Kobibi

And their apology episode was very much 'we would have believed you if you weren't so annoying, geez, it's still your fault'

This has always been one of my favourite far sides cos it's so dumb, and honestly kinda bad

I have a mental image of Larson with 5 minutes til his deadline being like 'fuck it, I'll do the ticks fleas one'

As a knowledge fight fan, I feel like I should say that it's more than a 'fact check' - it started out more like that, but it functions as a deconstruction of the methods, motives and aims of a right-wing idealogue and by extension, others in that sphere (tucker carlson, rogan etc)

It's a good way to keep up with and have an understanding of what's going on in that horrific but impactful space without having to wade in yourself

I know this isn't what you intended, but you gotta be careful on the Internet saying 'guess who 'they' are', cos a lotta places on the Internet ask this and the answer is supposed to be 'jews'

I think it's important to note that the BBC isn't 'state run media', if only to highlight the ways that it's more intertwined with the state than it should be.

The government officially holds some sway in the appointment of its chair, which is kinda sus. But the main issue I think is this more unofficial 'revolving door' appointment of it's heads and high level figures

They all seem to come from ex-government and business positions, very much from the same class and background as most of our political leaders

And as such, this same pro-status-quo worldview is present. Add to this that there are clearly many successions made to retain access to important figures..

The BBC in some spheres clearly feels able to critiscise the government, even quite harshly sometimes. But in other cases - notably gaza and climate change, activism etc - waves the same stick around

For my money it's not so much that the government tells the BBC how to report on this, per se, but that the editorial leaders of the BBC are of the same worldview and agenda of the Government leaders.

Although yes, there probably have been conversations over lunch at clubs and the vague threat of government interference if the BBC goes too far astray...

But above all, I think the BBC is against rocking the boat, and the boat in this case is neoliberalism

I use boost, no problems

Mate idk where you live but in the UK you aren't allowed to cycle on pavements. Call me a dick if you want but it's just how it is.

If you wanna use the pavement, get off your bike and walk. Dont get mad at me cos you don't like cycling on the road. Neither do I. So I walk.

Cyclists ringing their bell at pedestrians on the pavement is like cars honking their horns at cyclists in a bike lane

It's not your space, so don't impose on the people using it properly

I'm sorry that roads can be bad for cyclists, but making the pavement bad for pedestrians isn't the answer

If I'm walking on the pavement and a cyclist rings their bell to make me get out of their way, I'm gonna get mad

I know cars suck. But you're meant to cycle on the road - You're not supposed to cycle on the pavement. I don't care if you do if the road is horrible, fair play, but ringing your bell at me? It's my right of way, so no thanks

They've brought brought them back, at least temporarily. Got a six pack in my cupboard right now!

History is key, which is why in parliament square opposite the statue of Churchill there's a statue of Hitler

... Oh there isn't? Huh

What's that Think You Should Leave sketch?

Some guy is playing cards with his friends bantering about their wives, then he flashbacks to his wife being supportive when he does community theatre

I'd find it and link it if I was less lazy