UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

https://news.sky.com/story/row-over-new-greggs-vegan-sausage-rolls-heats-up-11597679 (https://archive.ph/5Ba6o)

A heated row has broken out over a move by Britain's largest bakery chain to launch a vegan sausage roll.

The pastry, which is filled with a meat substitute and encased in 96 pastry layers, is available in 950 Greggs stores across the country.

It was promised after 20,000 people signed a petition calling for the snack to be launched to accommodate plant-based diet eaters.


But the vegan sausage roll's launch has been greeted by a mixed reaction: Some consumers welcomed it, while others voiced their objections.

View image on Twitter


spread happiness@p4leandp1nk
https://twitter.com/p4leandp1nk/status/1080767496569974785

#VEGANsausageroll thanks Greggs

7
10:07 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See spread happiness's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Cook and food poverty campaigner Jack Monroe declared she was "frantically googling to see what time my nearest opens tomorrow morning because I will be outside".

While TV writer Brydie Lee-Kennedy called herself "very pro the Greggs vegan sausage roll because anything that wrenches veganism back from the 'clean eating' wellness folk is a good thing".

One Twitter user wrote that finding vegan sausage rolls missing from a store in Corby had "ruined my morning".

Another said: "My son is allergic to dairy products which means I can't really go to Greggs when he's with me. Now I can. Thank you vegans."

View image on Twitter


pg often@pgofton
https://twitter.com/pgofton/status/1080772793774624768

The hype got me like #Greggs #Veganuary

42
10:28 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See pg often's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


TV presenter Piers Morgan led the charge of those outraged by the new roll.

"Nobody was waiting for a vegan bloody sausage, you PC-ravaged clowns," he wrote on Twitter.

Mr Morgan later complained at receiving "howling abuse from vegans", adding: "I get it, you're all hangry. I would be too if I only ate plants and gruel."

Another Twitter user said: "I really struggle to believe that 20,000 vegans are that desperate to eat in a Greggs."

"You don't paint a mustach (sic) on the Mona Lisa and you don't mess with the perfect sausage roll," one quipped.

Journalist Nooruddean Choudry suggested Greggs introduce a halal steak bake to "crank the fume levels right up to 11".

The bakery chain told concerned customers that "change is good" and that there would "always be a classic sausage roll".

It comes on the same day McDonald's launched its first vegetarian "Happy Meal", designed for children.

The new dish comes with a "veggie wrap", instead of the usual chicken or beef option.

It should be noted that Piers Morgan and Greggs share the same PR firm, so I'm thinking this is some serious faux outrage and South Park KKK gambiting here.

 

[Mound Dweller]

The common and widely understood meaning is a closer fit to it.

That may be so, but it is still wrong
I do consneed that being picky about it is a bit cringe. but not having such standards is how you end up with patois, it's only a little thing of course but they add up over time and all of sudden you've got something horrid like esturary english.

 

[Overly Serious]

That may be so, but it is still wrong

No it is not.

There is guarding against the degradation of the language in meaningful ways and then there is trying to assert that something must mean the same as a badly translated bit of Greek in a fight that was lost hundreds of years ago because you feel a need to assert that you passed English Literature (in your own words).

This would be like me correcting someone on using continuous when they meant continual. Except in that instance, were I to be so fussy, I would at least be making an actual semantic correction. Whereas the meaning people give to "begging the question" is entirely compatible with the words used. And all you're doing is trying to assert that a different meaning should be given to them that few actually know. A meaning, incidentally, which doesn't fit well with the words in the first place. It would be better translated as "assuming the premise" or similar.

The meaning is not wrong in any objective sense. It has simply evolved from its origins a long, long time ago. I look forward to leaping in next time you use the word "awful" to tell you that actually you're calling something divine and majestic. Or if you call someone naughty, maybe I should leap in to ask if you really mean that they have naught.

There's a difference between correcting someone because the meaning is semantically wrong ("I could care less" grates on my ears like crazy) and insisting meanings from centuries ago be adhered to. Especially when the wording is just clumsy lifting direct from another language and context.

 

[Mound Dweller]

No it is not.

Oh yes it is
The gayreeks can speak gayreek all they like it has nothing to do with the price of fish, or in this case what wasn't was were, you can cope over it all you like since your blue might not be my blue and all that, but the words mean what the words mean.

 

[Overly Serious]

Oh yes it is

For someone who wants to fuss over dialectic rules, that's not a very convincing argument.

The gayreeks can speak gayreek all they like it has nothing to do with the price of fish, or in this case what wasn't was were, you can cope over it all you like since your blue might not be my blue and all that, but the words mean what the words mean.

And this just fails to understand the point that the interpretation is entirely consistent with the words used. There's no semantic inconsistency, only your insistence that they should mean something else. You say "your blue might not be my blue" which is actually a good argument, for me. Because blue is an arbitrary word and if everybody else means one thing by blue and you alone mean something else, you're the one with the problem. Now what you can do is argue against something being semantically wrong. You can say that "I could care less" is at odds with the meaning Americans give it. That's fine, I do that. You can argue about how something was introduced to the English language. That's fine, that's not in dispute. But to insist that you have the correct meaning of something which is commonly used by others in a semantically correct way, is just you trying to seem smart. But the longer you argue in the fashion of "oh yes it is"; or introduce self-contradicting arguments like the arbitrariness of interpretation of the word blue (an appeal to subjectivity) alongside "words mean what they mean" (an appeal to objectivity), the less smart you seem. Or to say that the Greek has "nothing to do" with it, when the meaning you ascribe to it is directly from the Greek original.

Language changes. You want to show off that you passed English Literature by pointing out the origins of the phrase, go ahead. Lots of us did. You want to say that it's wrong you have to either show that the interpretation is inconsistent with the meaning of the words, or inconsistent with general understanding of those words by others. Neither of which you have done.

 

[Crunkle]

NERD ALERT
(been a bit quiet in this thread recently, been busy with shit)

FindOutNow
15th October (changes with 8th October)

REF: 32% (n/c)
CON: 17% (n/c)
GRN: 15% (n/c)
LAB: 15% (-2)
LIB: 12% (n/c)

Labour is being swallowed up by every party. Tories are not "back" despite their annoying messaging since party conference.

Here's what it'd look like:



Not only would Kemi Badenoch (Essex North West) lose her seat, so would Robert Jenrick (Newark).

Labour smaller than the Lib Dems despite getting more of the vote.

Big changes coming here, vast majority of the political class would be ejected.

 

[FedPostalService]

To beg the question is to assume the conclusion, to raise the question is to prompt it, thus it raises the question.
I got top marks in English Literature for good reason and will never let anyone forget it

Tell me you studied philosophy without telling me you studied philosophy.

A priori bros, stay winning.

 

[Mound Dweller]

snca

You're making the mistake of trying to do a dialectical on whether or not something is grammatically correct, it either is or it isn't simple as, being smart doesn't come into it. That's just, like, my opinion, man.

Tell me you studied philosophy without telling me you studied philosophy.

A priori bros, stay winning.

I actually work for a living unlike some "people" get it right you Black Bastard.

 

[Clem Fandango]

I read the news today, oh boy
"Celia Imrie's fart steals the show on Celebrity Traitors".

That's the sixth most read article on the BBC website BTW - some woman farted on some TV show.

 

[Overly Serious]

NERD ALERT
(been a bit quiet in this thread recently, been busy with shit)

FindOutNow
15th October (changes with 8th October)

REF: 32% (n/c)
CON: 17% (n/c)
GRN: 15% (n/c)
LAB: 15% (-2)
LIB: 12% (n/c)

Labour is being swallowed up by every party. Tories are not "back" despite their annoying messaging since party conference.

Here's what it'd look like:

View attachment 8042844View attachment 8042846

Not only would Kemi Badenoch (Essex North West) lose her seat, so would Robert Jenrick (Newark).

Labour smaller than the Lib Dems despite getting more of the vote.

Big changes coming here, vast majority of the political class would be ejected.

This honestly makes me nervous. If you think that the Reform candidates are all noble and bright and coming in to clean house, this is superb. If you think of them as a big load of unknown people with God knows what backing or connections, you're looking at the entire country handing the unstoppable reigns of power for five years to an unknown with almost nobody able to stop them. A majority of that size they can do whatever they like. And as I understand it, as a Limited Company, Farage has even more power over the membership than usual.

I'm getting the vibe of when the Romans would appoint someone dictator to sort out the huge mess the elected senators had gotten the Republic into. Only Farage doesn't really put me in mind of Caesar or Cincinnatus.

I read the news today, oh boy
"Celia Imrie's fart steals the show on Celebrity Traitors".

That's the sixth most read article on the BBC website BTW - some woman farted on some TV show.

I take some small solace in the fact that there's a selection bias on those who read the BBC news website. But only some.

ou're making the mistake of trying to do a dialectical on whether or not something is grammatically correct, it either is or it isn't simple as, being smart doesn't come into it. That's just, like, my opinion, man.

I never even commented on whether it was grammatically correct or not (though it is), I said semantically. Do keep up Mr. I Passed English A-Level.

 

[Mound Dweller]

I never even commented on whether it was grammatically correct or not (though it is), I said semantically. Do keep up Mr. I Passed English Literature.

I never even commented on whether it was semantically correct or not (though it is), I said grammatically. Do keep up Mr. I Failed English Literature.

 

[Overly Serious]

I never even commented on whether it was semantically correct or not (though it is), I said grammatically. Do keep up Mr. I Failed English Literature.

This is getting tiresome because your posts are non sequiturs and now resorting to ad hominem. You say I commented about something being grammatically correct. I say I didn't. You respond that you raised grammatical correctness. So? What do I care? You could talk about hippos, it would have nothing to do with anything I said. Just bored at this point.

 

[FedPostalService]

I actually work for a living unlike some "people" get it right you Black Bastard.

I like the idea that people who can’t figure out how they’d feel if they didn’t have breakfast would study philosophy.

 

[Mound Dweller]

This is getting tiresome because your posts are non sequiturs and now resorting to ad hominem. You say I commented about something being grammatically correct. I say I didn't. You respond that you raised grammatical correctness. So? What do I care? You could talk about hippos, it would have nothing to do with anything I said. Just bored at this point.

N'wah all I did was apply some much needed correction, if it's boring it's because you made it boring, bore.

I like the idea that people who can’t figure out how they’d feel if they didn’t have breakfast would study philosophy.

Really begs the question innit, Doctors and Engineers and all that.

 

[Clem Fandango]

I like the idea that people who can’t figure out how they’d feel if they didn’t have breakfast would study philosophy.

Nig nogs should have their own capital-B Black philosophy. "I ate breakfast, therefore I am".

 

[UselessRubberKeyboard]

To beg the question is to assume the conclusion, to raise the question is to prompt it, thus it raises the question.
I got top marks in English Literature for good reason and will never let anyone forget it

Rated informative, even though I’m too stupid to understand much of a difference (I did not study English literature, and I didn’t even pass English language in school, as you can tell).

NERD ALERT
(been a bit quiet in this thread recently, been busy with shit)

FindOutNow
15th October (changes with 8th October)

REF: 32% (n/c)
CON: 17% (n/c)
GRN: 15% (n/c)
LAB: 15% (-2)
LIB: 12% (n/c)

Labour is being swallowed up by every party. Tories are not "back" despite their annoying messaging since party conference.

Here's what it'd look like:

View attachment 8042844View attachment 8042846

Not only would Kemi Badenoch (Essex North West) lose her seat, so would Robert Jenrick (Newark).

Labour smaller than the Lib Dems despite getting more of the vote.

Big changes coming here, vast majority of the political class would be ejected.

And that’s why there’s more chance of the Pope coming out as a Danish Hindu than there is of an early election.

@Otterly and @Overly Serious, I think you’re bang on the money with that assessment of why we’re such a shit state right now. Do you remember back when Big Brother began? I remember being unnerved by how adults around me were copying the judgemental shit they were supposed to say about ‘the housemates’ to stuff elsewhere. That attitude has spread like wildfire. Coupled with social media’s short attention span and reliance on one sentence ‘hot takes’, that’s how we’ve ended up going from ‘being gay isn’t a problem really’ o ‘being a paedophile is just another sexual preference and if you say otherwise you’re a hate-filled Nazi genociding innocent trans minorities’. Everything has to go to extremes to one-up the previous poster. Everyone wants to score that dopamine hit of being better than someone else online. Almost everyone’s forgotten what it’s like to be on the receiving end of real economic disaster and real war, shortages, oppression etc etc.

It’s not Friday night but I’m opening a beer anyway. Fuck this lark.

 

[teriyakiburns]

That's the sixth most read article on the BBC website BTW - some woman farted on some TV show.

I'd love to see the analytics for that. I bet it would go something like

2000
2,432,761,660

Labour is being swallowed up by every party. Tories are not "back" despite their annoying messaging since party conference.

Here's what it'd look like:

Labour truly are cooked this time. They've managed to lose most of London.

In reality, I think there'll be more blue on the map. The Conservatives will squeak past the post in a lot of their traditionally safer seats, just because of voter tribalism and a last-minute preference for familiarity. Regardless of what else happens, Labour's vote is going to utterly collapse at the next election, even if they throw out Starmer in the meantime. We might see a Conservative/Reform coalition, or we might see the Conservatives as the opposition to Reform, which is going to be interesting.

 

[Made In Wales]

I'd love to see the analytics for that. I bet it would go something like

2000
2,432,761,660

Labour truly are cooked this time. They've managed to lose most of London.

In reality, I think there'll be more blue on the map. The Conservatives will squeak past the post in a lot of their traditionally safer seats, just because of voter tribalism and a last-minute preference for familiarity. Regardless of what else happens, Labour's vote is going to utterly collapse at the next election, even if they throw out Starmer in the meantime. We might see a Conservative/Reform coalition, or we might see the Conservatives as the opposition to Reform, which is going to be interesting.

Would be interesting, but extremely unlikely as there's no reason to vote for the Tories - Reform UK have replaced them.

What you will see IMO is Farage v Davey - Reform UK v Liberal Democrats - the winner gets to rule.

There'd be a smattering of Greens, Independents, the various NI parties and Nationalists but Labour and Tories could well become 'past tense' parties.

 

[Overly Serious]

In reality, I think there'll be more blue on the map. The Conservatives will squeak past the post in a lot of their traditionally safer seats, just because of voter tribalism and a last-minute preference for familiarity. Regardless of what else happens, Labour's vote is going to utterly collapse at the next election, even if they throw out Starmer in the meantime. We might see a Conservative/Reform coalition, or we might see the Conservatives as the opposition to Reform, which is going to be interesting.

Running the numbers on that poll, Labour are being eaten up more by Reform than the Tories are, but then Labour massively over-performed at the last election so I'm not reading too much into it regards how feelings towards the parties have changed. If anything, given how much Labour performed above average last election, it's probably even more in the Tories favour. Is it possible that Reform are sweeping up more of the working class vote Labour claims than I thought? Looks like.

It's still a big jump from this polling to Conservative opposition. I doubt it unless Starmer clings on as leader for a couple more years until the GE and absolutely drives Labour support into the ground. Although can you imagine if we DID get Reform with Conservative opposition or vice versa? It's hard to imagine what that would be like. Almost a complete collapse of the Left and the Conservatives themselves would have renewed incentive to be nationalist and, well, conservative.

 

[Crunkle]

This honestly makes me nervous. If you think that the Reform candidates are all noble and bright and coming in to clean house, this is superb. If you think of them as a big load of unknown people with God knows what backing or connections, you're looking at the entire country handing the unstoppable reigns of power for five years to an unknown with almost nobody able to stop them.

I'm at the point of honestly not caring. The people who are in power have shown that they want our way of living to cease. They will not rest until our streets resemble New Delhi, covered in shit and rubbish. They deserve to lose their jobs and without fedposting, much more. Mussolini's end springs to mind.

Give me incompetent people who actually don't want me to die or be homeless over "qualified" career politicians who want all of our Isles speaking jungle babble.

 

[BongoMongo]

That may be so, but it is still wrong
I do consneed that being picky about it is a bit cringe. but not having such standards is how you end up with patois, it's only a little thing of course but they add up over time and all of sudden you've got something horrid like esturary english.

People confusing less and fewer is my personal peeve. Less is a thing your quantify on terms of volume, like water. Fewer is something you count in individual numbers like people or buttons or whatever.

Really grinds my tits.