eBay

astrologica · ‎06-11-2019

Walking through my local Supermarket this morning, I was appalled by the racks and racks of merchandise for this year's Children in need. There were rows and rows of outfits, headgear , bears etc...all made of synthetic fabrics and plastic. Most of that will be in landfill by next year, to make room for next year's tat. The Children in need franchise is run by the BBC, so how hypocritical are they? They produce programmes, reminding us that our world is in peril..pay David Attenborough thousands to tell us it's all our fault..at the same time as they condone and encourage the production of all this non-recyclable tat.

Sorry......rant over.

camcoll_0991 · ‎06-11-2019

Too damn right. It's an outrage actually. But than, so is the whole BBC CinN thing - it's a damn con! When you look at what the money is being spent on it makes a mockery of the whole thing. Mostly, this does not even benefit seriously poor children (from obviously poor families!). IF you really want to seriously help really poor children, in the first place help their families to be able to properly support their kids and not this sort of mamby-pamby nonsense!

Oh, and while I'm raanting - get all those rich barstewards that keep telling ordinary, often near-povery-line themselves, folks who make up the bulk of donations to dig deep into their pockets, to do exactly that themselves instead of - mostly - just paying lip service!

bustysinclare · ‎07-11-2019

Will all the ranting do any good, sadly I don't think so😫

Next mood swing in six minutes.

dark_castle1 · ‎07-11-2019

I quite agree ! If all those rich barstewards donated even a small fraction of what they have there would be no need to ask for donations.

Programme makers would rather make programmes like Rich Kids go Skint etc so they can rub peoples noses in it as to the haves and have nots.

upthecreekyetagain · ‎07-11-2019

CIN - one of my favourite charities.

Anyone remember the CIN thread in Q&A - we raised thousands for the charity and had fun doing it.

the charity is called Children in Need not Children in Financial Need

Deno thread on FHG

astrologica · ‎07-11-2019

The name of the charity is irrelevant Creeky. The point is...should they be flooding shops and supermarkets with all this non-recyclable tat, when we are constantly being reminded of the dire state of our planet? By the same people who are encouraging the production of the tat?😕

dark_castle1 · ‎07-11-2019

No they should not especially given the programmes and documentaries they produce regarding the state of our planet.

Once again it seems to be do as I say and not as I do.

upthecreekyetagain · ‎07-11-2019

No -,I don't agree with the type of merchandising you describe although I have to admit to still having a Pudsey Bear soft toy in the house from back in the 90s.

Deno thread on FHG

fallen-archie · ‎07-11-2019

All this angst about a charity programme, makes me wonder why things have changed so much in this country. I am quite certain that the merchandising is an error which they will by now be aware of! As for the rich doing their bit, some are extremely philanthropic others less so, which is reflective of people across the social spectrum! May I remind everyone that you have a choice of what to watch these days so why not turn over and watch something more to your taste?

bustysinclare · ‎07-11-2019

Its a shame the eBay CIN support stopped, it was fantastic what everyone did for the charity. Real community spirit.

The charity itself is a very well deserved one for the children in my opinion. Especially when so much in local areas are taking so much away from them due to council cut backs.

Next mood swing in six minutes.

camcoll_0991 · ‎07-11-2019

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:
No -,I don't agree with the type of merchandising you describe although I have to admit to still having a Pudsey Bear soft toy in the house from back in the 90s.

Give us the money, or the effing bear gets it! [/knife at bear's throat]