This article seems a bit misleading, since it states that free papers have large circulations - about 1.5 million a day in London, presumably excluding weekends. And those figures may be print-runs, not circulations, which would be larger. The author presumably is interested mainly in advertising revenue, but doesn't bother to give figures for advertising in the 'free' papers.
I share the delight of people pleased at the apparent decline, but let's not be naive - the promoters of news have ways of embezzling massive amounts of paper money, and that promotion will not stop.
I'm amused by Condell's comment on 'left-wing Jews' - possibly he means Margaret Oppenheimer, the billionaire. He is a bit naive I'm afraid, and has no idea of what's going on.
"We can't trust the BBC. ... Those days are gone. The BBC is no longer an impartial organisation. .."
Sigh. Condell is right about the present day; but he's wrong about the past. The BBC has always been biased. Ever since it was established, it has promoted the 'elite' views. There is no issue - strikes, Second World War, Stalin, genocides, paper money, education - which it ever reports fairly. Don't be naive about the past. It's just that a lot of people haven't woken u about the presentation of the past.
You've missed the whole point of the 'Panorama' ambush. The BNP is never interviewed, even when issues surface which it, alone, has aired. Nick was entirely justified in walking out on this bunch of liars. He was not 'obviously in a blue funk', and handled himself far better than the ridiculous thuggish BBC nonentity. Nobody else has done anything significant about the BBC. Including, presumably, you. Another deliberate piece of deception was the car park/ rendezvous material. Of course the BNP has to be careful, since state thugs, police agents, and Stalinist-type 'leftists' are encouraged to attack, something the 'reporter' failed to mention - just as they showed scenes of thugs outside the BBC, costing the taxpayer a fortune, as though it was the BNP's fault.
A bit of a waste of time - I still have no idea where the money went. My best guess is that Nick wrongly thought the pleas for money would continue to work, as indeed Dowson said. In my experience, few nationalists will donate much. However, the reasons for sackings and terminations of contracts were not gone into at all. I don't think a single one of the departees/expellees came across well; probably they were not intended to, of course. They all seemed pathetically ready with their soundbites, with little supporting information. And they all seemed to have been fed a party line - such as that Nick on Panorama was a disaster, which is now an established lie. And It's not just Harrington who wasn't mentioned, but Butler too, unless he came in at the last minute; I didn't watch the whole thing. However, GA's comment that they are doing the state's work seems ludicrous to me.
There is standard software out there, and it's common to find all countries listed in a drop-down menu. Perhaps you'd care to donate your software skills?
In practice, the cost of legal action is prohibitive. I've just watched most of the Panorama thing and it's a joke. Largely it's film of the ridiculous prat Murragh (or whatever he's called) with a procession of rather third-rate ex-BNPers. They all look like feeble prats, including Dowson.
I looked at your site; that page simply repeats comments that Panorama have made. There is not one single 'thought' from you. You give no statement as to why you hate Griffin. I'm disgusted that you believe your page has any validity whatsoever.
The link below is the BNP's reply to Panorama's accusations, though it's not clear to me if the BNP has seen the script of the programme, or are relying on a set of questions posed to them by Panorama, or is using some other set of accusations.
http://bnp.org.uk/news/national/panorama-%E2%80%9...
I have a feeling, judging by some of Nick's comments, that the BBC is unlikely to remain polite to people like Dowson and Golding, if they feel they've won this 'battle'.