Frogs? Or fuzzy-wuzzies?

 

Further to this post: 

Are we really DOOMED to accept trigger warnings for Dad's Army on BBC Two?

The BBC Press Office has reacted to The Sun's take on the story:

It's the Daily Mail's take that puzzles me though, to which the BBC didn't respond. I'm finding it hard to accept that even the BBC would slap a trigger warning on because of "frogs". As we assumed at the time, it was surely "fuzzy-wuzzies" to describe Sudanese fighters that got that warning put on? Where did the Mail get the idea that it was "frogs"?

Ah, I see the BBC is reacting to the Mail too:

I think we can guess what they'll be telling them!

There's no need for such trigger warnings regardless. That remains the main point here.