Originally Posted by
KerrAvon
I dipped out of this thread when it descended to the usual circular hate-fest (with the exception of John's contribution) between the usual suspects, but I'll come back in for this.
I don't think I've ever said that we have a fair press, but you'll doubtless correct me if I'm wrong about that. I've certainly said that we have a free press and long may that continue. A free press inevitably means that different newspapers etc. will hold editorial viewpoints that reflect those of their owners and editorial teams. How could that not be the case? What is the alternative? A state controlled media? That would hardly be unbiased, so what are you proposing?
I've also said that I don't believe that the media has much of an influence on voting habits, because people choose their news sources to suit their own views, by which I mean that not many members of Momentum will be regular readers of the Daily Mail, whilst hard-core Tories probably don't nip out to get their copy of The Guardian every morning.
That second point it, I think, neatly demonstrated by some of the posts on this thread. You posted a link to an article from The Independent (a member of the ‘mainstream media), because it suited your purposes, as did animal. And because it suited your purpose you are willing to accept it and hold it out as fact, whereas anything that is critical of The Great Leader is dismissed as smear or unbelievable, untrue and scurrilous accusations and insinuations (although MMM seemed to struggle a little when asked for examples of that). Guardian articles are regularly held out as indisputable fact by those with an inclination to the Left of politics.
Again, you will doubtless correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall you complaining about press bias against the Tories when the media ran stories about Cameron’s alleged activities with pig heads or allegations of child abuse against Heath or of **** being found on Damien Green’s computer. animal certainly posted about Cameron and Heath on Tyke’s Mad without even a hint of the indignation or scepticism that he seems to feel when the press runs stories that suggest that The Great Leader is anything other than perfect and the saviour in waiting.
You say that the Czech spy story is made up nonsense, which may be your opinion, but you cannot state is as being fact, can you? As I understand it, a former member of the Czech secret service is saying that The Great Leader was recruited by them in the 80s. What are you saying? Should the press have refused to print the story because it might upset you and others who hold your political stance? If so, why were you not onto the press over Cameron, Heath and Green?
As it happens, I am of the opinion that the Czech story is probably nonsense. What secrets would he have been able to pass in the 80s? His recipe for compost as I, mentioned above, or perhaps details of the winners in the North London Labour Party Christmas raffle? I think it more likely that they swapped views about their shared hopes for World Socialism until the Czechs got bored and went looking for someone more interesting.
Think about it, Roly . When you talk about media bias, is the factual position simply that you are intolerant of people holding and expressing views that you don’t agree with? You certainly give that impression on here. Read more Orwell would be my suggested antidote. He was, of course, a person with deep Left leanings who became disillusioned with the intolerance of that wing of politics.
Reply With Quote
