Grumble Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 On Mandate this morning, after David Cannan had his moan about the Mannin Line (which he sidetracked at least twice into the Jurby special school issue he's involved in) Beth Espey made the very good point that Talking Heads is a daily phone-in programme, and that Manx Radio DOES comply with stringent mandatory 'fairness' rules in the run up to the election. Whether every candidate takes to the airwaves is entirely up to them! And actually, Dan Davies positively begs people to phone/text/email in on topic(s) of the day, but few can ever be bothered. There are plenty of opportunities already for 'the people' to be heard - but unless granted the anonymity of fora like this, not many have much to say! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 C(o)unt Morenzi .... Someone told me that he isn't titled anyway and that his title derives from when he played in a band, so why does he still use it, delusions of grandeur? Do you know who I was? Ah. Like Duke Ellington and Count Basie. I was taught by a bloke whose first name was Baron. Count Arthur Strong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 I don't think it is a requirement for candidates to take part in public meetings, if not maybe it should be It most certainly should not be. It is up to the candidates how they wish to present themselves. In any case public meetings and Radio debates simply favour the gobbiest gobshite with the catchiest populist soundbites and should be seen as entertainment and not something to make a serious decision on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ripsaw Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 public meetings and Radio debates simply favour the gobbiest gobshite with the catchiest populist soundbitesSadly I agree with you, but surely that is only true because we the public let them peddle the 'shite'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoneWolf Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 It seemed to me to be a vote in favour of free speech, as in the station can programme what it wants rather than be dictated by the govt. I totally agree with that. Any other interpretation would be perverse. It seems to me there should also be an injunction against Government or representatives of Government attempting to influence the content of radio broadcasting. Isnt that the sort of thing a regulator is supposed to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Ayres Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 Try groups.msn.com/TheManninLine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.