so 20th-century.
-
@boomzilla said:
You have never read any of my posts and have no idea who I am.
LIKE I ALREADY SAID there is no "we" that includes both you and me.
Those are some faaaast reflexes you're demonstrating there, Drax.
-
I'm guessing you expected them to teach facts and skills.
I was really making the fairly banal point that the unions are in it for the teachers, not the kids, and generally oppose innovation as disruptive to their actual mission.
-
ads
Hi there. Just popping into see if you have enough trolling to keep you busy for the rest of the week, or did you want me to mention AdBlock?
-
IKE I ALREADY SAID there is no "we" that includes both you and me.
So you're a Sovereign Citizen fnord? Good luck with that.
Filed Under: Like I'm one to talk
