Stop Funding Hate - Pathetic!

[AWAYDAY]

Just been reading up on this utterly pathetic campaign.
Another bunch of idiotic politically correct morons labelling anything and everything they don't like or disagree with as "HATE" in some crusade against the free speech (and sometimes factually reporting) press!
These are the vocal minority who like to spout off about democracy and freedoms unless of course you dare to have the audacity to disagree with their right on beliefs.
Yet even now..especially this week they still cannot see the damage they do to their argument by thinking that labelling anything they dislike as 'hate' and labelling people who disagree with them as 'racists, bigots, blah blah blah'
These sort of people turned the Brexit vote into labelling war...deciding anyone voting to leave is racist and that they should in some way be morally ashamed......well look what happened there!!
Anyone who thought Trump should win the American election was labelled "Deplorable" and god knows what else....and look what happened there!
Couldn't really give a toss about the yanks election...I disliked both of them equally....however became sick to the back teeth of on a daily basis listening to some luvvie actor/actress/musician spouting off and taking the piss out of Trump because they think it's right on and makes them a 'great guy'!!
Supposedly fighting against 'hate'...or opinions that differ from theirs as we would call it!
However their 'hate' towards any paper they don't like is apparently....ok?

You do come across as reasonable and open minded.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

those who read the DM are intolerant/thick/wacist/ etc etc.

Hard to disagree with your summing-up, to be honest

 

[yxee]

Maybe they should call themselves "stop reading hate" instead, and rather than going after the press, spend time talking to DM readers and debating the actual issues at stake.

That would seem to be the approach, if you believe in your cause.

 

[Monkey Man]

Read the DM comments on most news stories and you feel your so called snooterati might not be far wrong.

Interestingly if you read the comments under The Guardian's stories you generally find that they're dominated by opposing views more aligned to the Mail than the Guardian. I think there's just a concerted effort from zealots on both sides to try and shout down the views of papers they don't identify with.

 

[ManOfSussex]

It's actually NSC at its best ... the only things we know unites us is our support of BHA. Our politics differ wildly, so we're likely to encounter a much broader set of arguments than we do in the Facebook/Twitter echo chamber. Quite good stuff, for the most part.

Very true. It's why I finally succumbed to joining NSC earlier this year, rather than just reading it as the majority of my Albion supporting friends still do. The referendum debate, prior to the vote, was very healthy, vibrant and it was interesting to converse and encounter people with different opinions, who you ordinarily wouldn't converse with about such things.

 

[Hastings gull]

Hard to disagree with your summing-up, to be honest

It took some time but clever clogs always eventually turns up to offer the usual . . . . .

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

It took some time but clever clogs always eventually turns up to offer the usual . . . . .

 

[Hastings gull]

I've read the entire thread actually, since it emerged last night, which is rare for me. Quite an interesting read especially at a time when I reckon it's more important than ever for people on opposing sides of an argument to listen to points of views that differ to their own. I doubt many people will change their views but it's healthy to have a discussion, and maybe some of us are actually closer to agreement on some issues than some of the more unfriendly responses might suggest.

I strongly suspect that you are . .quite right!

 

[portlock seagull]

The irony of the 'love conquers hate campaign' is quite something. I know some very very bitter 'love' followers who could be described as hating anyone who disagrees with their views. The funny part is they can't see their lack of understanding has played an enormous part in the backlash against so called liberalism. Not that I dare raise the subject for fear of being called a 'hater' when actually I just don't see everything in quite as black or white terms as they seem to. We now live in a world of extremism it seems: 100% commitment to either side of the argument or you're labelled as in the other camp. For us. Or against us. What ever happened to rationale debate?! Extreme liberalism can be as dangerous as extreme conservatism and socialism in my view. More so in some ways because the former don't believe they exist!

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

It's all irrelevant anyway,we are mere pawns in the divide and conquer tactics employed by the top 1%,money is the lowest common denominator,it transcends both sides and you will see Palace's lathed with Gold from Communist Russia right - through to Capitalist America.

 

[Hastings gull]

Maybe they should call themselves "stop reading hate" instead, and rather than going after the press, spend time talking to DM readers and debating the actual issues at stake.

That would seem to be the approach, if you believe in your cause.

Absolutely, but wouldn't suit the "look at me" brigade - far too tame and no publicity.

 

[portlock seagull]

You should try it at least once. Then you might try the Guardian too to see their perspective on the news. Over the last few years the papers have become ever more polarised with their own agendas. The Mail is saying that it is the real voice of middle England and the Guardian the home of free thinking liberal issues. There seems to be no middle ground any more as people these days seem to be constantly " Offended " on a daily basis. I'm not sure if it will get any better either.

Absolutely this. I read several different newspapers and I'm quite shocked at how extreme the Guardian can be and how at odds with it's own marketing image the actual content is. If anything it's as bad or worse than the DM (not a paper I choose to read because I like old fashioned news, not gossip and celebrity culture) appears to be. Yet it's not lampooned to anywhere near the same extent. Of course all papers are politically biased. Yet I find The 'Tory'graph isn't as imbalanced as the Guardian these days. The sad thing is papers are rapidly becoming so polarised it switches people off from reading them or accepting extreme views only. That's not healthy. I might be one of them if it weren't still for the excellent sports coverage.

 

[trueblue]

How do you know that the lies these papers tell, or the attacks on those that oppose them, don't affect my life? Or the life of those around me?

Agreed. The idea that some of these newspapers reflect people's views ignores the fact that they also shape them in the first place - and if the stories are based on a wilful distortion of the facts, that's disturbing.

It's unbelievable that some people still think that these stories have no effect, even after Brexit and Trump's elections - and even more weird they get so agitated by any suggestion that there are very worrying parallels to the rise of fascism that led to the 2nd World War.

 

[Biscuit]

Are they? "Many" sounds good, doesn't it? It adds a bit of credence. My definition of "many" would be to say that many readers of the three papers will simply ignore the "many"

very good, you're fast becoming my favourite WUM

I really couldn't give a toss for your opinion of what "many" is. Or anything else for that matter.

 

[Two Professors]

Probably the same rent a mob that turn up to any event where they can show their posters.

There were a bunch of Socialist Worker goons at the last Remain demo in London with Poll tax posters on the reverse side of their remain slogans!

 

[Soulman]

There were a bunch of Socialist Worker goons at the last Remain demo in London with Poll tax posters on the reverse side of their remain slogans!

A small mob outside the BBC studios this morning (Rememberence Day) protesting against Le Pen being on the Andrew Mardy show.

 

[Two Professors]

very good, you're fast becoming my favourite WUM

I really couldn't give a toss for your opinion of what "many" is. Or anything else for that matter.

Well I don't suppose there are many who give a toss about your opinion,no matter how thick you think they are.

 

[Two Professors]

A small mob outside the BBC studios this morning (Rememberence Day) protesting against Le Pen being on the Andrew Mardy show.

Couldn't make it up,could you?Morons!

 

[Biscuit]

Well I don't suppose there are many who give a toss about your opinion,no matter how thick you think they are.

Still couldn't give a toss!

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Absolutely this. I read several different newspapers and I'm quite shocked at how extreme the Guardian can be and how at odds with it's own marketing image the actual content is. If anything it's as bad or worse than the DM (not a paper I choose to read because I like old fashioned news, not gossip and celebrity culture) appears to be. Yet it's not lampooned to anywhere near the same extent. Of course all papers are politically biased. Yet I find The 'Tory'graph isn't as imbalanced as the Guardian these days. The sad thing is papers are rapidly becoming so polarised it switches people off from reading them or accepting extreme views only. That's not healthy. I might be one of them if it weren't still for the excellent sports coverage.

But newspapers carry a lot of other stuff aside from politics. The Guardian travel and food sections are very good in my opinion. Sport is okay. I'm not a big film buff but apparently the film section is very good. The Guide has its moments.