Mike Robson
@mikerobson.bsky.social
Paramount paid $16m to settle the $475m lawsuit because they didn’t want any regulatory issues with their merger with Skydance. Can’t see what leverage Trump has in this meritless claim. But with plenty of enemies of the BBC in the BBC who knows what happens.
November 11, 2025 at 3:31 PM
Paramount paid $16m to settle the $475m lawsuit because they didn’t want any regulatory issues with their merger with Skydance. Can’t see what leverage Trump has in this meritless claim. But with plenty of enemies of the BBC in the BBC who knows what happens.
Tbf it’s just a threat at the moment and v likely goes away because that would be typical of Trump. But if he follows through then BBC will need to “take him on” or pay.
November 11, 2025 at 2:35 PM
Tbf it’s just a threat at the moment and v likely goes away because that would be typical of Trump. But if he follows through then BBC will need to “take him on” or pay.
It was a v clumsy edit to try and convey the message of his HOUR long speech in a short clip. The program was made by an independent production company but the issue should have been picked up and not presented quite as it was.
November 11, 2025 at 12:34 PM
It was a v clumsy edit to try and convey the message of his HOUR long speech in a short clip. The program was made by an independent production company but the issue should have been picked up and not presented quite as it was.
The policy fails in one of its objectives. People aren’t having fewer kids so you can only support this if you want to save (short term) money by impoverishing kids.
November 11, 2025 at 11:16 AM
The policy fails in one of its objectives. People aren’t having fewer kids so you can only support this if you want to save (short term) money by impoverishing kids.
Surgical removal of just a handful of individuals would return the corporation it to be mildly annoying every now and then which would be fine.
November 11, 2025 at 10:32 AM
Surgical removal of just a handful of individuals would return the corporation it to be mildly annoying every now and then which would be fine.
And not viewable in the US. It’s a joke and should be treated as such and yet the actual BBC is part of the pile on.
November 11, 2025 at 8:45 AM
And not viewable in the US. It’s a joke and should be treated as such and yet the actual BBC is part of the pile on.
They then went on to interview Chris Ruddy of Newsmax who paid out over $100m for peddling voter fraud lies. Just a complete joke.
November 11, 2025 at 8:37 AM
They then went on to interview Chris Ruddy of Newsmax who paid out over $100m for peddling voter fraud lies. Just a complete joke.
BBC iPlayer isn’t available in the USA. Staggering that there was no mention of this by you or Anna Foster.
November 11, 2025 at 8:31 AM
BBC iPlayer isn’t available in the USA. Staggering that there was no mention of this by you or Anna Foster.
And yet unbelievably the actual BBC Radio 4 Today programme is wittering on about the case as if there’s any merit in it.
November 11, 2025 at 8:25 AM
And yet unbelievably the actual BBC Radio 4 Today programme is wittering on about the case as if there’s any merit in it.
Morally and intellectually bankrupt.
November 7, 2025 at 8:00 PM
Morally and intellectually bankrupt.
I think it’s partly a function of where they sit on the political spectrum but probably more to do with the issue Sunder is highlighting.
The one thing I would push back on from the Badenoch quote is the “lazy” tag is no trope in her case where I’ve come across it.
The one thing I would push back on from the Badenoch quote is the “lazy” tag is no trope in her case where I’ve come across it.
November 7, 2025 at 10:19 AM
I think it’s partly a function of where they sit on the political spectrum but probably more to do with the issue Sunder is highlighting.
The one thing I would push back on from the Badenoch quote is the “lazy” tag is no trope in her case where I’ve come across it.
The one thing I would push back on from the Badenoch quote is the “lazy” tag is no trope in her case where I’ve come across it.
Tbf I think he was slinging insults at all of those. He might have been correct then but stopped clocks and all that.
November 7, 2025 at 8:41 AM
Tbf I think he was slinging insults at all of those. He might have been correct then but stopped clocks and all that.
It’s really not. Ad hoc fillers to meet some ‘fiscal targets’ are really not good policy.
November 6, 2025 at 11:47 PM
It’s really not. Ad hoc fillers to meet some ‘fiscal targets’ are really not good policy.
Some sort of road pricing and usage cost has some merit but let’s be honest this is just likely a potential filler to meet the fiscal targets.
November 6, 2025 at 10:42 PM
Some sort of road pricing and usage cost has some merit but let’s be honest this is just likely a potential filler to meet the fiscal targets.
Can’t see a big deal between the two.
November 6, 2025 at 7:43 PM
Can’t see a big deal between the two.
Happy to pay (disclosure it’s buttons for me) but not convinced it’s a well thought out change to the tax system. As it’s unlikely anything else will be either then it fits with the non-strategy.
November 6, 2025 at 7:34 PM
Happy to pay (disclosure it’s buttons for me) but not convinced it’s a well thought out change to the tax system. As it’s unlikely anything else will be either then it fits with the non-strategy.
There’s no sense of strategy with any of this. I understand good tax reform can be politically difficult in certain areas and always very difficult when you need to increase the take.
November 6, 2025 at 3:30 PM
There’s no sense of strategy with any of this. I understand good tax reform can be politically difficult in certain areas and always very difficult when you need to increase the take.
All sounds very manageable for the vast sums it’s going to collect.
November 6, 2025 at 3:27 PM
All sounds very manageable for the vast sums it’s going to collect.
Seems to look at the cost and none of the value.
November 6, 2025 at 3:26 PM
Seems to look at the cost and none of the value.