Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2019 16:39:40 GMT
The Gammon meme I think was indicative of it all. "Let's parody middle aged white working class men because they are stupid racists and then wonder why all those people then voted for the Tories." Just ignore it for fuck sake. Social media is full of stupidity from both left and right and all points imbetween. But you and Dougie seem to spend an inordinate time looking for examples of it from the left in order to buttress your own worldview. What's the point?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2019 16:47:35 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2019 16:49:09 GMT
Whatever that speech may be.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Dec 17, 2019 17:26:07 GMT
The thing about the media is that realistically you cant do anything about it. It's called freedom of speech. Plus the reality is that the BBC and Ch4 are broadly liblab in their programming whilst the print media are broadly right wing with exceptions. There is no sustained right wing TV presence in the UK. Even Sky is pretty liberal. The press reported Corbyn's life. His words and his actions. The public said "fuck off cunt". For 40 years the imbecile had been scuttling around in the shadows unbeknownst to anyone outside of Westminster circles (I'd never heard of him) but then suddenly he's thrust into the limelight and then people start digging. It's not rocket science. The press did their job. Corbyn simply wasn't up to the scrutiny and the public saw him with a moral clarity that could teach some smug people a lesson.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2019 17:53:32 GMT
I meant what's the point in searching for the most extreme or stupid tweets from members of the "left" in order to discredit the left. Well I guess that is the point, but it still seems a waste of time to me. There's a lot of stupidity out there and a good deal of it ends up on-line.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2019 18:21:47 GMT
The press reported Corbyn's life. His words and his actions. The public said "fuck off cunt". I feel like I'm going to be arguing to a brick wall here, but if the press deliberately lie and misrepresent a politician then it's a massive problem in a democracy. You can't just flippantly dismiss it because you don't like the target they're victimising. www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-media-bias-labour-mainstream-press-lse-study-misrepresentation-we-cant-ignore-bias-a7144381.htmlEven if you don't fully accept the report's findings that 75% of the coverage of Corbyn was inaccurate or misrepresentative, let's say the figure is 30%, then that will have a huge effect. There have been many studies that prove the influence of mass media over voting intention ( I was teaching this stuff for about ten years, so did quite a lot of research in it. And even if it's found that a newspaper has been publishing inaccurate stories, there's little in the way of strict censure or immediate retraction, so the damage has been done. In that sense the press regulators act as ennablers of media bias. Geirge Monbiot's recent experience is a good illustration of the dangers of this. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/10/break-embargo-expose-press-lies-labour Whatever side of the political spectrum that you're on you have to be concerned at the way the media use their considerable power to manipulate.
|
|
|
Post by Sneelock on Dec 17, 2019 18:32:29 GMT
there is, it would appear, no crime so great as smugness.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2019 19:28:56 GMT
I meant what's the point in searching for the most extreme or stupid tweets from members of the "left" in order to discredit the left. Well I guess that is the point, but it still seems a waste of time to me. There's a lot of stupidity out there and a good deal of it ends up on-line.
Yeah, I was picking up the term "freedom of speech" and being sarcastic about it as it can be both totally irrelevant to the topic or used disingenuously (or thickly - but erring on the side of politeness). Struggling not to get into it but not managing.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. FOLLARD on Dec 17, 2019 23:53:14 GMT
Watching this now:
It's shocking and depressing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2019 11:33:16 GMT
Watching this now: It's shocking and depressing. I watched that last night. It should be mandatory viewing for everyone in this country.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Dec 18, 2019 13:09:10 GMT
The press reported Corbyn's life. His words and his actions. The public said "fuck off cunt". I feel like I'm going to be arguing to a brick wall here, but if the press deliberately lie and misrepresent a politician then it's a massive problem in a democracy. You can't just flippantly dismiss it because you don't like the target they're victimising. www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-media-bias-labour-mainstream-press-lse-study-misrepresentation-we-cant-ignore-bias-a7144381.htmlEven if you don't fully accept the report's findings that 75% of the coverage of Corbyn was inaccurate or misrepresentative, let's say the figure is 30%, then that will have a huge effect. There have been many studies that prove the influence of mass media over voting intention ( I was teaching this stuff for about ten years, so did quite a lot of research in it. And even if it's found that a newspaper has been publishing inaccurate stories, there's little in the way of strict censure or immediate retraction, so the damage has been done. In that sense the press regulators act as ennablers of media bias. Geirge Monbiot's recent experience is a good illustration of the dangers of this. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/10/break-embargo-expose-press-lies-labour Whatever side of the political spectrum that you're on you have to be concerned at the way the media use their considerable power to manipulate. I agree that the media is an issue, of course. That's why I hate the likes of Sarkar because they aren't journalists or anything even vaguely objective. They are just shrills, cheap propagandists. But to suggest it was all some kind of hysterical media smear is nonsense. That "analysis" is from the Independent so hardly unbiased themselves. The issue with Corbyn is how you perceived Corbyn and how people OUT THERE perceived him, with justification I would suggest. A lot of this stuff is just facts. Corbyn did this, Corbyn said that, all verified and on record. People judged him accordingly. The vast majority of people simply judged him in a way that is out of sync with how his supporters view him but until some concede they might have a valid pov you will struggle to put forward a leader who can bridge that gap. Your support of the likes of Clive Lewis, perhaps, suggests you do recognise this, even if it's just political expediency so that's something but it's too little too late for Labour. I'm afraid you and others have contributed to this mess by supporting that clown. blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/12/the-polling-that-proves-the-incompetence-and-indecency-of-jeremy-corbyn/There was something in the news from Blair today about some analysis of why Corbyn lost too but I can't find the link. Let's face it, we are both banging our heads against each others walls and it's pointless. have a wonderful Xmas you old cunt x
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Dec 18, 2019 13:22:54 GMT
there is, it would appear, no crime so great as smugness. I would suggest becoming apologists for anti-semitism is a bit worse
|
|
|
Post by tory on Dec 18, 2019 13:28:00 GMT
It was plainly obvious that as soon as Corbyn was elected the media was going to go after him.
Very few politicians are able to change the narrative to suit them and Corbyn was never going to be one who did. The media to a certain extent determine what is deemed to be acceptable and what is unacceptable, but at the same time they do also represent the people that buy their product. It is a two way dialogue that is not a situation where people unwittingly swallow what the newspaper etc says. They are also accountable in a way that say the BBC isnt because no-one is forced to buy their product. I do believe that investigative journalism I'd still very much a massive part of what makes good newspapers and it still very much exists in Britain.
Journalists are not necessarily allied to their paper - for me, all papers have qualities and good journalists, just as they also have bad qualities and bad journalists. To treat the media as this monolithic block that is culpable for the woes of the country is missing the mark.
We do actually have some of the best reportage and newspapers in the world and in general, I'd say that the journalistic rigour of the UK media is very good.
Corbyn was a political outsider who chose to make friends with people very much viewed with suspicion by most people. That was his choice. Maybe he didn't ever expect to be PM, but anyone who decides that they want to be, must expect the same sort of exhaustive journalism. That is one of the hallmarks of our country - I definitely don't want a PM that no-one knows much about.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Dec 18, 2019 13:34:59 GMT
It's this implicit belief that people are basically brainwashed because they happen to see things differently. It's hogwash. Many people from across the spectrum had serious weservations about Corbyn. Why is that? Were the left wingers duped? The centrists? The working classes?
Are we all just fools swallowing the media's lies and guff?
He was toxic and so it proved. Deal with the reasons why he was toxic and don't make the same mistake again. It's not hard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2019 14:04:58 GMT
I feel like I'm going to be arguing to a brick wall here, but if the press deliberately lie and misrepresent a politician then it's a massive problem in a democracy. You can't just flippantly dismiss it because you don't like the target they're victimising. www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-media-bias-labour-mainstream-press-lse-study-misrepresentation-we-cant-ignore-bias-a7144381.htmlEven if you don't fully accept the report's findings that 75% of the coverage of Corbyn was inaccurate or misrepresentative, let's say the figure is 30%, then that will have a huge effect. There have been many studies that prove the influence of mass media over voting intention ( I was teaching this stuff for about ten years, so did quite a lot of research in it. And even if it's found that a newspaper has been publishing inaccurate stories, there's little in the way of strict censure or immediate retraction, so the damage has been done. In that sense the press regulators act as ennablers of media bias. Geirge Monbiot's recent experience is a good illustration of the dangers of this. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/10/break-embargo-expose-press-lies-labour Whatever side of the political spectrum that you're on you have to be concerned at the way the media use their considerable power to manipulate. I agree that the media is an issue, of course. That's why I hate the likes of Sarkar because they aren't journalists or anything even vaguely objective. They are just shrills, cheap propagandists. But to suggest it was all some kind of hysterical media smear is nonsense. That "analysis" is from the Independent so hardly unbiased themselves. The issue with Corbyn is how you perceived Corbyn and how people OUT THERE perceived him, with justification I would suggest. A lot of this stuff is just facts. Corbyn did this, Corbyn said that, all verified and on record. People judged him accordingly. The vast majority of people simply judged him in a way that is out of sync with how his supporters view him but until some concede they might have a valid pov you will struggle to put forward a leader who can bridge that gap. Your support of the likes of Clive Lewis, perhaps, suggests you do recognise this, even if it's just political expediency so that's something but it's too little too late for Labour. I'm afraid you and others have contributed to this mess by supporting that clown. blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/12/the-polling-that-proves-the-incompetence-and-indecency-of-jeremy-corbyn/There was something in the news from Blair today about some analysis of why Corbyn lost too but I can't find the link. Let's face it, we are both banging our heads against each others walls and it's pointless. have a wonderful Xmas you old cunt x you haven't addressed the central point that media ran a coordinated campaign of lies and smears against him, often knowingly printing information that they knew to be untrue. I think deep down you feel this is fair game as you don't like him, whereas I think it is very damaging for democracy and the debate should really move beyond a personal dislike of Corbyn into thesefar wider and more important issues. On Corbyn I have been saying for at least two years that he was the wrong guy to lead Labour.
|
|