People who think the BBC could actually do that 👇without heads rolling, raise your hand?
And yes you can treat the subject with more subtlety -If you want people to say you willingly downplayed the whole thing
There is no way to patriotically treat that (even with the big flag)
And yes you can treat the subject with more subtlety -If you want people to say you willingly downplayed the whole thing
There is no way to patriotically treat that (even with the big flag)
Now the BBC-that-once-was would indeed have been able to mention that story -maybe even by focusing on the public money spent on the Beluga's mistress.
The "respect-the-flag-and-get-those-woke-shows-out-of-my-sight-you-official-govt-propaganda-channel!" -Not so much.
The "respect-the-flag-and-get-those-woke-shows-out-of-my-sight-you-official-govt-propaganda-channel!" -Not so much.
Now get back a few years in time, &tell me what politician could have escaped resigning for this deranged beluga's embezzlement of public money on sock-searching mistress.
The answer is none.
Because at the time, the media did not have to be "patriotic" in the holy name of Brexit
The answer is none.
Because at the time, the media did not have to be "patriotic" in the holy name of Brexit
There were lies already, &claims other people had it all wrong.
But it wasn't "treason" of the holy "will of the people" wrapped into nationalism's flag. People with different opinions were acceptable. Do-gooders weren't the enemy of the people. The UK wasn't at war -with itself.
But it wasn't "treason" of the holy "will of the people" wrapped into nationalism's flag. People with different opinions were acceptable. Do-gooders weren't the enemy of the people. The UK wasn't at war -with itself.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
