Media mistakes

In what way am I wrong? Unless in a reusable bottle, it isn't legal to sell milk by pints (no matter how it is dressed up). Anyone who believes they are buying pints are the ones who are wrong, or perhaps misled.
It looks like pints are going to be decriminalised*. From today's Mail:
E461C6E3-ABF0-47F1-9E1C-3330EBE6D62B.jpeg

* Since Metrication, it has only been legal to use the Imperial Pint as a sales measure in the very specific circumstances of a doorstep pint of milk and the pub draught serving. In all other situations a "1 Pint" marking (for example) is required to be subservient to the metric marking.
 
Seems a strange thing for the Foreign Secretary to be doing. Has she not got better things to do, or is she really twiddling her thumbs sometimes?

Sometimes I need milk on my way home after being away - the local garage/shop that thinks it's a mini-supermarket type of place sold it in 2L containers, although it's not obvious, for £1.35 whereas the proper supermarket local convenience shop sold it at the (then) normal £1.10 price. Work out how much of a premium you are paying for the garage version. It's quite a percentage hike. I don't go there any more and buy elsewhere at the start of the journey instead.
 
Last edited:
And you believe what comes out of the Mail? :rolling:
If it isn’t the BBC’s fault it’s the EU’s. If they could blame both in the same story, they would. (Having said that, if I get a newspaper it’s usually the Mail - but not for it’s political leanings).
Does it really need legislation. If it’s legal to sell a fraction of a litre and call it a pint, even though technically you’re selling it in litres, does it matter. Another attempt by the government to distract from their difficulties?
 
Another attempt by the government to distract from their difficulties?
IMO it's just the consequences of Brexit filtering through, removing unnecessary/unwanted external control, without much need for executive oversight.
 
What we really need is an accurate way of measuring the quality of legislation. I suggest calling the unit of measurement the Pooh-Bah. :D
 
I just looked up an acting credit on IMDB, only to find The Archers is classified as a "podcast series"!
 
It is available as a podcast which is how I listen to it. And if you are new to it and would like to catch up on old episodes then the podcast is the way to go.
 
No doubt... but for it to be categorised first and foremost as a podcast seem disingenuous and calls into question how IMDB classifies things in general.
 
Just looked into this further and it appears that it is actually tagged under seven different categories. Why the title picked on podcast as the one to include is the real question since it is not the first one listed.


 
Just done that but made no difference. Now submitted an update for consideration to remove those keywords which mention podcast. Suspecting though that the title is hard typed and it is that which needs a moderator's hand to change it.
 
128932F6-F2CC-4791-A3F6-918C0478CCFC.jpeg

Muscovies my arse. This is from today's Mail (an article about bird 'flu), where it says a flock of Muscovies has been culled, so I guess they've pulled the wrong stock photo (these are Mandarins)!
 
BBC Parliament was very slow with a caption change when showing the Scottish Parliament. The first minister was, apparently, “Douglas Ross Leader, Scottish Conservative Party” for several minutes. Made me wonder whether “the wee lass” had changed name, gender and party all in one go. Surely the names of party leaders are stored for quick caption changes - especially when it’s “Questions to ...”.84E3556E-B668-404D-A06E-FE0D807364FE.jpeg
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure if it counts as media but we get a local version of a 'what's happening' magazine through the door each month. It's usually well endowed with errors, but this month's had a nice one in an item about a chimney demolition - it was "raised to the ground."
Wouldn't that have been a mine rather than a chimney? :confused_:
 
With everything done on computers these days, one would think they might have software for checking that kind of thing! It's not beyond the wit of man to filter text which looks like a name and check it against a list of acceptable representations. Facial recognition is so good now it would even be possible to check they have the right person!
 
It's not beyond the wit of man to filter text which looks like a name and check it against a list of acceptable representations.
With the odd names people choose for their offspring that could be difficult. In this case, isn’t Angel a valid first name? Just not the right one for Labour’s deputy leader.
 
Back
Top