Do you think the floods in the South are more newsworthy than the ones in the North?

[oliveoil]

as Sky and BBC have all decamped and are LIVE 24 hours a day, all in waders and macs

yet Sheffield and Hull didn't get the same coverage

why is this do you think?

because us up North aren't as inportant?

live in Hull btw

or even important

don't be crazy

ta dash up the A40 from White City is no easier than a trek oop north.

IT's the famous north/south divide.

More people, more businesses, more properties, more affluence in the south.

Things down South always get more coverage than up North.

Also the Northern floods clashed with TB stepping down as prime minister, so got a bit overlooked in end. Was on local news for a long time, but not national.

Because it's in the south, that's why.

yes but people DIED in the floods in the north

I got quite annoyed watching Sky earlier tbh

Crikey - be grateful it gets a mention at all. If it was happening up here in Scotland it would not even warrant a mention on the national news - it would be consigned to the local news, whilst other 'more important' things about England (spec. the south) were broadcast

the Queen has sent her thoughts now

oh the waters will recede now, she is like Moses

sheffield did get a lot of coverage though. hull not so much.

dunno why. the south is way more important obviously. well, not the spouth per se, but the cotswolds at least. presumably all the tv execs have country homes there. I bet basildon wouldn't have got so much coverage.

More likely Canute.

its the centre of the Universe didn't you know?

That's crap, a month ago the news was all about the floods in Yorkshire and the surrounding areas and nowhere else. Now the floods are elsewhere they are reporting as such. Lets be honest the floods in the west country are pretty massive just like they were in Yorkshire etc.

I wonder if the floods are even mentioned out of the UK. Anyone seen a mention of it elsewhere? USA perhaps?

It's not crap. Do you think for a minute that if London/the SE was under water there would be any other news reported at all? We'd have 24 hour news coverage of it, a national emergency would be called, and things would move a hell of a lot faster than they have done so far.

weird I just said as much to dh.

I said the same this morning - is it beacuse its Berkshire that you get every TV anchor person & their dog stood in waders & a kagool !

because the south is more important

[of course emoticon]

It certainly appears that there is more news coverage from the southeast, but as people are going to be without mains water for up to two weeks, it does seem more serious down there than up here; the deaths that happened notwithstanding of course.

i mean southwest obviously.

they've had plenty of news coverage of the UK floods in Aus - my mum rang me in a panic thinking we might be 6 ft underwater. Here in leafy surrey we are doing fine - my garden is looking fab. Our only inconvenience was when a lorry delivering top soil got itself stuck in the mud in our front garden yesterday and had to be hauled out!

(Waynetta realises that she had better re-thing her definition of "down south" being everything below the M23....)

re-THINK dammit!