|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Sept 13, 2023 15:14:21 GMT
Look at the quote from Marlon that they use. They could have scripted that themselves but the irony is that it's an Asian fella so it doesn't fit into the usual narratives they like to spin (they would have splooged their collective goo if he was white). But this is where we are now sadly. Too many people thinking collectively rather than individually and interpreting every singe goddamn thing as being part of some wider, symbolic power struggle routed in race and sex. The BBC are complicit in this hence why they would naturally jump on a quote like that. It's no wonder therefore incidents like this between two people that get out of hand then get blown up and you have protests. At the same time, like I said, reading between the lines it sounds like there are ethnic tensions between the two groups so when you have an Asian fella selling stuff to black women it probably taps into feelings of resentment and envy I suspect too. All in all, a potent brew but not a recipe for social harmony. Good luck London. If a reporter is asked to cover a protest, then their first job is to ask a spokesman from the protest why they are protesting and report it with a quote. Standard journalistic practice and it is only your paranoia about the BBC that leads you to jump to other conclusions. Respectfully you need need to look at the difference between reporting and editorialization. A spokesman? He's just some punter. The other woman is just some punter too. Paranoia about the BBC my arsehole G. Compare and contrast: www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/footage-of-shop-owner-choking-woman-he-accused-of-stealing-sparks-protest/ar-AA1gCIDKWe can all see what they are and where they come from.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy Heydon on Sept 13, 2023 15:17:53 GMT
If a reporter is asked to cover a protest, then their first job is to ask a spokesman from the protest why they are protesting and report it with a quote. Standard journalistic practice and it is only your paranoia about the BBC that leads you to jump to other conclusions. Respectfully you need need to look at the difference between reporting and editorialization. A spokesman? He's just some punter. No, he was one of the protesters. That's why he was quoted. Straightforward journalistic practice.
|
|
|
Post by tory on Sept 13, 2023 15:19:34 GMT
Steal something for £199 and pay £70. I mean FFS. What sort of deterrent is that?
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Sept 13, 2023 15:28:49 GMT
A spokesman? He's just some punter. No, he was one of the protesters. That's why he was quoted. Straightforward journalistic practice. Do you agree with him?
|
|
|
Post by Stacy Heydon on Sept 13, 2023 15:31:30 GMT
No, he was one of the protesters. That's why he was quoted. Straightforward journalistic practice. Do you agree with him? No. I agree with the legitimacy of the BBC quoting him within the context of the report.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Sept 13, 2023 15:32:55 GMT
No. I agree with the legitimacy of the BBC quoting him within the context of the report. A handy spokesman for their propaganda G lad. No wonder you have idiots like Marlon. God help this country.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy Heydon on Sept 13, 2023 15:40:03 GMT
No. I agree with the legitimacy of the BBC quoting him within the context of the report. A handy spokesman for their propaganda G lad. No wonder you have idiots like Marlon. God help this country. You're really digging yourself into a hole with this one. Publishing a quote doesn't mean you agree with the quote.
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Sept 13, 2023 15:41:03 GMT
Why even bother posting his thoughts on the matter, given you don't agree with them?
|
|
|
Post by Stacy Heydon on Sept 13, 2023 15:50:20 GMT
Why even bother posting his thoughts on the matter, given you don't agree with them? I'm sorry John. You might have to compose a sentence yourself for me to get why you've quoted this. edit: Okay I think I've worked it out. Your quote was a stand alone quote with no accompanying comment, the quote we're discussing was within the context of a news report. You see the difference right?
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Sept 13, 2023 16:04:59 GMT
A handy spokesman for their propaganda G lad. No wonder you have idiots like Marlon. God help this country. You're really digging yourself into a hole with this one. Publishing a quote doesn't mean you agree with the quote. Fetch me another spade! That quote and the other one I would say are entirely in line with their identity politics influenced, intersectional pov these days. I suspect that's why they picked it because it fits into a wider narrative that's popular at the BBC.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy Heydon on Sept 13, 2023 16:06:23 GMT
Oh D...I'd quit while you're behind.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy Heydon on Sept 13, 2023 16:07:42 GMT
You're really digging yourself into a hole with this one. Publishing a quote doesn't mean you agree with the quote. Fetch me another spade! That quote and the other one I would say are entirely in line with their identity politics influenced, intersectional pov these days. I suspect that's why they picked it because it fits into a wider narrative that's popular at the BBC. Anyway, I'm not happy about what they've done to Roisin Murphy!
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Sept 13, 2023 16:14:27 GMT
I'm sorry John. You might have to compose a sentence yourself for me to get why you've quoted this. edit: Okay I think I've worked it out. Your quote was a stand alone quote with no accompanying comment, the quote we're discussing was within the context of a news report. You see the difference right? Your second post on this thread showed you were irritated with me for posting something that you assumed (correctly) I didn't agree with. And then you go on to say yourself that posting something doesn't necessarily indicate agreement with the post! BE CAREFUL G
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Sept 13, 2023 16:15:12 GMT
Oh D...I'd quit while you're behind. Sharpen my spade! Even the way they don't just quote them but they put their picture up. Please.
|
|
|
Post by Stacy Heydon on Sept 13, 2023 16:19:02 GMT
I'm sorry John. You might have to compose a sentence yourself for me to get why you've quoted this. edit: Okay I think I've worked it out. Your quote was a stand alone quote with no accompanying comment, the quote we're discussing was within the context of a news report. You see the difference right? Your second post on this thread showed you were irritated with me for posting something that you assumed (correctly) I didn't agree with. And then you go on to say yourself that posting something doesn't necessarily indicate agreement with the post! BE CAREFUL G J it's not worth pursuing this because we're making a mountain out of a molehill, but I've already explained why the two things aren't comparable. x G
|
|