[Politics] Tory meltdown finally arrived [was: incoming]...

[Jim in the West]

Number 10 admitting that they contacted the times to get them to remove the story about boris wanting to give Carrie a job is quite something. Some of the media are just state propaganda. The weird thing is that people who previously called them “the lame stream media” will not have a problem with PM’s people controlling them. We are drifting closer and closer to something really bad.

Indeed...
The Beeb has already been captured (Chair of the BBC is a big Tory party donor, and previous advisor to both Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak).
Channel 4 is being flogged off as it's too left wing.
Right to protest recently dramatically reduced.

There's a lot of money involved here, and those with the money have their little puppets in power who are doing their bidding. Quite frightening. Unfortunately a large number of people seem quite happy to ignore it (and ignore pretty much everything else that's wrong with this country, as we gently rot away). Extremely depressing.

 

[Berty23]

Indeed...
The Beeb has already been captured (Chair of the BBC is a big Tory party donor, and previous advisor to both Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak).
Channel 4 is being flogged off as it's too left wing.
Right to protest recently dramatically reduced.

There's a lot of money involved here, and those with the money have their little puppets in power who are doing their bidding. Quite frightening. Unfortunately a large number of people seem quite happy to ignore it (and ignore pretty much everything else that's wrong with this country, as we gently rot away). Extremely depressing.

Sadly people think that things won’t happen to them. They don’t mind other people being treated badly.

If ECHR scrapped then what is to stop tagging people on benefits to make sure not going to Starbucks? What about alcoholics not allowed near pubs etc. it all sounds too far fetched to be plausible but who knows where it would stop? Surely any government who would even consider scrapping ECHR are the sort of governments where the population should absolutely want to stay in!

 

[jcdenton08]

Indeed...
The Beeb has already been captured (Chair of the BBC is a big Tory party donor, and previous advisor to both Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak).
Channel 4 is being flogged off as it's too left wing.
Right to protest recently dramatically reduced.

There's a lot of money involved here, and those with the money have their little puppets in power who are doing their bidding. Quite frightening. Unfortunately a large number of people seem quite happy to ignore it (and ignore pretty much everything else that's wrong with this country, as we gently rot away). Extremely depressing.

I find the BBC rather left wing, actually.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Call me an old sentimentalist, but I can think of few more hertwarming scenes than Johnson singing a penitant 'All things Bright and Beautiful' in a surprisingly clear tenor, hands clasped in prayer, while surrounded by a dancing circle of gentle townsfolk and children, watching the inner circle of fire slowly consume him. Metaphorically speaking, of course.

Johnson’s low profile visit to Tiverton……

https://youtu.be/yI2oS2hoL0k

 

[WATFORD zero]

I find the BBC rather left wing, actually.

It's not a situation I've found myself in, but if I found myself thinking that Johnson, Patel, Truss and Nadine Dorries were right about something as important and intrinsic to British culture, morals and patriotic pride as the BBC, I would have a little sit down and think about how I've ended up there

 

[jcdenton08]

It's not a situation I've found myself in, but if I found myself thinking that Johnson, Patel, Truss and Nadine Dorries were right about something as important as the BBC, I would have a little sit down and think about how I've ended up there

No, I am talking about content produced by the BBC and their editorial line.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The Home Office is out of control. We’ve already lost 2000 GPs since 2015, and now foreign born GPs partway through their training have received deportation papers. Three years training is covered by the NHS but the remaining two years has to be covered by a sponsor.
The whole thing is a horrible mess.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/up-1000-gps-could-deported-27270555

 

[WATFORD zero]

No, I am talking about content produced by the BBC and their editorial line.

Maybe you could give some examples with links etc ?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Simon Clarke MP, Treasury Minister says we ALL have to make sacrifices in the present economic climate.


Just like we ALL had to follow the rules during lockdown, maybe?

He’s right.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Simon Clarke MP, Treasury Minister says we ALL have to make sacrifices in the present economic climate.


Just like we ALL had to follow the rules during lockdown, maybe?

Perhaps they should aim to fix the roof when the sun is shining rather than in the monsoon ?

 

[Hugo Rune]

I find the BBC rather left wing, actually.

That’s horrific.

Rather than moaning on here about it, write to Croydon’s Timothy Douglas Davie CBE who was made Director-General of the BBC to appease people like you. Is he failing to achieve his stated objectives?

“In August 2020 Tim Davie announced his intention for the BBC to "find a better balance of satirical targets rather than constantly aiming jokes at the Tories." He also announced his support of the licence fee as opposed to a Netflix style subscription service.

In October 2020, he set out new guidelines for BBC staff, stating that they should avoid expressing their personal views on current issues of political controversy (which he called 'virtue signalling') on their own private social media accounts. He said this was to reduce perceived bias in the BBC. This would include a ban on news reporters taking part in "public demonstrations or gatherings about controversial issues", with some BBC managers citing trans rights and Black Lives Matter as examples.”

 

[Bodian]

No, I am talking about content produced by the BBC and their editorial line.

You mean it's swung leftwards since Tory Laura left?

 

[jcdenton08]

Maybe you could give some examples with links etc ?

That would be superfluous, because the front page and editorial lines on a day to day basis sum up their approach for all to see. It appears to be mandated to have stories about social issues and alleged injustices pushed heavily to the fore, ahead of much more critical news stories. This is practically always with no countering view for balance.

A recent example of this was a transgender paramedic, who wrote an op-ed claiming that people have refused to be treated to them because they are trans. There was absolutely no evidence of this apart from the individual's claims, no discussion of how or why people may have refused treatment (if this even happened) and a very biased piece overall.

Go to the news front page right now, I can guarantee there will be a minimum of two "news articles" about social issues, without anything actually newsworthy being in them.

It is very much like the National Theatre or RSC of the present day, where they are so concerned with checking boxes and representation that they end up over-representing minority human interest stories over actual news.

You'd expect that from the Guardian, and you'd expect the hand-wringing opposite view from the Mail, but the BBC has shifted mightily from the centre to the left in recent years.

It's all very hashtags.

 

[West Hoathly Seagull]

Superb interview just now on LBC between Andrew Marr and Chris Patten. In summary, Patten thinks that the present Conservative Party being reelected would be a disaster, and in particular would lead to the break up of the United Kingdom. His best line: the words "Nadine Dorries" and "Culture" should not be mentioned in the same sentence".

Needless to say, he is probably just a miserable Remoaner.

 

[Bodian]

That would be superfluous, because the front page and editorial lines on a day to day basis sum up their approach for all to see. It appears to be mandated to have stories about social issues and alleged injustices pushed heavily to the fore, ahead of much more critical news stories. This is practically always with no countering view for balance.

A recent example of this was a transgender paramedic, who wrote an op-ed claiming that people have refused to be treated to them because they are trans. There was absolutely no evidence of this apart from the individual's claims, no discussion of how or why people may have refused treatment (if this even happened) and a very biased piece overall.

Go to the news front page right now, I can guarantee there will be a minimum of two "news articles" about social issues, without anything actually newsworthy being in them.

It is very much like the National Theatre or RSC of the present day, where they are so concerned with checking boxes and representation that they end up over-representing minority human interest stories over actual news.

You'd expect that from the Guardian, and you'd expect the hand-wringing opposite view from the Mail, but the BBC has shifted mightily from the centre to the left in recent years.

It's all very hashtags.

Which ones fit your description?



Looks quite a well balanced mix of news and articles to me.

 

[BBassic]

That would be superfluous, because the front page and editorial lines on a day to day basis sum up their approach for all to see. It appears to be mandated to have stories about social issues and alleged injustices pushed heavily to the fore, ahead of much more critical news stories. This is practically always with no countering view for balance.

A recent example of this was a transgender paramedic, who wrote an op-ed claiming that people have refused to be treated to them because they are trans. There was absolutely no evidence of this apart from the individual's claims, no discussion of how or why people may have refused treatment (if this even happened) and a very biased piece overall.

Go to the news front page right now, I can guarantee there will be a minimum of two "news articles" about social issues, without anything actually newsworthy being in them.

It is very much like the National Theatre or RSC of the present day, where they are so concerned with checking boxes and representation that they end up over-representing minority human interest stories over actual news.

You'd expect that from the Guardian, and you'd expect the hand-wringing opposite view from the Mail, but the BBC has shifted mightily from the centre to the left in recent years.

It's all very hashtags.

Said this to someone else in a previous post but I find the Beeb to be a bit right wing.

You find it to be a bit left wing

Which says to me it is doing the whole impartiality thing quite well

Plus, social issues affect people on both sides of the aisle.

 

[WATFORD zero]

That would be superfluous, because the front page and editorial lines on a day to day basis sum up their approach for all to see. It appears to be mandated to have stories about social issues and alleged injustices pushed heavily to the fore, ahead of much more critical news stories. This is practically always with no countering view for balance.

A recent example of this was a transgender paramedic, who wrote an op-ed claiming that people have refused to be treated to them because they are trans. There was absolutely no evidence of this apart from the individual's claims, no discussion of how or why people may have refused treatment (if this even happened) and a very biased piece overall.

Go to the news front page right now, I can guarantee there will be a minimum of two "news articles" about social issues, without anything actually newsworthy being in them.

It is very much like the National Theatre or RSC of the present day, where they are so concerned with checking boxes and representation that they end up over-representing minority human interest stories over actual news.

You'd expect that from the Guardian, and you'd expect the hand-wringing opposite view from the Mail, but the BBC has shifted mightily from the centre to the left in recent years.

It's all very hashtags.

I'm sorry, and I agree that everybody is entitled to 'their opinon'.

But for an opinion to be valid it needs validity, other wise it's just a string of meaningless words

validity
/vəˈlɪdɪti/

noun
the quality of being logically or factually sound; soundness or cogency.
"one might question the validity of our data"

I've simply asked for you to give examples to give your opinion validity

It appears that you cannot give a linked example, but insist that your 'opinion is still valid'. I hate to appear simple, but can you see why, with no examples I'm struggling to find any validity in your opinion, simply because you 'think' something

If you can give an example or evidence, then we can discuss that example or evidence. It's simple, give me an example of BBC left wing bias thanks

 

[jcdenton08]

From the front page.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-61865657

"Women from ethnic minority or deprived backgrounds are more likely to get STI trichomonas vaginalis (TV) than others.

That's according to new research carried out into the largely unknown sexually transmitted infection by sexual health organisation PreventX."

Now, if you do research into PreventX, you will realise they have absolutely no credibility or experience in these findings, which themselves are extremely dubious. There is no challenging of the findings, no rebuttal or clinical examination of the findings, and an outrageously small test sample was used.

It is simply an opportunity to force a medical journal piece (a dubious one at that) onto the site, call it "news" and fulfil a quota by discussing an issue which may, allegedly, possibly affect a very small number of black women.

I stick to Reuters or the AP now.

 

[Is it PotG?]

I'm sorry, and I agree that everybody is entitled to 'their opinon'.

But for an opinion to be valid it needs validity, other wise it's just a string of meaningless words

validity
/vəˈlɪdɪti/

noun
the quality of being logically or factually sound; soundness or cogency.
"one might question the validity of our data"

I've simply asked for you to give examples to give your opinion validity

It appears that you cannot give a linked example, but insist that your 'opinion is still valid'. I hate to appear simple, but can you see why, with no examples I'm struggling to find any validity in your opinion, simply because you 'think' something

If you can give an example or evidence, then we can discuss that example or evidence. It's simple, give me an example of BBC left wing bias thanks

Ever the reliable bastion for quality, accuracy and a proper, good old old-fashioned copy/paste quote.

Add the mandatory 'edit' in and we're sorted

 

[BBassic]

From the front page.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-61865657

"Women from ethnic minority or deprived backgrounds are more likely to get STI trichomonas vaginalis (TV) than others.

That's according to new research carried out into the largely unknown sexually transmitted infection by sexual health organisation PreventX."

Now, if you do research into PreventX, you will realise they have absolutely no credibility or experience in these findings, which themselves are extremely dubious. There is no challenging of the findings, no rebuttal or clinical examination of the findings, and an outrageously small test sample was used.

It is simply an opportunity to force a medical journal piece (a dubious one at that) onto the site, call it "news" and fulfil a quota by discussing an issue which may, allegedly, possibly affect a very small number of black women.

I stick to Reuters or the AP now.

If you're going to Newsbeat for hard hitting journalism of any political persuasion you're definitely better off with Reuters.