Please let this post be submitted. I've been away and was unaware there was a time limit and archiving of threads. I demand/ask nicely/beg for a right of reply.
BBC LDN posted:
What the hell...?¿
That silly tart wrote posted:
Sorry for taking so long in responding. But, i'm sure you'll appreciate that it is hard for me to be able to counter such a constructive and intelligently thought start to a discussion. I'll have to get back to you on this one.
I've explained exactly why I don't like it - because it's not deep and meaningful and thought-provocative.
The thing is...that every line is TRUE. You only have to see how even the television stations caught a severe case of tabloiditis during the Iraq war/invasion.
Practically every station and newspaper carried the same picture of a father carrying his daughter in his arms after a missile hit a market. However, every single one cut the photograph off at the level of the girls knees. This gave the impression she may have just been unconscious. I suggest you trace the picture in full and you will find that her lower legs were shredded. Pretty certain that means she was most likely dead. On the whole references were not made to the status of the girls health, ie. dead or alive. Just the fact that a father 'carries his daughter'.
If you desire something a bit more thought-provoking try War (truth of course)
BBC LDN posted:
Your poem isn't good enough to scratch my dead skin cells off, much less touch a raw nerve. If you want people to respect your writing, you should try making your poems less obvious and puerile.
It's not my poem.
BBC LDN posted:
Rants against 'the machine' in language that would get you laughed out of GCSE English...
I think you will find that the (non)structure of the 'poems' and simplistic language are deliberate. In the same way that if you are attacked or in a heated argument. Raw emotion spews forth and not perfect grammar.
Most of the site is based on (shock, horror) punk rock style music and lyrics. That does not mean it doesn't contain accurate realities.
I guess you won't be amused at the complexity of the 'witty ditty' contained in Religion (man-made death, hate and oppression) Genuinely interested in your response.
My response is that I haven't a clue what you're on about. I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with TV Presentation though... now perhaps someone will do the necessary with this topic.
My response is that I haven't a clue what you're on about. I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with TV Presentation though... now perhaps someone will do the necessary with this topic.
It is very much to do with tv presentation. I guess, 'mis-presentation' may be more accurate. I would have thought the 'presentation' of the iraq incident to be worthy of discussion. Also, the way social or political events are treated. From the sycophantic simpering of newsreaders when covering the royals to only briefly touching upon protestors views on numerous isssues. Is 'do the necessary' a euphenism for censorship ?.
My response is that I haven't a clue what you're on about. I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with TV Presentation though... now perhaps someone will do the necessary with this topic.
It is very much to do with tv presentation. I guess, 'mis-presentation' may be more accurate. I would have thought the 'presentation' of the iraq incident to be worthy of discussion. Also, the way social or political events are treated. From the sycophantic simpering of newsreaders when covering the royals to only briefly touching upon protestors views on numerous isssues.
Is 'do the necessary' a euphenism for censorship ?.
Me neither. Something to do with this thread though I don't know why "juliesays" couldn't continue in that one so not to baffle us.
I had been away for a couple of weeks. When i went to reply upon my return, the thread had been locked. As far as i know because of a time limit for replies.
No, still no idea.