Okay, a few hours late.
_insert something terribly poignant and meaningful here_
Thanks. Enough said.
While we're on the topic though, poppies pose a problem. There's these various issues that tend to hit the news every year to do with the fact that this act of support is apparently compulsory dress in many workplaces, schools and suchlike around the country. I readily support the number of people who gave their lives so that we can live in relative freedom today, and have the deepest respect for their sacrifice. I'm just wondering exactly how many people are giving money to the Royal British Legion simply because they have been told to by their bosses or teachers. If you can get into trouble with your boss, into detention at school and suchlike for not wearing a poppy, is that not surely a bit of a negation of the freedom which you are giving thanks for? People fought for our freedom - but that includes the right to be ungrateful or to not recognise this. Supporting veterans and giving thanks is certainly a good thing to do(tm) but if one is being forced to do it, surely that's pretty much taking the piss out of the entire thing.
The main starting point for this was the news story about the criticisms levelled at the newsreader Jon Snow for not wearing a poppy. His response was that while he supported the British Legion and all of the veterans, he refused to wear any symbol of affiliation on air - from an aids ribbon through poppies to any sort of political symbol. And bloody right too. Jon Snow is on Channel 4, which maintains the standards of unbiased journalism which the British broadcast media is known for worldwide (I'm excluding ITV News and Radio 1 "Newsbeat" from this, because they tend to be forced into catering for the lowest common denominator and thus meet lower standards of journalism.) It's absolutely imperative that the newsreader, like the reporter, presents things as they are without any personal bias, even something relatively minor such as their presentation while making the report. It's just a professionalism thing. The guy's said he supports the charity (not that it's any of the complainants' business), and wants to maintain his professional conduct alongside it. Awesome. Now leave him the fuck alone.
Anyways, it's late and I'm a little pissed. See you all tomorrow,
Tom
Thanks. Enough said.
While we're on the topic though, poppies pose a problem. There's these various issues that tend to hit the news every year to do with the fact that this act of support is apparently compulsory dress in many workplaces, schools and suchlike around the country. I readily support the number of people who gave their lives so that we can live in relative freedom today, and have the deepest respect for their sacrifice. I'm just wondering exactly how many people are giving money to the Royal British Legion simply because they have been told to by their bosses or teachers. If you can get into trouble with your boss, into detention at school and suchlike for not wearing a poppy, is that not surely a bit of a negation of the freedom which you are giving thanks for? People fought for our freedom - but that includes the right to be ungrateful or to not recognise this. Supporting veterans and giving thanks is certainly a good thing to do(tm) but if one is being forced to do it, surely that's pretty much taking the piss out of the entire thing.
The main starting point for this was the news story about the criticisms levelled at the newsreader Jon Snow for not wearing a poppy. His response was that while he supported the British Legion and all of the veterans, he refused to wear any symbol of affiliation on air - from an aids ribbon through poppies to any sort of political symbol. And bloody right too. Jon Snow is on Channel 4, which maintains the standards of unbiased journalism which the British broadcast media is known for worldwide (I'm excluding ITV News and Radio 1 "Newsbeat" from this, because they tend to be forced into catering for the lowest common denominator and thus meet lower standards of journalism.) It's absolutely imperative that the newsreader, like the reporter, presents things as they are without any personal bias, even something relatively minor such as their presentation while making the report. It's just a professionalism thing. The guy's said he supports the charity (not that it's any of the complainants' business), and wants to maintain his professional conduct alongside it. Awesome. Now leave him the fuck alone.
Anyways, it's late and I'm a little pissed. See you all tomorrow,
Tom