BBC U-turns on article blaming London’s ‘most congested city’ title on cycle lanes

Yep, although weirdly whenever prices have gone up across the whole European region, the UK seems to be hit worst. Probably just local taxes and factors I suspect  though and nothing else. 

Has that graph got the labels a bit mangled? The title indicates October 2021, but the Y axis only goes to November 2020 and seems offset as January 1997 is a bit below the top.

Definitely something squiff with the axis - the first big spike should be Apr/May '06

The labelling is a bit odd, the raw numbers are available on statista.

For reference stats from 14/15.

Do you masturbate while making this ludicrous and obscene posts? We can only assume these are the rantings of someone derangedly unhinged. 

Good job I wasn't drinking my coffee when I saw that

Says the guy who has just posted an unhinged comment.

Pot. Kettle. Black?

Flintshire Boy wrote:

Says the guy who has just posted an unhinged comment.

Pot. Kettle. Black?

No.

Insulting? yes

Scurrilous? yes

Obscene? yes

Unhinged? No

(Bonus line item - Sympathy? no, but you can find it in the dictionary, somewhere between shit and syphilis) 

Oh don't take things so seriously, I was only poking fun. I think the object of my humour can wear it. 

So you object to the response but are ok with the baiting, trolling and lies that seek to trigger a response?
How many different people control your account ?

Is that the City of London that's seeing so much of its banking business being transferred to Paris and Frankfurt because of Brexit? But no, you'd rather repeat a lie and then blame the recently re-elected mayor.

OldRidgeback wrote:

Is that the City of London that's seeing so much of its banking business being transferred to Paris and Frankfurt because of Brexit? But no, you'd rather repeat a lie and then blame the recently re-elected mayor.

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of arseholes. Maybe this Brexshit thing does have upsides.......

You may not like the bankers, but it's a fact that the corporate taxes the banking firms pay are one of the biggest contributors to the UK's GDP. Fewer banking firms will mean less money for the NHS.

OldRidgeback wrote:

You may not like the bankers, but it's a fact that the corporate taxes the banking firms pay are one of the biggest contributors to the UK's GDP. Fewer banking firms will mean less money for the NHS.

That depends on the damage they do that the state/tax payer underwrites as they gouge their corporate profit, on which their corporate tax is calculated.
When that's taken into account it may be that their overall payback ain't that great.
Bit like tax receipts from drivers not coming close to covering their costs.
More money for NHS. Where have I heard that before....
By the way, some of my best friend are bankers. And I'm quite happy to tell them so....

Captain Badger wrote:

Bit like tax receipt from drivers not coming close to covering their costs.

Tell 'em about the smokers, Captain!

Garage at Large wrote:

And why was London's economic rebound so much faster? Certainly isn't down to Sadiq Khan, that's for sure. Clue: starts with a "B" and ends in "xit" - the City is already buzzing due to a relaxation in red tape, all the doomsters will be proven wrong. Of course the BBC will be the last to admit it.

I work in the City, and I don't think Brexit is the catastrophe that many on here think it is. But, there has been very little regulatory change so far. Do you actually know what you are talking about here, or are you just parrotting the latest Daily Mail clickbait?

The City is currently the opposite of buzzing, by the way. It looks like a scene from 28 Days Later.

Garage at Large wrote:

And why was London's economic rebound so much faster? Certainly isn't down to Sadiq Khan, that's for sure.
Clue: starts with a "B" and ends in "xit" - the City is already buzzing due to a relaxation in red tape, all the doomsters will be proven wrong. Of course the BBC will be the last to admit it.

The rebound was large because the collapse in the UK economy was larger. But you already know this.

Which itself was a function of how we (in the UK) measure GDP.

hawkinspeter wrote:

I'm still waiting for the BBC to address my complaint about their response to my original complaint about that article.

They should not be allowed to publish such utter clickbait and then when they get called out on it, they get around to changing it weeks later. What's worse is that they don't acknowledge how manipulative and divisive the original article was and why exactly they had to change it.

(Welcome to Ryan, by the way)

I'm waiting too, and the revision of the article makes no reference to the original, lying, headline or why it was changed.  Nobody who read the first headline will be going back to check if it's changed, so this response from the BBC is, to put it mildly, inadequate.   A proper apology and a new article making it clear that the original headline was wrong is necessary.  Astute readers will notice the weasel words used, none of which actually admit bias or error.

The BBC is undeniably biased against cycling, and it's time they were held to account and changed their ways.  Another example was the recent R4 prog "You and Yours" which was another advert for electric cars.  They did ask for comments before the prog, so I both rang and emailed, pointing out that bicycles and electric bicycles were better on every criterion except long distance travel, and that they were again excluding public transport, cycling and walking, and I wasn't the only one.  They allowed one person to come on briefly to explain that there were alternatives to the electric car.