Are the media biased

[ramAnag]

I don't doubt that your characterisation of TR is not wide of the mark but I find it strange that he should be housed in a prison inhabited solely by violent murderering scum including the likes of Ian Huntly and that lunatic, highly dangerous Anjem Choudary. Why would he need to be isolated to that extent? After all, this small time crook (and fascist scumbag) poses no genuine threat to anyone. Why would anyone seek to silence him? Maybe the government is 'wasting its time' on him.

Belmarsh is a dual function prison, Gunteryy. Yes, some of it is Cat. A, housing the type of notorious criminals you describe, but another part is used as a ‘local’ prison for such small time villains as TR.

On the subject of Islam...I’m no supporter of any organised religion, but you really can’t sensibly imply that Islam is synonymous with mass murder, rape, child abuse and the torture of animals. That’s just bigoted nonsense.

[Geoff Parkstone]

... and this surprises you?

[MadAmster]

As (I think)!the only ‘card carrying Christian’ here I have to agree with this and find the dual standards applied to Islam and Christianity baffling.

You are probably right Andy. I am definitely anti organised religion. I'd ban the lot. Folk have freedom to believe what they like but where that freedom invades mine, theirs stops. There are parts of the Koran that see me beheaded and parts of the Bible that wouldn't see me survive very long. One sees a prophet marry a 6 year old and consumate the marriage when she was 9. That abhors me but I do realise that, and I'm only guessing here, it was probably not looked down on 1300 odd years ago. Some followers of said prophet seem to think it's still OK. Little wonder some folk are anti. The other a prophet who showed very many commendable traits, if it's about somone who actually lived and actually had the experiences written about. All likenesses of said prophet depict what looks very much like a Caucasian male. That likeness also appears on the Turin shroud. 200 years ago, locals in the region were were all small, had dark skin and dark, curly hair.......

Liquidate all of the assets of various religions plus those of charlatan TV evangelists and use the trillions they have between them to house, feed, clothe the world's poor. Use it to irrigate barren land so people can grow their own food. I think the first of the 2 prophets I mentioned would likely liquidate the funds and pocket them. The latter would be horrified at the obnoxious amount of money, land, gold, silver, art works, land, buildings, stocks, shares etc they have, particularly the Catholic Church. There are more things to dislike about religions but I won't rant further. I think you've all more than got my gist.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Yup, I guess you are a Hindu then MA

[mistaram]

As a point of interest, and I am not taking any sides in the above debate, why would you not want to give him a platform on what should be a neutral state funded media platform.

RA, you might not want to because you don't agree with what he says, but there are those that do... as evidenced above.

So surely in the spirit of democracy you must agree he should have a platform - if you're confident in your own argument you have nothing to lose.


Was it Churchill that said something like "I may not agree with your opinion but I will defend your right to express it to the seat"?

No Geoff it was novelist Evelyn Beatrice Hall in 1906 I know I'm sad

[mistaram]

Daft response Guntery.

There are doubtless lots of people I haven’t heard of. The fact that Anne Marie Waters is one of them proves absolutely nothing. No ‘sensible and well balanced individual’ could make the claim I mentioned.

Tommy Robinson has been convicted of having a false passport, attempting to enter the US illegally, has at least four ‘identities’ that even I know of, has had to answer three counts of conspiring to commit fraud and was convicted of using threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour as part of a group of Luton Town hooligans.
Maybe one of the above is why he went to Belmarsh, I wouldn’t know, but I’m not going to waste my time on a right wing extremist with that sort of record.
Why would you want to give someone like that the ‘platform’ provided by the BBC?

I’ve listed some of Trump’s statements elsewhere...I’ve never seen him ‘crucified’ by the BBC, but whenever they quote him he invariably ends up looking ridiculous. Who’s fault is that?

By the way, I am biased...I loath bullies, bigots and those who seek to be promoted beyond their capability. Trump ticks each of those boxes.

RA I see Trump didn't mean all those things about Covid ,he just didn't want people to be frightened ffs

[swaledale]

You continue to misunderstand my BBC focus - I constantly quote BBC for three reasons - it’s a) I actually pay directly for it unlike other media (I’d never go TTRs way by the way, the licence is IMO fantastic VFM) b) I watch/listen to it way more than the rest and c) it’s the best there is. But I do think it has its faults and I strongly believe it attempts to ‘condition’ the population to accept a skewed version of the world. In that I’m not sure I’m saying anything much different to the OP, albeit picking different examples.

Then your posts have miscommunicated your feelings on the issue!

Of course the BBC has its faults, no sensible person would deny that! In fact any organisation run by human beings has its faults. In fact I was once over a decade ago, well and truly skewered by a BBC local news reporter, being interviewed and then finding that the interview which took 20 mins lasted 30 seconds when broadcast (I knew obvs that it would be much edited) and my answers were edited such that they were to totally different questions!! Plus they got most of the actual facts of the case completely wrong!

Interestingly the programme was shown in my local pub which I visited later that night and without exception everyone said it was an obvious hatchet job and that the story was a not even newsworthy.

I learn't two things, one don't give anything other than a written prepared statement to any media and that people aren't as green as they are cabbage looking.

Which makes me question why you think it attempts to condition the population and how it would achieve that?

For a start, individual news editors and reporters have different angles on subjects and then people generally do recognise when they are being fed something thats not right. Also whereas it might be true that a large number of the people who work there are left of centre, many clearly are not and that includes many senior reporters, editors and the management and Chairman and the current DG!

I can see that you feel its changed, but isn't that inevitable as one grows older? An individual is generally rooted in the environment they know, times change and change is never an easy thing to accept.

My late Dad had a phrase, only believe half of what you hear and a quarter of what you read! My mantra whenever I've been told something or read something is quite simple Is it true?

[ramAnag]

... and this surprises you?

Lol...not really, but it’s always worth calling out.

[Andy_Faber]

Then your posts have miscommunicated your feelings on the issue!

Of course the BBC has its faults, no sensible person would deny that! In fact any organisation run by human beings has its faults. In fact I was once over a decade ago, well and truly skewered by a BBC local news reporter, being interviewed and then finding that the interview which took 20 mins lasted 30 seconds when broadcast (I knew obvs that it would be much edited) and my answers were edited such that they were to totally different questions!! Plus they got most of the actual facts of the case completely wrong!

Interestingly the programme was shown in my local pub which I visited later that night and without exception everyone said it was an obvious hatchet job and that the story was a not even newsworthy.

I learn't two things, one don't give anything other than a written prepared statement to any media and that people aren't as green as they are cabbage looking.

Which makes me question why you think it attempts to condition the population and how it would achieve that?

For a start, individual news editors and reporters have different angles on subjects and then people generally do recognise when they are being fed something thats not right. Also whereas it might be true that a large number of the people who work there are left of centre, many clearly are not and that includes many senior reporters, editors and the management and Chairman and the current DG!

I can see that you feel its changed, but isn't that inevitable as one grows older? An individual is generally rooted in the environment they know, times change and change is never an easy thing to accept.

My late Dad had a phrase, only believe half of what you hear and a quarter of what you read! My mantra whenever I've been told something or read something is quite simple Is it true?

Swale someone's hacked your account!

Seriously, there are points there I could respond sensibly to. Yes, as you've found to your cost the media can twist things to suit their own agendas (or their employer's agenda, or their promotion prospects etc), and you're right that 'people' recognise when they are being fed a line. I'm reflecting the fact that 'people' (me included) feel they are being fed a line on the national demographic.

The why? I don't know. I'm pretty scathing on conspiracy theories but always 'do the research' (for instance IMO 9/11 was a terrorist attack with planes, but I just don't get WTC7, not sure if you are familiar with it), and I just can't see the idea (maybe TTR and Gunter can!) that there's some dark force pushing for global cultural homogenization. What about mass virtue signalling - a sort of global 'Emperors New Clothes'?

The how? That's a bit easier to my ears and eyes, which comes back to my original point about doughnutting - MA reported that NL is the same (he mentioned adverts not the news) - constantly pushing an impression of the demographic mix which is not a true reflection but which the population are conditioned to accept as such through frequency and repetition. The nearest word I can think of although the definition doesn't quite fit is Gaslighting.

I don't actually think this is a left v right thing, its more along the Brexit lines, in fact I can see that split on social media, with those who see an issue being more vocal about it and those who don't pushing back equally - but it IS an issue.

Be sure though that this isn't anti-black/bame/muslim/LGBT or whatever, its about media presentation, maybe we can have a less acrimonious discussion (OK argument) on that basis

[swaledale]

Swale someone's hacked your account!

Seriously, there are points there I could respond sensibly to. Yes, as you've found to your cost the media can twist things to suit their own agendas (or their employer's agenda, or their promotion prospects etc), and you're right that 'people' recognise when they are being fed a line. I'm reflecting the fact that 'people' (me included) feel they are being fed a line on the national demographic.

The why? I don't know. I'm pretty scathing on conspiracy theories but always 'do the research' (for instance IMO 9/11 was a terrorist attack with planes, but I just don't get WTC7, not sure if you are familiar with it), and I just can't see the idea (maybe TTR and Gunter can!) that there's some dark force pushing for global cultural homogenization. What about mass virtue signalling - a sort of global 'Emperors New Clothes'?

The how? That's a bit easier to my ears and eyes, which comes back to my original point about doughnutting - MA reported that NL is the same (he mentioned adverts not the news) - constantly pushing an impression of the demographic mix which is not a true reflection but which the population are conditioned to accept as such through frequency and repetition. The nearest word I can think of although the definition doesn't quite fit is Gaslighting.

I don't actually think this is a left v right thing, its more along the Brexit lines, in fact I can see that split on social media, with those who see an issue being more vocal about it and those who don't pushing back equally - but it IS an issue.

Be sure though that this isn't anti-black/bame/muslim/LGBT or whatever, its about media presentation, maybe we can have a less acrimonious discussion (OK argument) on that basis

Ah conspiracy theories, love them! Trouble is they ignore the real conspiracies that are taking place in plain sight!

Mm I get what you say, but don't necessarily agree - for a start it would be hard for any national broadcaster to accurately reflect the demographic as it applies to a particular region and location, so if you live in an area where the population is predominantly white, one may feel that way about BAME representation and the opposite would be true if you lived in an area where the population was predominantly BAME.

But I don't see the inclusion of more diverse presenters or whatever on the BBC or other media as some grand plan to influence people, I think thats stretching credulity a little far and if that irritates people, I'd say whats the issue? We do live in a diverse society, albeit some areas are more diverse than others and the media should reflect that. I don't see it as an issue other than with people who are either stuck 3 or 4 decades in the past or for whatever reason they choose, some I can see why they feel that way, largely though its down to feeling threatened by change, except that boat sailed a long time ago and its pointless pissing into the wind!

Ah social media, to me thats a series of bubbles wherein like minded folk generally seem to say stuff to like minded folk - pick any topic and there are those who think one way speaking to like minded people, those who think the other doing the same. Its like a conversation down the pub, everyone knows whats wrong with anything, my usual response on encountering such people of any persuasion is that if they know the answer, is to ask what practical steps are they taking to implement it?

As for adverts, well companies tend not to spend money unless it has the desired effect so one presumes the trend there is aimed at increasing sales? Mind you anyone who takes an advert seriously or believes even 2% of it is IMO clearly bordering on insanity - which clearly applies to a high percentage of the population because otherwise the companies wouldn't spend money on it!

There is nothing odd about WTC7, there is a detailed documented report which covers what happened there.