Nanny Beeb?

[b.h.j...@hw.ac.uk]

For nearly 34 years my wife and I have left The Archers on as a
matter of pleasing, relaxing background - EVEN (would you believe)
something to talk about to quite a large percentage of friends and
relations.

Since somewhat before John's death we regularly turn it off when
there is sobbing or quarrelling. Which is most episodes.

Is someone trying to influence the British public some way?

It fits in with changes in a similar direction in a lot of other
Beeb output. "Assume the listener is too stupid to discuss events
sensibly and take care of him/her self"?

Nanny? As in "Ah, diddums nasty bank charge for a letter den?"

Anyway, I don't like the trend. Are we being softened up?

============ ===== ===== BILL J. ===== ===== ============
GM8APX, qthr Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

Nolant id in ea...nolite pavidus esse!

Net-Tamer V 1.11 - Registered

[Jonathan Sambrook]

b.h.j...@hw.ac.uk wrote in message <6i3qgs$l0k$1...@cn1.hw.ac.uk>...

> Since somewhat before John's death we regularly turn it off when
> there is sobbing or quarrelling. Which is most episodes.
>
> Is someone trying to influence the British public some way?
>
> It fits in with changes in a similar direction in a lot of other
> Beeb output. "Assume the listener is too stupid to discuss events
> sensibly and take care of him/her self"?

<please don't flame me>Post Princess Di-sorder, perhaps?</please don't flame
me>

[Melvin I Reynolds]

In article <6i3qgs$l0k$1...@cn1.hw.ac.uk>, b.h.j...@hw.ac.uk writes

>
> For nearly 34 years my wife and I have left The Archers on as a
> matter of pleasing, relaxing background - EVEN (would you believe)
> something to talk about to quite a large percentage of friends and
> relations.
>

> Since somewhat before John's death we regularly turn it off when
> there is sobbing or quarrelling. Which is most episodes.
>
> Is someone trying to influence the British public some way?
>
> It fits in with changes in a similar direction in a lot of other
> Beeb output. "Assume the listener is too stupid to discuss events
> sensibly and take care of him/her self"?
>

> Nanny? As in "Ah, diddums nasty bank charge for a letter den?"
>
> Anyway, I don't like the trend. Are we being softened up?
>

Probably. But maybe they think that all we need is a make-believe world.
After all, news 'items' have been replaced by 'stories',irrelevancies
become 'investigations', perspective and balance swapped for the heavy-
handed use of the magnifying glass...
I don't understand, but then perhaps I'm more dumb than I thought, after
all even the 'serious' papers are doing it.

Best regards,

Melvin Reynolds.