tomo, the flower RHS shows are much the same except you can bring your own food and drink and you can go home at the end of the day. They've killed the golden goose though and a lot of the exhibitors are no longer willing to stump up the cash for the RHS to profit from. They're essentially expensive, over crowded garden centres.

The DM article that goes with the picture talks about 'volunteers' picking up the litter. In reality, they're people who are essentially working for less than minimum wage. They agree to work during the show, in exchange for free attendance. They get to pitch their tents the furthest away from the stages and spend most of the days and nights working. The rest periods are such that the workers are invariably a long distance from the stages when they're free and have to slog to the already crowded venues. my nephew foolishly signed up for it and swore 'never again'.

You would think that Corbyn wouldn't agree with that style of greedy capitalistic exploitation of young people. Nah, anything to get a few cheers from the wealthy socialists who certainly won't be picking up litter at the end.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/06/26/08/article-4638888-41C3C66100000578-141_964x548.jpg

The greenest, most socially aware generations ever, who are going to save the planet and society from the rest of us?

TinyCO2

I used to listen to R4 regularly in the expectation that I'd get reportage of a sort , informed commentary that sought to explore issues in a rational way and journalism that made an effort at balance - throw in some occasional diverse drama / amusement ...

Those days are but a distant memory. For the most part it's an unlistenable predictably formulaic monoculture freak show. I thought it was me ... and I tried to listen on the basis that I might well be wrong and they'd convince me of the errors of my ways....

Fat chance - the sneering, the skewing, the political correctness and perhaps above all the presumption to omniscient authority on simply any matter from a wholly partisan perspective are all utterly insufferable.

I listened to BBC World Service's decline on short wave from remote parts and in truth I had an inkling / knew what was coming down the chute. I thought it was maybe a late flowering of my inner curmudgeon - but I spoke with younger colleagues and foreigners who seemed pretty unanimous that there'd been a recipe change and the product was now so tainted as to be near unpalatable and taken with a large pinch of salt.

The tactic of egregious bias by omission seems now so deeply engrained that they think they can get away with snipping bits out of the middle of eyewitness accounts in a manner so crude that it reminds me of the Spitting Image satirical police interview videos of the 1980s .

It would seem that they're trying to ape Guardian Media Group's circulation performance. I simply wouldn't believe any viewing figures they proffered anyway - not that they care - BBC Three is still going years after they agreed to euthanise it as nobody watched it

Peter Sissons sat in the office checking out The Daily Mail inside a copy of The Guardian .... The present cabal are so enamored with the concept of haram that one is forced to suspect they canned the long running / successful "What The Papers Say" since it involved an agreed round robin of the press rather than their chosen commentators / 'slebs. Lily Allen as a guest editor on Today anyone?

If only the BBC would do something similar .......

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/06/25/aussie-government-broadcaster-gives-climate-skeptics-airtime/

Judith Curry explains what Climategate really revealed about Climate Science.