Reply With QuoteWas just coming on to post his interview with channel 4 news last night so will piggyback on your thread.
https://www.channel4.com/news/peter-...-out-fake-news
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
A long read, but well worth it - what he says is all the more meaningful for me because of his background.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ope...-news-machine/
Was just coming on to post his interview with channel 4 news last night so will piggyback on your thread.
https://www.channel4.com/news/peter-...-out-fake-news
"They’re turning their readers into dupes"
Even Johnson’s chief cheer leader Laura Kunesberg called him out today.
Probably won’t last long but when even She says it.....
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
The last paragraph is a powerful punchline:
"But there is now clear evidence that the prime minister has debauched Downing Street by using the power of his office to spread propaganda and fake news. British political journalists have got chillingly close to providing the same service to Boris Johnson that Fox News delivers for Donald Trump."
How interesting that you see her as biased in one way, whilst I see her as biased in the opposite way.
BBC news people have often told me that they find they can't win because viewers will pick out stuff according to their own prejudices and regard it as bias. Now I've always rejected that , but your post there makes me wonder whether there's some merit in the defence.
It's probably powerful to you because it's something you want to believe, but to others it just sounds like more dramatic fake news from the liberal elite media. It all just goes to prove that people are now so divided in both the UK and USA that productive debate seems impossible. It's a very worrying prospect because, as I said in another thread, the only alternative to debate settled by voting is ,historically , war.
Here's an interesting question for you. If you won an election or vote after a campaign and public debate but were then told that it didn't count because the losing side insisted on their view, how would you feel ? What would be your next move ?
That's why it pays to seek out the actual truth, and not an interpretations of it. Just give me the raw data and let me make up my own mind, and they can keep their the spin for the easily influenced such as lardy & cyril.
Spot on
Sources from within BBC news...
You disappear whenever people challenge what you are saying.
I'll keep my eyes peeled but I have never seen you make a post based on data.
Are you saying Trump tweets, Fox News straplines and alt-right swivel-eyed YouTube channel rants are not data?
Sorry Eric, I don't monitor the message board 24/7. Not sure what you're on about anyway - that I know people in BBC News ?
Well, sorry but I do, even if that seems unimaginable to you. I'm afraid I know people at Sky and RT too. In fact I know all sorts of people - even MPs !!!!
They're all just human beings you know, and so people do know them.
Hey, here's a shocker Eric. You might well have seen me on tv or heard me on the radio !
You wouldn't think that was possible when I'm just a human being would you ?
In fact, here's a third bite of the cherry which will make all the bollocks I've written here worth it if you listen Eric.
Trust me, politicians , journalists and especially actors are just as bloody stupid and faulted as anyone. If there's any difference it's that they haven't got the deferential gene.
Eric , you are as good as any other bugger my boy, and there is absolutely no reason why you should think otherwise. You can go and be a BBC correspondent or an MP if you want to, or anything else you choose and which is within your capability, ( which both the things I mentioned are ).
Strangers Bar in the House of Commons is exactly the same as your local pub, except that the crooks drinking there are far more dangerous.
It seems as though you are not familiar with any of my work. I debunked the entire Trump Russia Collusion hoax, and where possible I provided original source material every step of the way. I thought it would open a few people's eyes, but it had the opposite effect, and all I got was a load of abuse and constant ridicule. This was quite interesting since brexit is exactlty the same game, with the same players, using the same methods. It actually made me pay attention to the behaviour of other people, especially how they reacted to the fake news media narratives. I may post my conclusions at some point, but I think a lot of people have already worked out that Western society is going to be pretty screwed up going forward.
I find the suggestion anyone is pro Boris in the media especially if you consider the following:
BBC accused of being pro remain .
The hysteria In all sections of the media of Boris to mention a few :
proguiging parliament .
Lying to the queen .
Supreme court ruling.
His row in his girlfriend's flat.
The association with the American lass.l
His attacks on May .
The use of Humburg on parliament.
Sorry as some point out there's blindness out there when it comes to politics .
This idea the press /media is pro right wing it not completely true , its which story you chose to follow and comment on, and what hatred you have festering within you.
Ironically there was an awful statement in the lords last week suggesting fire fighters may have treated the Grenville Tower differently depending on the race of the occupants, it went largely unreported, can you imagine a politician or house of Lords MP on the right side of politics getting away with that ??
Are you saying these things shouldn't have been reported?
Everything you said about Boris Johnson is true though.
Any other occupations you want to randomly bring up to prove your point which is guess is the usual ‘Torys aren’t bad look at etc etc etc etc ‘
No.
You missed my point, I'm refering to the inference that the press /media is right biased. They have enjoyed slaughtering May and Boris in equal measure.
But your examples are a bit weird. Illegally proroguing parliament, giving public money to a woman he's having an affair with, etc.
No, he's pointing out that most of the news which the BBC have reported about Boris is negative, which tends to disprove the claim above that they're pro Boris
Even in these chaotic days, this qualifies as a completely ludicrous and somewhat baffling argument. Working my way down your message, I would start by agreeing with you that not everyone in the media is pro Johnson, but, certainly in the print media, the large majority of them are.- as for the BBC there was a poll done quite recently, that there is a large number of people who think they are left wing biased, but then there are similar numbers who feel they are right wing biased.
As has been pointed out already, you then go on to claim that by reporting the events you list (news events which were covered by the news media!) this is, somehow, proving that the news media is anti, not pro, Johnson. I don't get why you didn't also mention the fact that we have a Prime Minister who won't say how many children he has fathered, his intervention in the Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe case when he was Foreign Secretary, tthe fact he twice voted against a deal which could have had us out of the EU months ago and that he has hung out the DUP to dry in the last fortnight - using your logic, that would have strengthened your argument.
Can I ask, if you don't think the media is pro Johnson, who do you think they favour? Even you can't imagine it is jeremy Corbyn and his party surely? Just imagine what the print media would have made of the events you list if a quarter of them related to Corbyn not Johnson.
The notion that any of the stories you list should be ignored and are down to the petty vendettas of the writers, as you seem to imply, is simply ridiculous when you consider that they relate to the Prime Minister of this country
Just click on the page on the BBC website which shows the front pages of the national newspapers and you soon see how "hostile" the majority of the print media is to Johnson.
Finally, if you are going to bring a tragedy where scores of people needlessly died or were made homeless into your argument, at least get the name of the block of flats that burned down right - it was Grenfell Tower.
Posting Permissions