Former HFPA President Philip Berk, (I can't add the source but if you google both their names it comes up)

You, and obviously others, are misunderstanding my comment.

I never said she did anything wrong.

I am just saying the headline is misleading.

It doesn't matter if he wants to remain anonymous or not, the headline should have simply been more general.

Saying that the couple was heroic rather than just the woman.

Anyways, we are going around I circle. Obviously the point was missed here.

Maybe, but the headline is making her sound like the one and only hero.

What she did was amazing, no doubt, but her partner was just as heroic and amazing.

He could have easily been mentioned in the headline, it would have been less misleading.

Right now her husband is rather miffed that his wife is the only hero in the story.

It not like he was not helping at all....

I can't wait for the Facebook scientific reviews to tell me how good my WiFi will be...

I am not going to split hair here, I think we are both saying the same thing in a way.

I still think they do have to make money otherwise the UK taxpayers would need to pay higher fees and that would make the BBC even more unpopular, (or the government of the day if they had to use taxpayer money to foot the difference).

So, while they are definitely not a private entity they do have to make some money.

Because they are seen as the TV station of the UK, they also have a role to play when it comes to those kind of delicate situations. In this case I think they chose a bit of a backhanded way to still be there but be seen to be outraged.

They do, they sell contents, (like coverage of the soccer world cup), to other providers.

License fee does not cover everything.

They do make money, they sell the rights to some of their shows/events.

License fees only partially cover their costs, (large part if I recall), but that's not all of it. They have to sell some of their contents.

>However, they do have a remit to report on anything of public interest

Yes, then why not show the opening ceremony then?

A bit of a weird thing for the bbc to do.

I mean they have entire teams in Qatar reporting the tournament and yet they still choose to have a go at their human rights.

I think it would have been best for them to not go at all ... but I guess they still had to make money.

Sorry, can I ask a sub-question that I think you can answer.

How did operator 'A' know the speed operator 'B' could read/understand?

I mean, by your example if one guy is firing 60 words a minute, how does he know he wasn't talking to 20 words per minute guy?

Ho about new guys? Were they all expected to understand 60 words per minute? If not... How would they tell the sender to slow down?

OK... I keep watching then.