BBC (again)

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

BBC (again)

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 356 of 435 < 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 >

Glazier#1 30 Nov 23 9.18am
Originally posted by Stirlingsays No, it's because the advertising rules imposed conditions on 'representation'. They go beyond the requirement to ensure they don't make a mistake and get penalised. --------------------- They know who their customer base is and who they wish to sell to. They run focus groups to inform them of their customer- base preferences. Also, sorry to tell you, it's not old duffers like you or I but those they deem have the most disposable income or spending power. I'm not saying we're past it but.... we're past it. An interesting dynamic is why it invariably features white women with black men. Why not black women with white men? Who knows? I might imagine that it has something to do with a cultural history where the sexual power ratio might militate against such unions; perhaps, culturally, it's seen as 'disloyal' for a black woman to go with a white man. That's probably a completely stupid and false stab; I'm only guessing but it's definitely noticeable. On the other hand, it could be, dare I say, that white women just find black men more attractive. I reckon that's what white blokes may fear. But what do I know? I only throw it out there. What do you reckon, Wisbech?
Alert a moderator to this post

Glazier#1

30 Nov 23 9.18am

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

No, it's because the advertising rules imposed conditions on 'representation'. They go beyond the requirement to ensure they don't make a mistake and get penalised.

---------------------

They know who their customer base is and who they wish to sell to. They run focus groups to inform them of their customer- base preferences.

Also, sorry to tell you, it's not old duffers like you or I but those they deem have the most disposable income or spending power.

I'm not saying we're past it but.... we're past it.

An interesting dynamic is why it invariably features white women with black men. Why not black women with white men? Who knows?

I might imagine that it has something to do with a cultural history where the sexual power ratio might militate against such unions; perhaps, culturally, it's seen as 'disloyal' for a black woman to go with a white man.

That's probably a completely stupid and false stab; I'm only guessing but it's definitely noticeable.

On the other hand, it could be, dare I say, that white women just find black men more attractive. I reckon that's what white blokes may fear.

But what do I know? I only throw it out there.

What do you reckon, Wisbech?

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 30 Nov 23 9.21am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle You, unsurprisingly, miss the point completely. I wasn’t comparing numbers. I was highlighting the fear of change. No one argues that there won’t be change. There always has been and almost certainly always will. Along with everything in life changes are occurring faster than in the past. That’s just the way it is. Trying to hold back the tide of history is a pointless waste of time and effort. What we must do is find ways to embrace and harvest it. Arguing we will be replaced is a totally nonsensical idea. We will be replaced whatever happens. Our children and grandchildren will replace us and theirs them. Their experiences and attitudes will be different to ours, just as ours are different to our parents and grandparents, who may well have not been comfortable with the life we lead. There’s nothing new involved and you have neither the right nor the means to try to control the lives of our successors. That’s theirs. All we can do is ensure we leave behind a situation in which they can live successfully and happily. Not one full of fear and division. I am sure you switch off at the use of terms such as supremacist, as It carries such bad connotations. Others though won’t miss the point or the reasons why it’s use in this context is appropriate. Why, to a few of the most blinkered here, it seems to matter where I happen to currently live or how often I personally witness anything, beats me. I have retired to somewhere I love, having lived in many places both in the UK and elsewhere during my life. I have enough experience to reach opinions and a brain that functions perfectly well and a keen interest in current affairs. I haven’t noticed you, or anyone else here, not commenting on issues in the USA, Ukraine or Gaza just because you don’t live there! Edited by Wisbech Eagle (30 Nov 2023 9.10am) This is just nonsense. There is no certainty to just about anything. The future of our population can be changed by decisions made today. As you so often point out, any projection is based on current trends. Those trends are determined by policy and can be changed. You suggest that nothing is inevitable in one breath and then say it is in another. A wonderful example of doublethink. You can't have it both ways. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (30 Nov 2023 9.21am)
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

30 Nov 23 9.21am

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

You, unsurprisingly, miss the point completely.

I wasn’t comparing numbers. I was highlighting the fear of change.

No one argues that there won’t be change. There always has been and almost certainly always will. Along with everything in life changes are occurring faster than in the past. That’s just the way it is. Trying to hold back the tide of history is a pointless waste of time and effort. What we must do is find ways to embrace and harvest it.

Arguing we will be replaced is a totally nonsensical idea. We will be replaced whatever happens. Our children and grandchildren will replace us and theirs them. Their experiences and attitudes will be different to ours, just as ours are different to our parents and grandparents, who may well have not been comfortable with the life we lead. There’s nothing new involved and you have neither the right nor the means to try to control the lives of our successors. That’s theirs. All we can do is ensure we leave behind a situation in which they can live successfully and happily. Not one full of fear and division.

I am sure you switch off at the use of terms such as supremacist, as It carries such bad connotations. Others though won’t miss the point or the reasons why it’s use in this context is appropriate.

Why, to a few of the most blinkered here, it seems to matter where I happen to currently live or how often I personally witness anything, beats me.

I have retired to somewhere I love, having lived in many places both in the UK and elsewhere during my life. I have enough experience to reach opinions and a brain that functions perfectly well and a keen interest in current affairs. I haven’t noticed you, or anyone else here, not commenting on issues in the USA, Ukraine or Gaza just because you don’t live there!

Edited by Wisbech Eagle (30 Nov 2023 9.10am)

This is just nonsense.

There is no certainty to just about anything.
The future of our population can be changed by decisions made today.
As you so often point out, any projection is based on current trends. Those trends are determined by policy and can be changed.

You suggest that nothing is inevitable in one breath and then say it is in another.

A wonderful example of doublethink.
You can't have it both ways.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (30 Nov 2023 9.21am)

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 9.23am
Originally posted by cryrst Oh but you can see the future when Brexit is involved. My ball and I’m taking it home ! I can hold an opinion and I can vote. So can you and everyone else, with a vote. We voted to leave. My opinion is we should not have been asked to vote on this, having already chosen our representatives. Those representatives can decide to rejoin. It’s possible. I think in time they will. They can also adopt measures to limit immigration, if they think it wise. It’s possible, but it won’t change the past. We are where we are. I think they will try to limit illegal immigration in whatever way they can and will react to the impact of AI on employment in how they manage legal immigration. We have though seen change, and I think more is inevitable. That being true requires us to ensure we manage that change positively and to the benefit of everyone. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 9.23am

Originally posted by cryrst

Oh but you can see the future when Brexit is involved. My ball and I’m taking it home !

I can hold an opinion and I can vote. So can you and everyone else, with a vote.

We voted to leave. My opinion is we should not have been asked to vote on this, having already chosen our representatives.

Those representatives can decide to rejoin. It’s possible. I think in time they will.

They can also adopt measures to limit immigration, if they think it wise. It’s possible, but it won’t change the past. We are where we are. I think they will try to limit illegal immigration in whatever way they can and will react to the impact of AI on employment in how they manage legal immigration. We have though seen change, and I think more is inevitable. That being true requires us to ensure we manage that change positively and to the benefit of everyone.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 9.40am
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger This is just nonsense. There is no certainty to just about anything. The future of our population can be changed by decisions made today. As you so often point out, any projection is based on current trends. Those trends are determined by policy and can be changed. You suggest that nothing is inevitable in one breath and then say it is in another. A wonderful example of doublethink. You can't have it both ways. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (30 Nov 2023 9.21am) There is a difference between certainty and extremely high probability, but not sufficient to change policy. Given our political system and our present needs it’s extremely unlikely that decisions will be made that result in any kind of cliff edge decline in immigration in the short to medium term. The current spike will flatten somewhat and AI will likely reduce the need in time. However what we already have is baked in and will go on being added to for as far into the future as it’s possible to see. Other scenarios are the wishful thinking of the politically naive who, even if they somehow managed to secure power, would be unable to deliver. Much as the Brexiteers have failed to deliver their immigration promises. We need to be realistic. Accept that there are issues that need addressing and then work to deal with them. Positive action is what’s needed. Not a pointless moanfest of impracticality. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 9.40am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

This is just nonsense.

You suggest that nothing is inevitable in one breath and then say it is in another.

A wonderful example of doublethink.
You can't have it both ways.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (30 Nov 2023 9.21am)

There is a difference between certainty and extremely high probability, but not sufficient to change policy.

Given our political system and our present needs it’s extremely unlikely that decisions will be made that result in any kind of cliff edge decline in immigration in the short to medium term. The current spike will flatten somewhat and AI will likely reduce the need in time. However what we already have is baked in and will go on being added to for as far into the future as it’s possible to see. Other scenarios are the wishful thinking of the politically naive who, even if they somehow managed to secure power, would be unable to deliver. Much as the Brexiteers have failed to deliver their immigration promises.

We need to be realistic. Accept that there are issues that need addressing and then work to deal with them. Positive action is what’s needed. Not a pointless moanfest of impracticality.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 9.47am
Originally posted by Glazier#1 --------------------- They know who their customer base is and who they wish to sell to. They run focus groups to inform them of their customer- base preferences. Also, sorry to tell you, it's not old duffers like you or I but those they deem have the most disposable income or spending power. I'm not saying we're past it but.... we're past it. An interesting dynamic is why it invariably features white women with black men. Why not black women with white men? Who knows? I might imagine that it has something to do with a cultural history where the sexual power ratio might militate against such unions; perhaps, culturally, it's seen as 'disloyal' for a black woman to go with a white man. That's probably a completely stupid and false stab; I'm only guessing but it's definitely noticeable. On the other hand, it could be, dare I say, that white women just find black men more attractive. I reckon that's what white blokes may fear. But what do I know? I only throw it out there. What do you reckon, Wisbech? I don’t know what the thinking is, but it would be interesting to find out. The ad agencies seem all to be having the same thoughts so there must be a basis for it. They tend to understand these things pretty well. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 9.47am

Originally posted by Glazier#1

---------------------

They know who their customer base is and who they wish to sell to. They run focus groups to inform them of their customer- base preferences.

Also, sorry to tell you, it's not old duffers like you or I but those they deem have the most disposable income or spending power.

I'm not saying we're past it but.... we're past it.

An interesting dynamic is why it invariably features white women with black men. Why not black women with white men? Who knows?

That's probably a completely stupid and false stab; I'm only guessing but it's definitely noticeable.

On the other hand, it could be, dare I say, that white women just find black men more attractive. I reckon that's what white blokes may fear.

But what do I know? I only throw it out there.

What do you reckon, Wisbech?

I don’t know what the thinking is, but it would be interesting to find out.

The ad agencies seem all to be having the same thoughts so there must be a basis for it. They tend to understand these things pretty well.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 30 Nov 23 9.51am
Originally posted by Glazier#1 --------------------- They know who their customer base is and who they wish to sell to. They run focus groups to inform them of their customer- base preferences. Also, sorry to tell you, it's not old duffers like you or I but those they deem have the most disposable income or spending power. I'm not saying we're past it but.... we're past it. An interesting dynamic is why it invariably features white women with black men. Why not black women with white men? Who knows? I might imagine that it has something to do with a cultural history where the sexual power ratio might militate against such unions; perhaps, culturally, it's seen as 'disloyal' for a black woman to go with a white man. That's probably a completely stupid and false stab; I'm only guessing but it's definitely noticeable. On the other hand, it could be, dare I say, that white women just find black men more attractive. I reckon that's what white blokes may fear. But what do I know? I only throw it out there. What do you reckon, Wisbech? I would think from the advertiser's point of view it's a way of increasing their potential market share rather than political correctness but who knows? From conversations in the past black women aren't impressed at seeing "their" men represented with white women.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

30 Nov 23 9.51am

Originally posted by Glazier#1

---------------------

They know who their customer base is and who they wish to sell to. They run focus groups to inform them of their customer- base preferences.

Also, sorry to tell you, it's not old duffers like you or I but those they deem have the most disposable income or spending power.

I'm not saying we're past it but.... we're past it.

An interesting dynamic is why it invariably features white women with black men. Why not black women with white men? Who knows?

That's probably a completely stupid and false stab; I'm only guessing but it's definitely noticeable.

On the other hand, it could be, dare I say, that white women just find black men more attractive. I reckon that's what white blokes may fear.

But what do I know? I only throw it out there.

What do you reckon, Wisbech?

I would think from the advertiser's point of view it's a way of increasing their potential market share rather than political correctness but who knows?
From conversations in the past black women aren't impressed at seeing "their" men represented with white women.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 30 Nov 23 9.55am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle There is a difference between certainty and extremely high probability, but not sufficient to change policy. Given our political system and our present needs it’s extremely unlikely that decisions will be made that result in any kind of cliff edge decline in immigration in the short to medium term. The current spike will flatten somewhat and AI will likely reduce the need in time. However what we already have is baked in and will go on being added to for as far into the future as it’s possible to see. Other scenarios are the wishful thinking of the politically naive who, even if they somehow managed to secure power, would be unable to deliver. Much as the Brexiteers have failed to deliver their immigration promises. We need to be realistic. Accept that there are issues that need addressing and then work to deal with them. Positive action is what’s needed. Not a pointless moanfest of impracticality. Politicians need to stop thinking in terms of economics regarding immigration and think about the bigger picture. So do people like you. There is no long term financial advantage to mass immigration anyway, and a huge cost in resources. Unless there is concerted pressure to deal with this then things will continue as they are. Politicians only care about keeping their jobs and that is where we have power.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

30 Nov 23 9.55am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

There is a difference between certainty and extremely high probability, but not sufficient to change policy.

We need to be realistic. Accept that there are issues that need addressing and then work to deal with them. Positive action is what’s needed. Not a pointless moanfest of impracticality.

Politicians need to stop thinking in terms of economics regarding immigration and think about the bigger picture. So do people like you.
There is no long term financial advantage to mass immigration anyway, and a huge cost in resources.

Unless there is concerted pressure to deal with this then things will continue as they are. Politicians only care about keeping their jobs and that is where we have power.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 10.04am
It always amuses and puzzles me in equal measure when I read the not infrequent suggestions that because I live in Cornwall I am unqualified to comment on issues elsewhere. Particularly so when they originate from Cambridgeshire, which is an area I have also lived in, for longer than I have been in Cornwall. The population Cambridgeshire is 94.6% “white”. I haven’t noticed any reticence from them on making comments on anything under the sun as a consequence. Wherever and whatever it occurs they are expert on it. In fact I suspect I have far more experience of actually living in diverse areas, having moved frequently during my career and subsequently lived abroad for a while. Hypocrisy in spades. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 10.04am

It always amuses and puzzles me in equal measure when I read the not infrequent suggestions that because I live in Cornwall I am unqualified to comment on issues elsewhere.

Particularly so when they originate from Cambridgeshire, which is an area I have also lived in, for longer than I have been in Cornwall. The population Cambridgeshire is 94.6% “white”.

I haven’t noticed any reticence from them on making comments on anything under the sun as a consequence. Wherever and whatever it occurs they are expert on it. In fact I suspect I have far more experience of actually living in diverse areas, having moved frequently during my career and subsequently lived abroad for a while.

Hypocrisy in spades.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 10.10am
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger Politicians need to stop thinking in terms of economics regarding immigration and think about the bigger picture. So do people like you. There is no long term financial advantage to mass immigration anyway, and a huge cost in resources. Unless there is concerted pressure to deal with this then things will continue as they are. Politicians only care about keeping their jobs and that is where we have power. What you think politicians ought to be thinking is for you to determine. Just as it is for me. We each have a vote. In the meantime we will go on doing what we do. The choice we face as individuals is whether we just moan about things on social media or try to make things better, within the scope that we actually possess. I have made my choice. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 10.10am

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Unless there is concerted pressure to deal with this then things will continue as they are. Politicians only care about keeping their jobs and that is where we have power.

What you think politicians ought to be thinking is for you to determine. Just as it is for me. We each have a vote.

In the meantime we will go on doing what we do.

The choice we face as individuals is whether we just moan about things on social media or try to make things better, within the scope that we actually possess.

I have made my choice.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 30 Nov 23 10.10am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle It always amuses and puzzles me in equal measure when I read the not infrequent suggestions that because I live in Cornwall I am unqualified to comment on issues elsewhere. Particularly so when they originate from Cambridgeshire, which is an area I have also lived in, for longer than I have been in Cornwall. The population Cambridgeshire is 94.6% “white”. I haven’t noticed any reticence from them on making comments on anything under the sun as a consequence. Wherever and whatever it occurs they are expert on it. In fact I suspect I have far more experience of actually living in diverse areas, having moved frequently during my career and subsequently lived abroad for a while. Hypocrisy in spades. It's not so much commenting on others' experience on where they live as correcting them for having certain viewpoints. It's like people whose homes are regularly flooded being told to get over it by others who live on a hill.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

30 Nov 23 10.10am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

It always amuses and puzzles me in equal measure when I read the not infrequent suggestions that because I live in Cornwall I am unqualified to comment on issues elsewhere.

Particularly so when they originate from Cambridgeshire, which is an area I have also lived in, for longer than I have been in Cornwall. The population Cambridgeshire is 94.6% “white”.

Hypocrisy in spades.

It's not so much commenting on others' experience on where they live as correcting them for having certain viewpoints. It's like people whose homes are regularly flooded being told to get over it by others who live on a hill.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 10.21am
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle It's not so much commenting on others' experience on where they live as correcting them for having certain viewpoints. It's like people whose homes are regularly flooded being told to get over it by others who live on a hill. Differences in viewpoints are the normal currency of debate. No problem. This isn’t that though. Those living on a hill are perfectly entitled to point out the wisdom of their location to those flooded below. No one though should ever tell someone to get over it. Offering a plot next door would be a kindness. Cornwall has houses for sale. For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.
Alert a moderator to this post

Wisbech Eagle

Truro Cornwall 30 Nov 23 10.21am

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Differences in viewpoints are the normal currency of debate. No problem.

This isn’t that though.

Those living on a hill are perfectly entitled to point out the wisdom of their location to those flooded below. No one though should ever tell someone to get over it. Offering a plot next door would be a kindness. Cornwall has houses for sale.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 30 Nov 23 10.34am
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle Differences in viewpoints are the normal currency of debate. No problem. This isn’t that though. Those living on a hill are perfectly entitled to point out the wisdom of their location to those flooded below. No one though should ever tell someone to get over it. Offering a plot next door would be a kindness. Cornwall has houses for sale. Rather a literal interpretation. I could offer farmers any amount of advice and they'd be right to ignore it because I don't know anything about farming, have never lived on a farm and never wanted to do so. But I've been to farms so am entitled to tell them what they should do.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

30 Nov 23 10.34am

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Differences in viewpoints are the normal currency of debate. No problem.

This isn’t that though.

Rather a literal interpretation.
I could offer farmers any amount of advice and they'd be right to ignore it because I don't know anything about farming, have never lived on a farm and never wanted to do so. But I've been to farms so am entitled to tell them what they should do.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 356 of 435 < 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

BBC (again)

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors