Perhaps it is just me but….
Most of R4’s output these days seems to have to have a connection with,
come from or be about Ukraine.
Whether is is peotry, drama, music, news items, short talks, even the food
programme!

I realise there is a war in progress and, honestly, I am sympathetic with
the millions of poor souls involved (and I suspect there are even a lot of
Russians who are sympathetic and not in favour of Putin’s greed and
stupidity), however, as usual, Aunty has IMHO gone OVER THE TOP yet again;
I can’t help feeling there may be an edict that producers receive to the
effect, ‘If you want your programme broadcast, it must contain references
or be directly about Ukraine.’

Harrumph!

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

On 10/04/2022 13:32, Mike McMillan wrote:
> Perhaps it is just me but….
> Most of R4’s output these days seems to have to have a connection with,
> come from or be about Ukraine.
> Whether is is peotry, drama, music, news items, short talks, even the food
> programme!
>
> I realise there is a war in progress and, honestly, I am sympathetic with
> the millions of poor souls involved (and I suspect there are even a lot of
> Russians who are sympathetic and not in favour of Putin’s greed and
> stupidity), however, as usual, Aunty has IMHO gone OVER THE TOP yet again;
> I can’t help feeling there may be an edict that producers receive to the
> effect, ‘If you want your programme broadcast, it must contain references
> or be directly about Ukraine.’
>
> Harrumph!
>
>

Though strangely enough the news of a potential Third World War doesn't
seem to have penetrated The Archers. Is the Borsetshire Times owned by
an oligarch? EMWTK.

john

John Ashby <johnashby20@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 10/04/2022 13:32, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> Perhaps it is just me but….
>> Most of R4’s output these days seems to have to have a connection with,
>> come from or be about Ukraine.
>> Whether is is peotry, drama, music, news items, short talks, even the food
>> programme!
>>
>> I realise there is a war in progress and, honestly, I am sympathetic with
>> the millions of poor souls involved (and I suspect there are even a lot of
>> Russians who are sympathetic and not in favour of Putin’s greed and
>> stupidity), however, as usual, Aunty has IMHO gone OVER THE TOP yet again;
>> I can’t help feeling there may be an edict that producers receive to the
>> effect, ‘If you want your programme broadcast, it must contain references
>> or be directly about Ukraine.’
>>
>> Harrumph!
>>
>>
>
> Though strangely enough the news of a potential Third World War doesn't
> seem to have penetrated The Archers. Is the Borsetshire Times owned by
> an oligarch? EMWTK.
>
> john
>

BoJo has actually ordered 5 tonnes of Jill’s flapjack and she has agreed to
give SAS armed assault teams training in throwing flapjack with deadly
intent. Now let me see, writing time, editing, recording … the cat should
come out of the bag in the next week or two as it is too big a story line
for a tactical insert.

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan

On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 at 12:32:44, Mike McMillan
<toodle.pip1@virginmedia.com> wrote (my responses usually FOLLOW):
>Perhaps it is just me but….
>Most of R4’s output these days seems to have to have a connection with,
>come from or be about Ukraine.
>Whether is is peotry, drama, music, news items, short talks, even the food
>programme!
>
>I realise there is a war in progress and, honestly, I am sympathetic with
>the millions of poor souls involved (and I suspect there are even a lot of
>Russians who are sympathetic and not in favour of Putin’s greed and
>stupidity), however, as usual, Aunty has IMHO gone OVER THE TOP yet again;
>I can’t help feeling there may be an edict that producers receive to the
>effect, ‘If you want your programme broadcast, it must contain references
>or be directly about Ukraine.’
>
>Harrumph!
>
>
I call it monostoryism. I'm not as much a listener to R4 (so any radio,
as R4 was almost all anyway) as I used to be, but it's definitely the
case in the news: the news channels (not just the BBC) tend to latch
onto any big story _to the exclusion of anything else_. Partygate, a
royal birth/divorce/marriage, The Slap (which has also IMO been very
one-sided - there's been _no_ condemnation of the "comedian"), so-and-so
being (allegedly) antisemitic, Mrs. Sunak's tax affairs (that had more
than a whiff of racism about it - for the first two or three days, they
were saying she didn't pay UK tax on some things, _without_ saying
whether she paid tax on them elsewhere) ... whatever the story, it is
given far too much coverage, with nothing else getting a look-in. (Or
worse, presumably in a[failed IMO]n effort to avoid such accusations,
all run together in the last few seconds of the bulletin.)

The other side of the coin also applies - in the
half-way-through-the-news headline summary the other day, we got these
two adjacent headlines: station in Ukraine bombed, many killed; it's
Grand National weekend. I hope some editor isn't proud of _that_
juxtaposition.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The main and the most glorious achievement of television is that it is killing
the art of conversation. If we think of the type of conversation television is
helping to kill, our gratitude must be undying. (George Mikes, "How to be
Inimitable" [1960].)

On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 14:18:57 +0100, John Ashby <johnashby20@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On 10/04/2022 13:32, Mike McMillan wrote:
>> Perhaps it is just me but….
>> Most of R4’s output these days seems to have to have a connection with,
>> come from or be about Ukraine.
>> Whether is is peotry, drama, music, news items, short talks, even the food
>> programme!
>>
>> I realise there is a war in progress and, honestly, I am sympathetic with
>> the millions of poor souls involved (and I suspect there are even a lot of
>> Russians who are sympathetic and not in favour of Putin’s greed and
>> stupidity), however, as usual, Aunty has IMHO gone OVER THE TOP yet again;
>> I can’t help feeling there may be an edict that producers receive to the
>> effect, ‘If you want your programme broadcast, it must contain references
>> or be directly about Ukraine.’
>>
>> Harrumph!
>>
>>
>
>Though strangely enough the news of a potential Third World War doesn't
>seem to have penetrated The Archers. Is the Borsetshire Times owned by
>an oligarch? EMWTK.
>
No, it's now borsetshirelive.co.uk and writing a story like that would
require having someone on the staff who passed GCSE English.

Nick

On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 19:58:34 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> scrawled in the dust...

>On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 at 12:32:44, Mike McMillan
><toodle.pip1@virginmedia.com> wrote (my responses usually FOLLOW):
>>Perhaps it is just me but….
>>Most of R4’s output these days seems to have to have a connection with,
>>come from or be about Ukraine.
>>Whether is is peotry, drama, music, news items, short talks, even the food
>>programme!

I listened to that Food Prog and found it very interesting - mainly because
it taught me things about Ukraine of which I was not aware.
Mostly I avoid the news these days but do hear the headlines.

>>I realise there is a war in progress and, honestly, I am sympathetic with
>>the millions of poor souls involved (and I suspect there are even a lot of
>>Russians who are sympathetic and not in favour of Putin’s greed and
>>stupidity), however, as usual, Aunty has IMHO gone OVER THE TOP yet again;
>>I can’t help feeling there may be an edict that producers receive to the
>>effect, ‘If you want your programme broadcast, it must contain references
>>or be directly about Ukraine.’
>>
>>Harrumph!

I've actually found Radio 4 over-saturated with various African countries
and cultures in recent months. I realise they have a lot of catching up to
do in that regard but wish they mixed things up a bit rather than tick that
previously empty box in and among the many others while retaining a bit of
homespun drama too.

>I call it monostoryism. I'm not as much a listener to R4 (so any radio,
>as R4 was almost all anyway) as I used to be, but it's definitely the
>case in the news: the news channels (not just the BBC) tend to latch
>onto any big story _to the exclusion of anything else_. Partygate, a
>royal birth/divorce/marriage, The Slap (which has also IMO been very
>one-sided - there's been _no_ condemnation of the "comedian"), so-and-so
>being (allegedly) antisemitic, Mrs. Sunak's tax affairs (that had more
>than a whiff of racism about it - for the first two or three days, they
>were saying she didn't pay UK tax on some things, _without_ saying
>whether she paid tax on them elsewhere) ... whatever the story, it is
>given far too much coverage, with nothing else getting a look-in. (Or
>worse, presumably in a[failed IMO]n effort to avoid such accusations,
>all run together in the last few seconds of the bulletin.)

The Mrs Sunak 'story' just annoys me.
It's a somewhat weird law but it is legally fine and has been for years -
approved of by all parties AFAIK, as a 'good thing' which brings benefit to
the British economy.
While it might be a good plan to take another look at it in economic terms,
it is grossly unfair to harass someone who has done nothing wrong.
I avoid tax - have done for years - and my money (nowhere near the size of
her stash) is not taxed anywhere else.

--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 18:17:50 +0100, Penny wrote:
>
> The Mrs Sunak 'story' just annoys me.

A would-be prime minister has a wife who declares she is only temporarily
in the UK and it is her intent to return to India, and (it later emerges)
has himself declared an intent to make his home in the USA. As has his
wife.

I'd like a prime minister who actually wants to be British. (At least
Johnson gave up his USA citizenship, but that was to avoid tax.)

> It's a somewhat weird law but it is legally fine and has been for years
> - approved of by all parties AFAIK, as a 'good thing' which brings
> benefit to the British economy.
> While it might be a good plan to take another look at it in economic
> terms,
> it is grossly unfair to harass someone who has done nothing wrong.

Although it was not illegal, it was sufficiently wrong for her to stop as
soon as she was found out.

> I avoid tax - have done for years - and my money (nowhere near the size
> of her stash) is not taxed anywhere else.

Neither is her stash, according to what I've read. Her claim that she'd
be double taxed doesn't wash as the UK and India have a mutual
recognition deal to prevent that. The UK doesn't have such a deal with
whichever off-shore tax haven she hides her unearned income in though.
--
Jim <http://www.jim-easterbrook.me.uk/>
1959/1985? M B+ G+ A L- I- S- P-- CH0(p) Ar++ T+ H0 Q--- Sh0

Penny <spam@labyrinth.freeuk.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 19:58:34 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
> <G6JPG@255soft.uk> scrawled in the dust...
>
>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 at 12:32:44, Mike McMillan
>> <toodle.pip1@virginmedia.com> wrote (my responses usually FOLLOW):
>>> Perhaps it is just me but….
>>> Most of R4’s output these days seems to have to have a connection with,
>>> come from or be about Ukraine.
>>> Whether is is peotry, drama, music, news items, short talks, even the food
>>> programme!
>
> I listened to that Food Prog and found it very interesting - mainly because
> it taught me things about Ukraine of which I was not aware.
> Mostly I avoid the news these days but do hear the headlines.
>
>>> I realise there is a war in progress and, honestly, I am sympathetic with
>>> the millions of poor souls involved (and I suspect there are even a lot of
>>> Russians who are sympathetic and not in favour of Putin’s greed and
>>> stupidity), however, as usual, Aunty has IMHO gone OVER THE TOP yet again;
>>> I can’t help feeling there may be an edict that producers receive to the
>>> effect, ‘If you want your programme broadcast, it must contain references
>>> or be directly about Ukraine.’
>>>
>>> Harrumph!
>
> I've actually found Radio 4 over-saturated with various African countries
> and cultures in recent months. I realise they have a lot of catching up to
> do in that regard but wish they mixed things up a bit rather than tick that
> previously empty box in and among the many others while retaining a bit of
> homespun drama too.
>
>> I call it monostoryism. I'm not as much a listener to R4 (so any radio,
>> as R4 was almost all anyway) as I used to be, but it's definitely the
>> case in the news: the news channels (not just the BBC) tend to latch
>> onto any big story _to the exclusion of anything else_. Partygate, a
>> royal birth/divorce/marriage, The Slap (which has also IMO been very
>> one-sided - there's been _no_ condemnation of the "comedian"), so-and-so
>> being (allegedly) antisemitic, Mrs. Sunak's tax affairs (that had more
>> than a whiff of racism about it - for the first two or three days, they
>> were saying she didn't pay UK tax on some things, _without_ saying
>> whether she paid tax on them elsewhere) ... whatever the story, it is
>> given far too much coverage, with nothing else getting a look-in. (Or
>> worse, presumably in a[failed IMO]n effort to avoid such accusations,
>> all run together in the last few seconds of the bulletin.)
>
> The Mrs Sunak 'story' just annoys me.
> It's a somewhat weird law but it is legally fine and has been for years -
> approved of by all parties AFAIK, as a 'good thing' which brings benefit to
> the British economy.
> While it might be a good plan to take another look at it in economic terms,
> it is grossly unfair to harass someone who has done nothing wrong.
> I avoid tax - have done for years - and my money (nowhere near the size of
> her stash) is not taxed anywhere else.
>

You have to save a Penny somehow.;-)))

--
Toodle Pip, Mike McMillan