Doesn't look particularly like any English street I've ever seen. Presumably an old English street designed by somebody who had never seen a real old English street. Kind of like all those totally unconvincing sets built on Holywood backlots of various different parts of the world.
The real problem is lazy journalism. Time was a journalist would do some research for a story. These days journalists (esp. at the BBC) think it's enough to cite Twitter or Facebook sources as being all that matters, either in terms of fact or as public opinion. The other problem is the promotion of Facebook and particularly Twitter as a political force.
I get so tired of reading that something has happened purely as the result of a campaign on Twitter or Facebook. You know the sort of thing according to the media some major political or legal decision has happened simply because a few hundred people made a noise about it on Twitter. Of course the news media never ever mention the thousands of similar campaigns every year that fail. The fact that many more of these campaigns fail than succeed seems to show that on balance they are largely pointless. And that's before you take into account that things that happen after supposedly successful campains would probably happened without Facebook and/or Twitter.
Journalists like Facebook and particularly Twitter because they get to do less work that way - so they promote the two sites as major tools for social change in order to support their continued reliance on these services.
Who the hell says human beings have more right to the planet than anything else? BTW anybody who puts forward any form of religious argument is on a hiding to nothing. If you can't justify your viewpoint without recourse to a mythical deity then you can't justify your viewpoint at all.
For many years Tony Hawks the British author and comedian has received emails intended for Tony Hawk the skateborder. His replies are much more amusing than those from Opera, but then he is a comedian.
Doesn't that make it the third time this guy has predicted the end of the world. How many times does he have to get it wrong before his followers realise he's full of crap?
I get so tired of reading that something has happened purely as the result of a campaign on Twitter or Facebook. You know the sort of thing according to the media some major political or legal decision has happened simply because a few hundred people made a noise about it on Twitter. Of course the news media never ever mention the thousands of similar campaigns every year that fail. The fact that many more of these campaigns fail than succeed seems to show that on balance they are largely pointless. And that's before you take into account that things that happen after supposedly successful campains would probably happened without Facebook and/or Twitter.
Journalists like Facebook and particularly Twitter because they get to do less work that way - so they promote the two sites as major tools for social change in order to support their continued reliance on these services.
http://www.tony-hawks.com/skateboarding.php
All the better for it.