Election Year or Fear!

[ramAnag]

But that’s a false analogy, you’re analogising deciding you don’t like a band because you don’t like the look of them and then telling folk how bad they are without ever visiting their catalogue

Sorry but that’s utter tripe, Andy. I haven’t mentioned not ‘liking the look of them’, ‘telling folk how bad they are’ or ‘never visiting their catalogue’. What I’ve said is that I choose not to access the two media agencies mentioned because I don’t trust them and similarly I don’t read books or listen to music performed by those who don’t appeal to me.

[Trickytreesreds]

Anyway, this will make RA feel better.
When will Sunak, wake up(if ever) and realise the extent of how pissed off Tory voters are?
This isn't just about how ****ed up the current leadership is, even the die hards are deserting, for floating around like Blairs middle ground Labour was.

The Conservative party, today, is holding less than half its 2019 voters. In the latest polls, the Tories only hold 48% of their 2019 vote while Labour holds 86% of its 2019 vote. This underlines just how badly the Tories have managed the post-Brexit realignment —which I’ve pointed to before.
Will all these voters return? Amid record levels of net legal migration and broken borders? I very much doubt it.
While 12% have switched to Labour, and 21% to Reform, a noticeably larger share of 27% now say they won’t vote at all, or refuse to answer the question.
They are fed up, angry, disillusioned, done with politics —especially when it comes to how they think the Tories have managed things like immigration, crime, and the NHS.
https://www.mattgoodwin.org/p/the-to...-in-10-charts?

[ramAnag]

Anyway, this will make RA feel better.
When will Sunak, wake up(if ever) and realise the extent of how pissed off Tory voters are?
This isn't just about how ****ed up the current leadership is, even the die hards are deserting, for floating around like Blairs middle ground Labour was.

The Conservative party, today, is holding less than half its 2019 voters. In the latest polls, the Tories only hold 48% of their 2019 vote while Labour holds 86% of its 2019 vote. This underlines just how badly the Tories have managed the post-Brexit realignment —which I’ve pointed to before.
Will all these voters return? Amid record levels of net legal migration and broken borders? I very much doubt it.
While 12% have switched to Labour, and 21% to Reform, a noticeably larger share of 27% now say they won’t vote at all, or refuse to answer the question.
They are fed up, angry, disillusioned, done with politics —especially when it comes to how they think the Tories have managed things like immigration, crime, and the NHS.
https://www.mattgoodwin.org/p/the-to...-in-10-charts?

Tricky, I doubt there’s anything Matt Goodwin could tell me to make me ‘feel better’ about the state of our country, but thanks for your concern.
If you want to know about the state of the current Tory Party look no further than the number of their MP’s who’ve already announced they won’t be standing for re-election. 64 at the moment I think, including Theresa May, and with more to come in all probability.
Easy life when you’ve got a massive majority…more like rats leaving a sinking ship given the current political prognosis.

[Andy_Faber]

Sorry but that’s utter tripe, Andy. I haven’t mentioned not ‘liking the look of them’, ‘telling folk how bad they are’ or ‘never visiting their catalogue’. What I’ve said is that I choose not to access the two media agencies mentioned because I don’t trust them and similarly I don’t read books or listen to music performed by those who don’t appeal to me.

I stand by what I said and think your analogy was a poor one, even more surprised that you don’t at least listen to those who’s voice you don’t share, Ido mean genuinely, I thought your opinions were better informed than that

[ramAnag]

I stand by what I said and think your analogy was a poor one, even more surprised that you don’t at least listen to those who’s voice you don’t share, Ido mean genuinely, I thought your opinions were better informed than that

Sorry Andy…as regards the ‘analogy’, the job of the media should be to inform (preferably objectively). I don’t believe that either GB News or ‘The Sun’ (or the Daily Mail for that matter) set out to do that…I believe they regularly lie and have a political function rather than a journalistic one, so I choose not to add to their coffers.
Where music, literature (and film) are concerned…we all have different tastes. It may well be a flawed analogy, but my point, to GP, was that to avoid things we don’t like/approve of shouldn’t come as a surprise.
At no point did I suggest that because I don’t like something it should be dismissed and it was just wrong to suggest that I don’t consider things because I ‘don’t like the look of them’.

As regards being ‘better informed than that’. I honestly don’t have to subscribe to the aforementioned media outlets to be well informed about the intentions of the Right, anymore than I have to be black to have opinions on racism or attend a Trump rally to know that he’s bonkers.

[Trickytreesreds]

Sorry Andy…as regards the ‘analogy’, the job of the media should be to inform (preferably objectively). I don’t believe that either GB News or ‘The Sun’ (or the Daily Mail for that matter) set out to do that…I believe they regularly lie and have a political function rather than a journalistic one, so I choose not to add to their coffers.
.

And that is where you fall down my friend.

As I told you, seeing as you have never watched it. When they have a debate, they have a representaive off both sides and often a middle neutral. Something the BBC definitely doesn't do.
Had you bothered to watch the link I gave you, You;d have seen the BBC fawn and play up to so called desperate asylum seekers, who came here looking for help. The BBC played the poor them card, gave them a programme of pity, and they turned out to be the biggest *** monsters going.

A news outlet is supposed to be objective. You should listen and compare. But your Guardian bias, prevents it. That is the point being made.

All I ask for is a fair representation AND report what has happened.

NOT WHAT ANYONE CHOOSES TO IGNORE AND REPORT

[Andy_Faber]

Sorry Andy…as regards the ‘analogy’, the job of the media should be to inform (preferably objectively). I don’t believe that either GB News or ‘The Sun’ (or the Daily Mail for that matter) set out to do that…I believe they regularly lie and have a political function rather than a journalistic one, so I choose not to add to their coffers.

Sorry Andy…as regards the ‘analogy’, the job of the media should be to inform (preferably objectively). I don’t believe that either GB News or ‘The Sun’ (or the Daily Mail for that matter) set out to do that…I believe they regularly lie and have a political function rather than a journalistic one, so I choose not to add to their coffers.

But did you bother to fact check the issue highlighted by TTR? Or do you ever? TTR has an extreme slant, as does our other extremist Swale, and both are likely to spout a load of *******s in support of their beliefs. However, i do fact check/investigate some of their claims and find them to be enlightening/different to my perception. Yes even Swale, the fact that he comes over in such an odious manner doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be listened to.

Regarding the issue in question, GBN, in their shouty way, appear to have it right, BBC lauded a person when his circumstances appeared to be ‘the wronged immigrant’ but have buried the fact that the person is, and was at the time, a serial *** offender. Yes GBN had/have an agenda, but this appears to show that BBC, by omission, do to.

So lying any worse than hiding the truth? I think not. There are no clean hands in the media

[ramAnag]

But did you bother to fact check the issue highlighted by TTR? Or do you ever? TTR has an extreme slant, as does our other extremist Swale, and both are likely to spout a load of *******s in support of their beliefs. However, i do fact check/investigate some of their claims and find them to be enlightening/different to my perception. Yes even Swale, the fact that he comes over in such an odious manner doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be listened to.

Regarding the issue in question, GBN, in their shouty way, appear to have it right, BBC lauded a person when his circumstances appeared to be ‘the wronged immigrant’ but have buried the fact that the person is, and was at the time, a serial *** offender. Yes GBN had/have an agenda, but this appears to show that BBC, by omission, do to.

So lying any worse than hiding the truth? I think not. There are no clean hands in the media

Sorry Andy…had enormous difficulty logging in. No idea why.

[ramAnag]

But did you bother to fact check the issue highlighted by TTR? Or do you ever? TTR has an extreme slant, as does our other extremist Swale, and both are likely to spout a load of *******s in support of their beliefs. However, i do fact check/investigate some of their claims and find them to be enlightening/different to my perception. Yes even Swale, the fact that he comes over in such an odious manner doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be listened to.

Regarding the issue in question, GBN, in their shouty way, appear to have it right, BBC lauded a person when his circumstances appeared to be ‘the wronged immigrant’ but have buried the fact that the person is, and was at the time, a serial *** offender. Yes GBN had/have an agenda, but this appears to show that BBC, by omission, do to.

So lying any worse than hiding the truth? I think not. There are no clean hands in the media

You have me there…sort of! I rarely read any of Capt. YouTube’s attachments so, to be honest, I could hardly fact check them.
The reason? I’ll debate with anyone but I don’t think the forum is the right place to just regurgitate clips from the Right - or Left - wing press. I prefer to debate with people on the forum rather than have to watch items that I would usually choose to avoid and Tricky has been inclined to obsessively bombard the Election thread with his ‘video’ clips recently.

Does that make me ‘narrow minded’ or not fully informed? I don’t think so. I’ve already explained why but, to reiterate, you don’t have to hear stuff from the ‘horse’s mouth’/original source to be able to form an opinion. There is plenty of more honest, objective journalism out there and that is what I prefer to rely on to influence my opinions. That doesn’t, btw, mean that I believe everything said by the BBC, the Guardian or the Independent but I do believe them to have far greater integrity than any of Capt. YT’s sources.

Are Swale and Tricky ‘extremists’? In my opinion the only thing extreme about Swale is his, self defeating, anger. As regards Tricky…he certainly seems to spend a lot of time quoting or defending those on the far Right, but then his reasoning about it being impossible for him to be xenophobic on the basis of a previous relationship with a Native American and his current one with his future Thai bride is beyond simplistic.

[swaledale]

You have me there…sort of! I rarely read any of Capt. YouTube’s attachments so, to be honest, I could hardly fact check them.
The reason? I’ll debate with anyone but I don’t think the forum is the right place to just regurgitate clips from the Right - or Left - wing press. I prefer to debate with people on the forum rather than have to watch items that I would usually choose to avoid and Tricky has been inclined to obsessively bombard the Election thread with his ‘video’ clips recently.

Does that make me ‘narrow minded’ or not fully informed? I don’t think so. I’ve already explained why but, to reiterate, you don’t have to hear stuff from the ‘horse’s mouth’/original source to be able to form an opinion. There is plenty of more honest, objective journalism out there and that is what I prefer to rely on to influence my opinions. That doesn’t, btw, mean that I believe everything said by the BBC, the Guardian or the Independent but I do believe them to have far greater integrity than any of Capt. YT’s sources.

Are Swale and Tricky ‘extremists’? In my opinion the only thing extreme about Swale is his, self defeating, anger. As regards Tricky…he certainly seems to spend a lot of time quoting or defending those on the far Right, but then his reasoning about it being impossible for him to be xenophobic on the basis of a previous relationship with a Native American and his current one with his future Thai bride is beyond simplistic.

Ah but rA the world is full of people who aren't racist because my best friend, a relative or some such person is of a different ethnicity to themselves. Tricky does this and so does AF, you know the Af who say's stuff like the are too many ethnic presenters in the media.

By the way my "self defeating" anger is merely me having a laugh at the inability to have a debate with people who use obviously false, inaccurate and biased interpretations to back up their warped views.

There is an old saying, Don't argue with a fool, they will drag you down to their level"

[swaledale]

But did you bother to fact check the issue highlighted by TTR? Or do you ever? TTR has an extreme slant, as does our other extremist Swale, and both are likely to spout a load of *******s in support of their beliefs. However, i do fact check/investigate some of their claims and find them to be enlightening/different to my perception. Yes even Swale, the fact that he comes over in such an odious manner doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be listened to.

Regarding the issue in question, GBN, in their shouty way, appear to have it right, BBC lauded a person when his circumstances appeared to be ‘the wronged immigrant’ but have buried the fact that the person is, and was at the time, a serial *** offender. Yes GBN had/have an agenda, but this appears to show that BBC, by omission, do to.

So lying any worse than hiding the truth? I think not. There are no clean hands in the media

So you make an assumption that the way a news story is covered by the BBC is a deliberate omission and they are therefore hiding the truth? Based on no evidence other than your own particular prejudice? News stories get covered in many different ways by different media, in practically any news report I could find omissions or even things that patently aren't actually true. Conspiracy or cock up? I generally favour the latter, unless its a front page of the Express or Mail which will cheerfully print complete lies and made up guff as headlines and indeed completely contradict themselves within days.

You make a statement that GB News, a TV station that in no way attempts to be objective, factual or truthful, never mind the implicit right wing bias is a useful foil, when the facts are this - it's loss making, £40 million and counting, its viewing figures are miniscule, its owning company has as one of its investors a notorious hedge fund manager with distinctly dubious political views, and has made donations in excess of £600,000 to the Tory party. In addition the TV has employed some of the more right wing and extreme Tory MP's as presenters not to mention the other presenters who range from a former historian turned conspiracy theorist, a former actor turned complete nut case, a fake vicar and a notorious journalist noted mainly for appalling misogynist attacks on celebrities.

How can any person capable of critical thought consider GB News as anything other than the vehicle for rich right wing ****s who want to push a certain agenda to the proles in the hope that some of it will stick?

How is that a foil for anything?

Truly you have confirmed my assessment of you as not being quite as bright as you think you are.

[Andy_Faber]

So you make an assumption that the way a news story is covered by the BBC is a deliberate omission and they are therefore hiding the truth? Based on no evidence other than your own particular prejudice? News stories get covered in many different ways by different media, in practically any news report I could find omissions or even things that patently aren't actually true. Conspiracy or cock up? I generally favour the latter, unless its a front page of the Express or Mail which will cheerfully print complete lies and made up guff as headlines and indeed completely contradict themselves within days.

You make a statement that GB News, a TV station that in no way attempts to be objective, factual or truthful, never mind the implicit right wing bias is a useful foil, when the facts are this - it's loss making, £40 million and counting, its viewing figures are miniscule, its owning company has as one of its investors a notorious hedge fund manager with distinctly dubious political views, and has made donations in excess of £600,000 to the Tory party. In addition the TV has employed some of the more right wing and extreme Tory MP's as presenters not to mention the other presenters who range from a former historian turned conspiracy theorist, a former actor turned complete nut case, a fake vicar and a notorious journalist noted mainly for appalling misogynist attacks on celebrities.

How can any person capable of critical thought consider GB News as anything other than the vehicle for rich right wing ****s who want to push a certain agenda to the proles in the hope that some of it will stick?

How is that a foil for anything?

Truly you have confirmed my assessment of you as not being quite as bright as you think you are.

You’re digging the usual big hole for yourself Swale, GBN’s funding and profitability has nothing to do with the fact that it occasionally is on the right side of an issue. In media parlance I’d suggest you are indulging in a ‘smear campaign’, as you do against anyone and anything that disagrees with your entrenched views.

Still, you’re clearly less unhinged than normal as you’ve not gone off on your Nazi analogies. Yet

[MadAmster]

You’re digging the usual big hole for yourself Swale, GBN’s funding and profitability has nothing to do with the fact that it occasionally is on the right side of an issue. In media parlance I’d suggest you are indulging in a ‘smear campaign’, as you do against anyone and anything that disagrees with your entrenched views.

Still, you’re clearly less unhinged than normal as you’ve not gone off on your Nazi analogies. Yet

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.... that's more often than GB News.

You're right. They do get it occasionally right.

It's high time, IMO, that HMG introduced a Truth Law. One that demands that both Politicians and Journalists MUST tell the truth, the facts and absolutely NO BS lies. The public deserve the truth.

[Andy_Faber]

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.... that's more often than GB News.

You're right. They do get it occasionally right.

It's high time, IMO, that HMG introduced a Truth Law. One that demands that both Politicians and Journalists MUST tell the truth, the facts and absolutely NO BS lies. The public deserve the truth.

I’ll vote for you on that ticket MA

[ramAnag]

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.... that's more often than GB News.

You're right. They do get it occasionally right.

It's high time, IMO, that HMG introduced a Truth Law. One that demands that both Politicians and Journalists MUST tell the truth, the facts and absolutely NO BS lies. The public deserve the truth.

Completely agree…but how the hell do you do it? Even ‘back in the day’ when newspapers were just that, there was no online media presence and no concept of ‘social influencers’ or ‘deep fakes’, every newspaper had some sort of political allegiance albeit heavily weighted (numerically) in favour of the Conservatives.
The difference imo is that things have become much more extreme. GBN encapsulates that and, without taking personal sides, Swale’s ‘assessment’ of GBN in the second paragraph of post #281, has nailed it.