From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

In article <106n5o0$1gihd$1@dont-email.me>,
jon <reading.mostly@crap.org> wrote:

When I was at school there was a country called Palestine, but the
jews over ran that like everywhere else they settled.

Has Britain been "over ran" by Jews?
Far be it from me to claim that Israel is a perfect state that has
been 100% over the decades, they have not.

However, lets be clear who the monster is in all this: "HAMAS". Iran
backed terrorists.

Do you fully understand the terible, really terrible things they did on
October 7th or have you not really grasped it?

They are why there is such suffering in Palestine. They are why it is impossible to negotiate a solution, or even release the sausages.
They are why Egypt has built a massive wall to keep Palestinians out.

Remember how many billions of dollars were poured into Palestine to
build it up into a proper nation but instead, Hamas chose to buy
weapons and build tunnels under schools and hospitals. Build for war
not a nation because of Jew hatred.

Don't believe what the BBC/Sky and any of the antisemitism riddled left
say. This form of racism is fine in the UK even though they are harmless contributors to the UK....


Bob.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On Sun, 03 Aug 2025 10:04:50 +0100, Bob Latham
<bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

In article <106n5o0$1gihd$1@dont-email.me>,
jon <reading.mostly@crap.org> wrote:

When I was at school there was a country called Palestine, but the
jews over ran that like everywhere else they settled.

Has Britain been "over ran" by Jews?
Far be it from me to claim that Israel is a perfect state that has
been 100% over the decades, they have not.

However, lets be clear who the monster is in all this: "HAMAS". Iran
backed terrorists.

Do you fully understand the terible, really terrible things they did on >October 7th or have you not really grasped it?

They are why there is such suffering in Palestine. They are why it is >impossible to negotiate a solution, or even release the sausages.
They are why Egypt has built a massive wall to keep Palestinians out.

Remember how many billions of dollars were poured into Palestine to
build it up into a proper nation but instead, Hamas chose to buy
weapons and build tunnels under schools and hospitals. Build for war
not a nation because of Jew hatred.

Don't believe what the BBC/Sky and any of the antisemitism riddled left
say. This form of racism is fine in the UK even though they are harmless >contributors to the UK....

I believe that Nazis killed whole villages in revenge for the death of
a German soldier.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 03/08/2025 10:04, Bob Latham wrote:

Has Britain been "over ran" by Jews?
Far be it from me to claim that Israel is a perfect state that has
been 100% over the decades, they have not.

However, lets be clear who the monster is in all this: "HAMAS". Iran
backed terrorists.

Do you fully understand the terible, really terrible things they did on October 7th or have you not really grasped it?

And do you understand the reasons why they felt the need to do what they
did then? Many, many years of oppression and aggression by Israel. Hamas
was formed as a reaction to Israeli expansion plans. Check the full
history of what has been happening in Palestine since the 1948 agreement
split it onto a Jewish bit almost fully surrounded by n Arab bit.

And since October 7th 2023, there have been credible reports of the IDF killing many thousand of innocent civilians and destroying many homes,
schools and hospitals in their quest to get rid of Hamas. "We think
there may be a Hamas base under that hospital" Bombs and other nastiness flattens the hospital. The tunnels, if they even existed, are probably
still usable...

If, as the Israelis claim, all they want is their hostages back, the SAS
or then American imitators could do that in a few weeks, if not days. As
it is, they seem to be following a scorched earth policy, and doing
their best to make the Gaza strip uninhabitable. Also,ask yourself why
the Israelis are forbidding independent reporters from entering the Gaza strip, and forcing them all to be based in areas controlled by Israeli authorities, while relying on reports posted by local residents?

They are why there is such suffering in Palestine. They are why it is impossible to negotiate a solution, or even release the sausages.
They are why Egypt has built a massive wall to keep Palestinians out.

Think about the 1948 agreement which created the modern state of Israel.
That annoyed everyone in the area except the Jews. The Egyptian wall was
built for the same reason that Trump wants to build a wall on the
Mexican border, to keep the illegal immigrants and refugees out.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 03/08/2025 09:13, jon wrote:

When I was at school there was a country called Palestine, but the jews
over ran that like everywhere else they settled.

I don't know when you went to school but I doubt that a 'country' was
marked on the maps. A region perhaps but it has never been a country.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 03/08/2025 10:04, Bob Latham wrote:

They are why there is such suffering in Palestine. They are why it is impossible to negotiate a solution, or even release the sausages.
They are why Egypt has built a massive wall to keep Palestinians out.

It is not even 'a wall', it is a series of walls and defences comparable
to what there was in Berlin.



--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On Sun, 3 Aug 2025 13:19:33 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

On 03/08/2025 09:13, jon wrote:

When I was at school there was a country called Palestine, but the jews
over ran that like everywhere else they settled.

I don't know when you went to school but I doubt that a 'country' was
marked on the maps. A region perhaps but it has never been a country.

Before the creation of Israel, was Palestine not a 'Protectorate'
administered by the UK under a mandate from the League of Nations
(also known as 'Mandatory Palestine')? Does this not suggest that
Palestine was a country (in mapping terms) that was administered by
the League of Nations? (There may have been a short spell between the
ending of the mandate and the creation of the State of Israel.)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/8/3 5:8:30, Andy Burns wrote:

"J. P. Gilliver" wrote:

How do the plethora of small channels we have now get treated in that
regard - are they obliged to pay a levy towards it? AFAI can see, none
of them carry any news - only ITV (or itv1 as they want us to call
them), C4, and - though minimally - 5.

Some other ITV channels seem to have a "newsblit" shoved in like an ad-break?

I think I may have seen those occasionally. Though I don't think so on
"itv2" or "itv3", let alone things like Dave.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end. --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

In article <mf8rldFkcl4U1@mid.individual.net>,
John Williamson <johnwilliamson@btinternet.com> wrote:

And since October 7th 2023, there have been credible reports of the
IDF killing many thousand of innocent civilians and destroying
many homes, schools and hospitals in their quest to get rid of
Hamas. "We think there may be a Hamas base under that hospital"
Bombs and other nastiness flattens the hospital. The tunnels, if
they even existed, are probably still usable...

If, as the Israelis claim, all they want is their hostages back,
the SAS or then American imitators could do that in a few weeks,
if not days. As it is, they seem to be following a scorched earth
policy, and doing their best to make the Gaza strip uninhabitable.
Also,ask yourself why the Israelis are forbidding independent
reporters from entering the Gaza strip, and forcing them all to be
based in areas controlled by Israeli authorities, while relying on
reports posted by local residents?

Propaganda has been very effective.

You cannot negotiate with people who's creed is your extermination!

Don't think I'm not concerned with innocent lives being lost or
ruined by war on either side because I am.

But if you start a war and Hamas did start a war and then refuse to
give up your prisoners there will be consequences.

What are you supposed to do when your neighbour wishes to exterminate
you and keeps trying to do so again and again? Agree a cease fire is
usually up there, get troops out of gaza etc. etc. .

Then what? Then what?

You know without the slightest doubt that HAMAS will regroup, get
more arms and support from Iran and prepare to attack again and again
and again.

I think the BBC expect the Israel to sit there and take it.

We now have a problem in the west in that many, many well meaning
people believe that all people are equal and all cultures are equal.

That of course is modern ideology, like all other modern ideologies
it ignores the much less palatable objective truth and instead talks
about feelings and being nice.

This is why parliament refuses to stop the boats.

So the naive but well meaning ideologs think that a solution via
dialogue is possible because the ideology says so. We're all the same
aren't we?

No we're not and this is nothing to do with race. It is to do with
the culture people were formed in. You will never stop HAMAS wishing
to exterminate Jews no matter what you do.

In the end this can only end in one way, one side has to win
completely otherwise it will go on for ever. Halting the war has only
one certain outcome, IT WILL MAKE IT HAPPEN AGAIN.

That massive penny hasn't dropped yet for the cease fire, 2 state
solution people who are not facing reality.

You cannot negotiate with people who's creed is your extermination!

So it's either the extermination of Israel and the Jews which the
lefties seem to think would be desirable or the destruction of Hamas.
Not the civilian population just Hamas.

The IDF is faced with a terrible dilemma.

The troops know that buildings and tunnels are booby trapped and if
they attempt to take them by going in they are not likely to walk
out. So they either die themselves or tell people to get out and then
destroy the building.

The IDF are continuously telling the population where they will go
next in order to minimise casualties.

What I have seen is figures showing that the number of civilian
casualties for a war on this scale is remarkably low, much lower than
you would expect.

People particularly Muslims are being slaughtered in vast numbers
continuously in places like Sudan but that's not a fight against the
Jews so no protests on the streets or condemnation by the media about
that.

Antisemitism is a shape shifting hate that finds many excuses.

Bob.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 03/08/2025 14:32, Bob Latham wrote:

Antisemitism is a shape shifting hate that finds many excuses.

Its current main shape is that even the slightest criticism of the
current Israeli government or its actions is considered by many
Governments to be equivalent to what the Nazi party was responsible for
during WW2.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 03/08/2025 14:32, Bob Latham wrote:

You cannot negotiate with people who's creed is your extermination!

Also Israel is not a good country to mess around with as many other
terrorists have found.

Already a couple of HAMAS terrorists who raped and murdered a really
beautiful Israeli girl on the 7th October have been 'eliminated' in the
last few weeks.



--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On Sun, 03 Aug 2025 09:50:51 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sat, 2 Aug 2025 15:43:56 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

On 02/08/2025 15:00, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I remember being displeased, though I don't remember blaming either
"side", if any; having both newses (?) at the same time seemed rather
daft.

How many people watch more than one news bulletin?

I don't tend to watch much news, fed of hearing about the ####### >>pallystinians.

Friend of mine, to get more than one perspective. I compromise by
making sure that I watch enough non-BBC news.

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

Rod.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 04/08/2025 05:25, Roderick Stewart wrote:

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

What is the source of that figure? It sounds very doubtful.

We get dodgy figures like that from time to time by very selectively
using figures.

I have never seen GB News and no one has ever mentioned to me that they
have watched it.

The Telegraph reports that GB News is not making any profit.





--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 05:25:49 +0100, Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Aug 2025 09:50:51 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sat, 2 Aug 2025 15:43:56 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

On 02/08/2025 15:00, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I remember being displeased, though I don't remember blaming either
"side", if any; having both newses (?) at the same time seemed rather
daft.

How many people watch more than one news bulletin?

I don't tend to watch much news, fed of hearing about the ####### >>>pallystinians.

Friend of mine, to get more than one perspective. I compromise by
making sure that I watch enough non-BBC news.

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

I like Sky News. It has moved on so far from just being 'rolling news'
with the same clips repeated every 20 minutes. Of course the same
clips will be repeated - this is inevitable in a news channel that
people dip in and out of - but I think the presentation and analysis
are much more informed than in the early days.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 05:25:49 +0100, Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Aug 2025 09:50:51 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sat, 2 Aug 2025 15:43:56 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

On 02/08/2025 15:00, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I remember being displeased, though I don't remember blaming either
"side", if any; having both newses (?) at the same time seemed rather >>>>> daft.

How many people watch more than one news bulletin?

I don't tend to watch much news, fed of hearing about the #######
pallystinians.

Friend of mine, to get more than one perspective. I compromise by
making sure that I watch enough non-BBC news.

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

I like Sky News. It has moved on so far from just being 'rolling news'
with the same clips repeated every 20 minutes. Of course the same
clips will be repeated - this is inevitable in a news channel that
people dip in and out of - but I think the presentation and analysis
are much more informed than in the early days.

IrCOm more curious as to who watches the news channels. Other than the
retired does anyone deliberately tune in? ThererCOs a lot of involuntary viewers - airports etc, picture no sound with the subtitles on.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 07:23:08 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 05:25:49 +0100, Roderick Stewart
<rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Aug 2025 09:50:51 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sat, 2 Aug 2025 15:43:56 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

On 02/08/2025 15:00, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I remember being displeased, though I don't remember blaming either >>>>>> "side", if any; having both newses (?) at the same time seemed rather >>>>>> daft.

How many people watch more than one news bulletin?

I don't tend to watch much news, fed of hearing about the #######
pallystinians.

Friend of mine, to get more than one perspective. I compromise by
making sure that I watch enough non-BBC news.

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

I like Sky News. It has moved on so far from just being 'rolling news'
with the same clips repeated every 20 minutes. Of course the same
clips will be repeated - this is inevitable in a news channel that
people dip in and out of - but I think the presentation and analysis
are much more informed than in the early days.

IAm more curious as to who watches the news channels. Other than the
retired does anyone deliberately tune in? ThereAs a lot of involuntary >viewers - airports etc, picture no sound with the subtitles on.

As a member of 'the retired' it is difficult for me to answer this
question. I always try to watch Trevor Philips on a Sunday morning.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 04/08/2025 07:01, JMB99 wrote:

On 04/08/2025 05:25, Roderick Stewart wrote:

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

What is the source of that figure? It sounds very doubtful.

Another source (BARB, which uses feedback from connected smart TV sets)
shows that BBC News, in June this year, got a monthly reach of 9,925 as against 3,756 for GB News. The top channel was BBC1 with 40,576.

https://www.barb.co.uk/monthly-viewing/
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/8/4 5:25:49, Roderick Stewart wrote:

On Sun, 03 Aug 2025 09:50:51 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sat, 2 Aug 2025 15:43:56 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

On 02/08/2025 15:00, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I remember being displeased, though I don't remember blaming either
"side", if any; having both newses (?) at the same time seemed rather
daft.

How many people watch more than one news bulletin?

I don't tend to watch much news, fed of hearing about the #######
pallystinians.

Friend of mine, to get more than one perspective. I compromise by
making sure that I watch enough non-BBC news.

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

Rod.

Surely it's available in all main FreeView areas (maybe not some
relay-only areas, I don't know what multiplex it's on), and thus has
(shares) the same network of broadcast transmitters (say) the BBC does?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Her [Valerie Singleton's] main job on /Blue Peter/ was to stop
unpredictable creatres running amok. And that was just John Noakes.
- Alison Pearson, RT 2014/9/6-12
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/8/4 10:41:11, John Williamson wrote:

On 04/08/2025 07:01, JMB99 wrote:

On 04/08/2025 05:25, Roderick Stewart wrote:

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,

They have (share) the same network as BBC news, surely?

and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

What is the source of that figure? It sounds very doubtful.

Another source (BARB, which uses feedback from connected smart TV sets) shows that BBC News, in June this year, got a monthly reach of 9,925 as against 3,756 for GB News. The top channel was BBC1 with 40,576.

https://www.barb.co.uk/monthly-viewing/

Using input from connected smart TV sets will hugely disadvantage those
who aren't using them - not only those who don't have one, but those who
have multiple sets not all of which are "smart connected".

I've occasionally looked in at GBN. If you take into account its
political leaning, it _can_ be useful, although its politics sometimes
mean it doesn't _cover_ some stories in sufficient detail (or
occasionally at all). Useful, though, at least when the main channels
are suffering from monostoryism (obsessed by one story to the exclusion
of all else, as happens all too frequently, across BBC _and_ Sky).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Her [Valerie Singleton's] main job on /Blue Peter/ was to stop
unpredictable creatres running amok. And that was just John Noakes.
- Alison Pearson, RT 2014/9/6-12
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 04/08/2025 08:23, Tweed wrote:

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 05:25:49 +0100, Roderick Stewart
<rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Aug 2025 09:50:51 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sat, 2 Aug 2025 15:43:56 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

On 02/08/2025 15:00, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I remember being displeased, though I don't remember blaming either >>>>>> "side", if any; having both newses (?) at the same time seemed rather >>>>>> daft.

How many people watch more than one news bulletin?

I don't tend to watch much news, fed of hearing about the #######
pallystinians.

Friend of mine, to get more than one perspective. I compromise by
making sure that I watch enough non-BBC news.

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

I like Sky News. It has moved on so far from just being 'rolling news'
with the same clips repeated every 20 minutes. Of course the same
clips will be repeated - this is inevitable in a news channel that
people dip in and out of - but I think the presentation and analysis
are much more informed than in the early days.

IrCOm more curious as to who watches the news channels. Other than the retired does anyone deliberately tune in? ThererCOs a lot of involuntary viewers - airports etc, picture no sound with the subtitles on.

That's the only time I routinely see the news channels, (plus in my
mum's care home) I've always found the notion of watching TV in daytime, and/or as 'background' rather vulgar.

The least worst is Sky News. I only really watch it when I'm working
away, and (these days) cast the Sky News YouTube stream from my phone to
the hotel room telly. BBC News/World etc etc is a total waste of
electricity from what I do see of it.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 04/08/2025 11:32, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

On 2025/8/4 5:25:49, Roderick Stewart wrote:

On Sun, 03 Aug 2025 09:50:51 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sat, 2 Aug 2025 15:43:56 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

On 02/08/2025 15:00, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I remember being displeased, though I don't remember blaming either
"side", if any; having both newses (?) at the same time seemed rather >>>>> daft.

How many people watch more than one news bulletin?

I don't tend to watch much news, fed of hearing about the #######
pallystinians.

Friend of mine, to get more than one perspective. I compromise by
making sure that I watch enough non-BBC news.

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

Rod.

Surely it's available in all main FreeView areas (maybe not some
relay-only areas, I don't know what multiplex it's on), and thus has
(shares) the same network of broadcast transmitters (say) the BBC does?

It's on one of the COM muxes, so on about 85 out of 1100 transmitters,
or (a better gauge) available to about 93% of the UK population

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/8/4 8:57:0, Scott wrote:

On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 07:23:08 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
<usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

[]

I like Sky News. It has moved on so far from just being 'rolling news'
with the same clips repeated every 20 minutes. Of course the same
clips will be repeated - this is inevitable in a news channel that
people dip in and out of - but I think the presentation and analysis
are much more informed than in the early days.

IrCOm more curious as to who watches the news channels. Other than the
retired does anyone deliberately tune in? ThererCOs a lot of involuntary
viewers - airports etc, picture no sound with the subtitles on.

As a member of 'the retired' it is difficult for me to answer this
question. I always try to watch Trevor Philips on a Sunday morning.

I tend to have my TV on in the background, when I'm doing other things
(such as writing here!). For that, news is a reasonable choice. Also, especially in the small hours, when I can't find anything I _want_ to watch. (It's not as irresponsible as in the days of a TV set full of valves -
modern sets use a lot less power than the 300+ watts that was common in
those days, and also are less likely to go wrong.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 04/08/2025 11:32, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

Surely it's available in all main FreeView areas (maybe not some
relay-only areas, I don't know what multiplex it's on), and thus has
(shares) the same network of broadcast transmitters (say) the BBC does?

I think main stations only, not Freeview Lite.



--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 04/08/2025 11:43, Mark Carver wrote:

That's the only time I routinely see the news channels, (plus in my
mum's care home) I've always found the notion of watching TV in daytime, and/or as 'background' rather vulgar.

The least worst is Sky News. I only really watch it when I'm working
away, and (these days) cast the Sky News YouTube stream from my phone to
the hotel room telly. BBC News/World etc etc is a total waste of
electricity from what I do see of it.

Ditto, I rarely switch the TV on during the day, usually just when there
is a major news story or event.

Never seen Sky News either. Its funny, I visit some friends regularly,
they have Sky but never seen Sky News being watched there.

Years ago I was sent over to Barra to investigate some interference on a
relay station. The Radiocommunications Agency (?) had been over and not
seen anything. It was reported to be on all day from breakfast time to
late in the evening, this apparently was a clue to it being a faulty
head amplifier on someone's TV. TV and head amplifier would come on
when mains switch to TV switched on in the morning then off when turned
off at bedtime.

I managed to see the interference and narrowed it down to one of a
couple of house using my scanner so left it to the RA to sort out. But
it stopped soon afterwards, perhaps the spurious oscillation drifted to another frequency.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

Mark Carver <mark@invalid.com> wrote:

On 04/08/2025 08:23, Tweed wrote:

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 05:25:49 +0100, Roderick Stewart
<rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sun, 03 Aug 2025 09:50:51 +0100, Scott
<newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

On Sat, 2 Aug 2025 15:43:56 +0100, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:

On 02/08/2025 15:00, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I remember being displeased, though I don't remember blaming either >>>>>>> "side", if any; having both newses (?) at the same time seemed rather >>>>>>> daft.

How many people watch more than one news bulletin?

I don't tend to watch much news, fed of hearing about the #######
pallystinians.

Friend of mine, to get more than one perspective. I compromise by
making sure that I watch enough non-BBC news.

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

I like Sky News. It has moved on so far from just being 'rolling news'
with the same clips repeated every 20 minutes. Of course the same
clips will be repeated - this is inevitable in a news channel that
people dip in and out of - but I think the presentation and analysis
are much more informed than in the early days.

IrCOm more curious as to who watches the news channels. Other than the
retired does anyone deliberately tune in? ThererCOs a lot of involuntary
viewers - airports etc, picture no sound with the subtitles on.

That's the only time I routinely see the news channels, (plus in my
mum's care home) I've always found the notion of watching TV in daytime, and/or as 'background' rather vulgar.

The least worst is Sky News. I only really watch it when I'm working
away, and (these days) cast the Sky News YouTube stream from my phone to
the hotel room telly. BBC News/World etc etc is a total waste of
electricity from what I do see of it.

The signal to noise ratio of these channels is terrible. All sorts of fill
in stuff, trailers, adverts (or advert place holders for BBC)

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/8/4 11:43:38, Mark Carver wrote:

On 04/08/2025 08:23, Tweed wrote:

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

[]

I like Sky News. It has moved on so far from just being 'rolling news'
with the same clips repeated every 20 minutes. Of course the same
clips will be repeated - this is inevitable in a news channel that
people dip in and out of - but I think the presentation and analysis
are much more informed than in the early days.

IrCOm more curious as to who watches the news channels. Other than the
retired does anyone deliberately tune in? ThererCOs a lot of involuntary
viewers - airports etc, picture no sound with the subtitles on.

That's the only time I routinely see the news channels, (plus in my
mum's care home) I've always found the notion of watching TV in daytime, and/or as 'background' rather vulgar.

Yes, our generation (and previous) were brought up to think that - I
think it's partly a hangover from TV in general being thought vulgar ("I
only have it for the servants"), and the idea that during the day you
should be working. Both, of course, can be challenged.>

The least worst is Sky News. I only really watch it when I'm working
away, and (these days) cast the Sky News YouTube stream from my phone to
the hotel room telly. BBC News/World etc etc is a total waste of
electricity from what I do see of it.

Well, not total, but certainly a lot of it: with the exception of very
few programmes a week, it's definitely designed/aimed-at the dipper-in,
_only_ - in other words it's repetitive to a sickening extent. (And
also, doesn't timestamp - well - more or less anything, so unless you've
been watching and _know_, you think footage is new. [I think Ofcom need
to tell news - not just the news channels - to timestamp all material
over a certain age, I'd say somewhere between 15 and 60 minutes.])
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"You play the market?" "No, the ukelele. And I sing too"
- Tony Curtis/Marilyn Monroe in SLIH
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

J. P. Gilliver wrote:

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,

They have (share) the same network as BBC news, surely?

GBNews is on COM6, so won't exist in "freeviewlite" areas ...

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I tend to have my TV on in the background, when I'm doing other things
(such as writing here!). For that, news is a reasonable choice.

I prefer radio over television though ... less distracting, if a big
story is on the radio, I can always switch to TV.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Not really significant. It gets more viewers that Channel 231 - BBC
News, not the BBC News programs at 18:00 and 22:00 which get 4.3 million viewers compared to 78,000 for GB News.

Not sure why, given the tiny audience it has, the BBC continues to
broadcast BBC news. I would say it appears that more people watch Prime Ministers Question Time on BBC Parliament than watch BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year, >>>>> and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

Neither does the BBC. It does not own the transmitters. Its news output
is spread across its channels. GB-News is available on any streaming
service.

Dave.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

David Wade wrote:

Not sure why, given the tiny audience it has, the BBC continues to
broadcast BBC news.

They don't know what to put on in its place?

At various times of day BBC News is used as a "filler" on BBC1, BBC2 and
BBC Parliament
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 04/08/2025 17:08, Andy Burns wrote:

David Wade wrote:

Not sure why, given the tiny audience it has, the BBC continues to
broadcast BBC news.

They don't know what to put on in its place?

At various times of day BBC News is used as a "filler" on BBC1, BBC2 and
BBC Parliament

Actually I think what this really shows is that TV News Channels in the
UK are just pointless. Last Seasons Manchester United/Manchester City
opening game of the season had an attendance of 78,000, just a few
thousand less than the news channels.

.. and with an audience of 4.2 million, more listen to BBC Radio 4 than
any of this, more interestingly the satirical Radio 3 program "I'm Sorry
I haven't a Clue" at 2.5 million ....

... To quote another thread, what a waste of electricity this is......

Dave
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 17:08:59 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
wrote:

David Wade wrote:

Not sure why, given the tiny audience it has, the BBC continues to
broadcast BBC news.

They don't know what to put on in its place?

At various times of day BBC News is used as a "filler" on BBC1, BBC2 and
BBC Parliament

Is BBC News not now the de facto test card?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 11:32:12 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
wrote:

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

Rod.

Surely it's available in all main FreeView areas (maybe not some
relay-only areas, I don't know what multiplex it's on), and thus has
(shares) the same network of broadcast transmitters (say) the BBC does?

It's a streaming service. I didn't know it was on Freeview as well.

Rod.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 04/08/2025 20:15, Roderick Stewart wrote:

On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 11:32:12 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
wrote:

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

Rod.

Surely it's available in all main FreeView areas (maybe not some
relay-only areas, I don't know what multiplex it's on), and thus has
(shares) the same network of broadcast transmitters (say) the BBC does?

It's a streaming service. I didn't know it was on Freeview as well.

Its not on any more.

Rod.

Dave
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 04/08/2025 20:54, David Wade wrote:

On 04/08/2025 20:15, Roderick Stewart wrote:

On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 11:32:12 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
wrote:

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters, four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

Rod.

Surely it's available in all main FreeView areas (maybe not some
relay-only areas, I don't know what multiplex it's on), and thus has
(shares) the same network of broadcast transmitters (say) the BBC does?

It's a streaming service. I didn't know it was on Freeview as well.

Its not on any more.

Freeview 236 round here.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

David Wade wrote:

Roderick Stewart wrote:

It's a streaming service. I didn't know it was on Freeview as well.

Its not on any more.

Panto season starting early this year?

It's on freeview Ch73
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

Andy Burns wrote:

It's on freeview Ch73

scratch that, that's just my local numbering, but it's still there.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 04/08/2025 18:50, David Wade wrote:

Actually I think what this really shows is that TV News Channels in the
UK are just pointless. Last Seasons Manchester United/Manchester City opening game of the season had an attendance of 78,000, just a few
thousand less than the news channels.

Not sure of the relevance of that, completely different.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/8/4 16:54:53, David Wade wrote:

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Not really significant. It gets more viewers that Channel 231 - BBC
News, not the BBC News programs at 18:00 and 22:00 which get 4.3 million viewers compared to 78,000 for GB News.

Not sure why, given the tiny audience it has, the BBC continues to
broadcast BBC news. I would say it appears that more people watch Prime Ministers Question Time on BBC Parliament than watch BBC News.

Well, it's clear from the obvious "ad breaks" that it's sold
internationally; I presume, therefore, it is there anyway, so putting it
out domestically is a way of providing something that _looks_ worthwhile
for minimal cost.

PMQ is infuriating - well, it usually is _anyway_, but what I was
meaning in this specific case is that it's carried simultaneously on BBC
News, BBC Parliament, Sky News, _and_ GB News (and I think I've seen it
being on BBC1 as well). Talk about laziness ...
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"When the people fear the government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty." - Thomas Jefferson
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/8/4 20:15:43, Roderick Stewart wrote:

On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 11:32:12 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
wrote:

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

[]

Surely it's available in all main FreeView areas (maybe not some
relay-only areas, I don't know what multiplex it's on), and thus has
(shares) the same network of broadcast transmitters (say) the BBC does?

It's a streaming service. I didn't know it was on Freeview as well.

I was the other way round - I knew it was on FreeView (236 here), but
hadn't thought of streaming.>

Rod.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 05/08/2025 00:45, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

PMQ is infuriating - well, it usually is_anyway_, but what I was
meaning in this specific case is that it's carried simultaneously on BBC News, BBC Parliament, Sky News,_and_ GB News (and I think I've seen it
being on BBC1 as well). Talk about laziness ...

What do you think they should carry at those times?

On BBC there are often differences, so one channel will have in vision
signing and another perhaps in vision subtitles.

If a major news story breaks, BBC News will often switch to covering it
whilst a news programme continues on BBC1. They have many years of
experience of shuffling programming around between their channels.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/8/5 7:58:11, JMB99 wrote:

On 05/08/2025 00:45, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

PMQ is infuriating - well, it usually is_anyway_, but what I was
meaning in this specific case is that it's carried simultaneously on BBC
News, BBC Parliament, Sky News,_and_ GB News (and I think I've seen it
being on BBC1 as well). Talk about laziness ...

What do you think they should carry at those times?

On BBC there are often differences, so one channel will have in vision signing and another perhaps in vision subtitles.

I acknowledge the signing difference. Subtitles are available on I think
all of the channels for those who want or need thwm.

It's just the unimaginativeness of them all carrying the same thing at
the same time (the same for almost any Downing Street announcement, too,
and similar). _Why_ does it have to be _simultaneous_ coverage?

In the case of PMQ, as well, I find it an unedifying experience (and
_not_ something that shows our democracy in a good light) - and would
like to switch away from it. If I want to do that, but still have a news
feed, I'm not served. If anything really memorable happens beyond the
usual brayfest (and often enough even if it doesn't), "highlights" are
shown on the next three or four news summaries at least. Do I need to be
told the instant it happens? Same for DS announcements, and similar.>

If a major news story breaks, BBC News will often switch to covering it whilst a news programme continues on BBC1. They have many years of experience of shuffling programming around between their channels.

That's another thing: again, do I need to know the _instant_ something
happens. I've not infrequently seen someone - sometimes an expert in
something, who was being quite interesting, but isn't necessarily
media-savvy, rudely interrupted in mid-sentence, to (e. g.) "go over to
Downing Street" - not infrequently to join a long wait with nothing
happening, but even if there was - it's far from beyond modern
technology to introduce an indefinite delay into the "important" feed,
to let the interrupted person finish his answer. At worst, the
"important announcement" would be tranmitted a couple of minutes later
than real time; at best, we'd be excused on-site reporters twiddling
their thumbs until something expected _does_ happen.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

My movies rise below vulgarity.
- Mel Brooks, quoted by Barry Norman in RT 2016/11/26-12/2
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

Scott wrote:

Did the One Show not start just before 7 pm to try to capture viewers
before ITV '7 pm' slot?

There is a clear and deliberate difference between published
schedule and actual working timings.

I raised the matter on a visit to the BBC Nottingham studio
locally, where I was actually able to sit in a control room and
hear the network give the countdown down the line, for The One
Show, in compliance with the printed running sheet in front of
me, at 18:58. No explanation was forthcoming.

My theory is that starting early is a ploy intended to grab
audience at a programme junction by starting ahead of the other
channels.

As live viewing/ listening declines, it becomes increasingly
pointless.

IIRC when such differences were brought up with the BBC, they
claimed that "to make it easier for viewers" they always worked
in units of 5 minutes for the published timings.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK
chris@cdixon.me.uk @ChrisJDixon1

Plant amazing Acers.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

Chris J Dixon <chris@cdixon.me.uk> wrote:

Scott wrote:

Did the One Show not start just before 7 pm to try to capture viewers
before ITV '7 pm' slot?

There is a clear and deliberate difference between published
schedule and actual working timings.

I raised the matter on a visit to the BBC Nottingham studio
locally, where I was actually able to sit in a control room and
hear the network give the countdown down the line, for The One
Show, in compliance with the printed running sheet in front of
me, at 18:58. No explanation was forthcoming.

My theory is that starting early is a ploy intended to grab
audience at a programme junction by starting ahead of the other
channels.

As live viewing/ listening declines, it becomes increasingly
pointless.

IIRC when such differences were brought up with the BBC, they
claimed that "to make it easier for viewers" they always worked
in units of 5 minutes for the published timings.

Chris

Your theory is correct. I went on a tour of the BBC which encompassed the
One Show studio. They said it was deliberately timed at 1858 to steal the audience. Seems a bit churlish to me.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 11/08/2025 08:35, Chris J Dixon wrote:

As live viewing/ listening declines, it becomes increasingly
pointless.

It used to common for people to say they had the clocks set several
minutes fast, particularly alarm clocks, so they got up on time. I
wonder if they still do it?





--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 11/08/2025 08:50, Tweed wrote:

Your theory is correct. I went on a tour of the BBC which encompassed the
One Show studio. They said it was deliberately timed at 1858 to steal the audience. Seems a bit churlish to me.

I seem to remember it was a reaction to ITV doing the same or similar.




--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 11/08/2025 08:53, JMB99 wrote:

On 11/08/2025 08:35, Chris J Dixon wrote:

As live viewing/ listening declines, it becomes increasingly
pointless.

It used to common for people to say they had the clocks set several
minutes fast, particularly alarm clocks, so they got up on time. I
wonder if they still do it?

Possibly some do, but just about everyone I know now uses their phone as
an alarm clock. so they can't set it fast.

I don't do it deliberately, but my very cheap battery powered clock
radio gains abut a five minutes per set of batteries.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 11/08/2025 09:29, John Williamson wrote:

On 11/08/2025 08:53, JMB99 wrote:

On 11/08/2025 08:35, Chris J Dixon wrote:

As live viewing/ listening declines, it becomes increasingly
pointless.

It used to common for people to say they had the clocks set several
minutes fast, particularly alarm clocks, so they got up on time.-a I
wonder if they still do it?

Possibly some do, but just about everyone I know now uses their phone as
an alarm clock. so they can't set it fast.

Both our sons (and daughter in laws) only use their phones/ ipads etc to
tell the time and set alarms. They literally don't care about BST<>GMT changeover nights, they just wake up feeing tired, or before the alarm
goes off !
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 11/08/2025 09:43, Mark Carver wrote:

Both our sons (and daughter in laws) only use their phones/ ipads etc to tell the time and set alarms. They literally don't care about BST<>GMT changeover nights, they just wake up feeing tired, or before the alarm
goes off !

Never used my phone as alarm, so much easier to reach across and hit the
top of the alarm clock to shut it up, only rarely use as a clock because
I prefer a wrist watch.








--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/8/11 8:35:22, Chris J Dixon wrote:

[]

IIRC when such differences were brought up with the BBC, they
claimed that "to make it easier for viewers" they always worked
in units of 5 minutes for the published timings.

Chris

The underestimation of the audience's intelligence is always increasing.
I remember Radio 4 timings in particular in the Radio Times used to be
very much not rounded to 5 minutes: 12:27 p. m. in particular comes to mind.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The web is a blank slate; you can't design technology that is 'good'.
You can't design paper that you can only write good things on. There are
no good or evil tools. You can put an engine in an ambulance or a tank.
- Sir Tim Berners-Lee, Radio Times 2009-Jan-30 to -Feb-5.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On 2025/8/11 9:29:19, John Williamson wrote:

On 11/08/2025 08:53, JMB99 wrote:

On 11/08/2025 08:35, Chris J Dixon wrote:

As live viewing/ listening declines, it becomes increasingly
pointless.

It used to common for people to say they had the clocks set several
minutes fast, particularly alarm clocks, so they got up on time. I
wonder if they still do it?

I don't do that, but I do set the alarm a few minutes ahead of the time
I decide I want - mainly, because that's usually on a headline time, and
I like to turn on the TV to get the headlines.>>

Possibly some do, but just about everyone I know now uses their phone as
an alarm clock. so they can't set it fast.

I could: I was most surprised to find my dumbphone (Nokia 105, IIRR) has
a clock which is _not_ constantly corrected from its network. (I
discovered it was a few minutes out [I don't use it much] - I forget
which way - so I deduce it's not network-permanent.) It _may_ correct
itself when a call or text is actually sent or received, I haven't
checked.>

I don't do it deliberately, but my very cheap battery powered clock
radio gains abut a five minutes per set of batteries.

I have a very cheap (runs on one AA; has space for two, but I discovered
the other is only for the light) radio-controlled one, which runs for
several years on a cell. (And I have verified that it really is radio-controlled, not just claiming to be.)>
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The web is a blank slate; you can't design technology that is 'good'.
You can't design paper that you can only write good things on. There are
no good or evil tools. You can put an engine in an ambulance or a tank.
- Sir Tim Berners-Lee, Radio Times 2009-Jan-30 to -Feb-5.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: uk.tech.broadcast

On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 20:15:43 +0100, Roderick Stewart <rjfs@escapetime.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

Apparently GB News now has more viewers than BBC News.

Quite an achievement when you consider that GB News doesn't have a
national network of broadcast transmitters,

Bullshit from Rod as usual.

four billion quid a year,
and a hundred years of history. The times they are a-changing.

The BBC does other things than news. Hardly comparing like with like.
But don't let it stop you pushing your little agenda, eh?

Surely it's available in all main FreeView areas (maybe not some
relay-only areas, I don't know what multiplex it's on), and thus has >>(shares) the same network of broadcast transmitters (say) the BBC does?

It's a streaming service. I didn't know it was on Freeview as well.

Well you wouldn't as you haven't turned on your Freeview boxes in years. Perhaps you should stop commenting on things you clearly know nothing
about, eh?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2