Charlie Brooker's Newswipe

like if joshier suddenly decided he dint like charlie brooker no more and made a song about it

actually, joshier, in the unaired pilot for newswipe charlie brooker said something like 'you would wouldn't you?' about the replacement for the more attractive replacement for the chinese olympics singer girl

Brooker is back with Series 2 of Newswipe.

Check BBC iPlayer.

  On 1/22/2010 at 2:18 PM, Gary C said:

Brooker is back with Series 2 of Newswipe.

 

Check BBC iPlayer.

Hooray! I was wondering when

it's awesome

It was alright. Doug Stanhope was good. Poet was shit. When he tries to straddle serious stuff and silly stuff it can fall flat, I think thats the problem with newswipe, he goes off the funny stuff for a while and then tries to claw it back by doing something really purile right afterwards.

downloading now. i love how shit sneaks up on me because i'm so out of the loop

Sorted. Respect due.

Doug Stanhope was good.

But Christ... Especially with that final link I had to facepalm. I fucking hate TV news. My God, and I studied fucking journalism. My life is over.

It was alright, just kinda reminded me how much I prefer Screenwipe.

Tim Key, please fuck off.

iPad

Really liked this weeks. The Nixon Fear was good, as was Doug Stanhope.

In fact, I'm probably going to start reading Stanhope's blog: http://www.dougstanhope.com/

no comments beyond a general high opinion of this programme

Love Adam Curtis

Kay Burley is such a fucking massive cunt. Every time I see her she seems to be saying something completely inappropriate and stupid.

I must be missing something, I just watched this and it didn't seem very funny at all.

I wish Chris Morris would bring back The Day Today

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_aU3TeDMnE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8APlx9btTn8

LOL, the crowd turn on him pretty quickly.

Doug Stanhope was spot on with his observations regarding the climate problem: overpopulation.

  On 2/11/2010 at 2:36 PM, Higgins VanHiggins said:

Doug Stanhope was spot on with his observations regarding the climate problem: overpopulation.

people don't consider why they have kids.. that's a problem in itself. I don't feel we are "overpopulated" - it's the way we use resources that causes the problems. If we managed how we used resources on a logical, scientific basis, I think things would be different.

i'd say we're overpopulated by about 2 billion people, given our current technology

  On 2/11/2010 at 8:49 PM, theSun said:

i'd say we're overpopulated by about 2 billion people, given our current technology

How can you say such a statement > where's the evidence for this? Firstly, the world has never drawn up a survey of how many resources we have at this current moment in time to ensure we are living in accordance with the carrying capacity of the Earth. Secondly, we haven't even built structures on the sea yet - yes, it can be done: http://www.thevenusproject.com/technology/cities-in-the-sea

I'm trying to also find a youtube video of a company in Denmark which built houses on top of the water. The property would be suspended afloat + above the water via a spring system which measures the water level and drifts on top of the water whilst being anchored to the ground - obviously a large "air bubble" compartment is at the bottom of the house as well.. we've still got so much more to discover when it comes to constructing out at sea.

judging by the amount of people that are currently starving to death. i don't want to get into serious shit atm but there's about a billion people who are perpetually malnourished worldwide. unless our means of production in the food industry changes, those billion will continue on that path.

plus i can't wait to see what happens when all these millions of tons of old plastic floating around in the sea get into our food supply.

i can never take permanent sea-top residences seriously. the ocean is so varied and unpredictable it makes the west coast look safe. kind of a believe-it-when-i-see-it. so far all i've seen is nice pretty utopian pics that would be astronomically expensive to build.

  Quote

judging by the amount of people that are currently starving to death. i don't want to get into serious shit atm but there's about a billion people who are perpetually malnourished worldwide. unless our means of production in the food industry changes, those billion will continue on that path.

People in places like Africa starve to death because they don't have a bank account with money to pay for food. We can easily create an abundance of food for everyone using, for example, mass scale hydroponic farms - quite literally, we have the technology to build skyscrapers filled with hydroponic plants. The only thing that stops us is money. You don't need to employ anyone to run the farms as they can be completely automated with current day technology. There is enough food to go around for the world's population. Where do you get the idea that we don't? When you see suffering, you're witnessing the effects of a capitalist system, where you can only solve a problem like starvation if you can make a profit out of it. You can't gain profit from feeding the world if the people you're feeding don't buy the food - do you see where I am going with this?

  Quote

plus i can't wait to see what happens when all these millions of tons of old plastic floating around in the sea get into our food supply.

My understanding of plastics is limited in terms of what types of plastics can be recycled. I hope science can deliver a solution to this one day.

  Quote

i can never take permanent sea-top residences seriously. the ocean is so varied and unpredictable it makes the west coast look safe. kind of a believe-it-when-i-see-it. so far all i've seen is nice pretty utopian pics that would be astronomically expensive to build.

Unfortunately we still live in a pathetic social system which consists of a money oriented economy. Once we outgrow this, things will progress.. hopefully. The way we should be looking at things is: have we got the resources to build such structures? What we should not be asking is: have we got the money to build? > because money is nothing, non-existent and completely irrelevant to social progression. Why not research structures built in the sea? I'm sure you'll find plenty of interesting bits of information on what has already been achieved.

The wise man built his house upon the rocks.

just watched it too lol.

i'd much rather just lower population than live in a world that is both post-scarcity and human-saturated.

fuck Zeitgeist. implementation