Is 2005 the year to be a callous bastard?
I ask because I'm getting fed up to the back teeth with two things this year already. One is tragic and shocking, the other is petty and inconsequential.
I'm shocked and appalled at the devastation caused by the tsunami. It looks like nearly a quarter of a million people could end up dead because of it. It is a shocking and tragic event, but can we please stock having 24/7 coverage of it. Surely news people realised after weeks of 9/11 that most people don't want their TVs choc-a-bloc with tragedy - it puts everyone on a downer and we need to be positive about the beginning of the year.
The other thing that has pissed me off recently is the BBC. Now I'm a fan of the Beeb, but I'm growing concerned that my license fee is not used the way I want it to be.
Take BBCNews24 for starters, and throw in the BBC1 bulletins for good measure.
Do we really need two-thirds of the BBC news team positioned across the devastated areas? Did we really have to fly George Alaghia and Sian Williams out to Sri Lanka? Did we really need 6 different reporters in the Ukraine for the elections and subsequent upheaval? I'm growing concerned that my money is being used to keep news teams in work and while I'm on the subject, just who pays for BBCs 3 & 4?
No comments:
Post a Comment