What's wrong with Sky's Kay Burley?

[greyseagull]

Kay Burley asked 'what's wrong with you?' by Labour MP asked same question three times

Terrifyingly unhinged woman. Still would though. Probably. Just to see how evil the sex would be.

 

[Brighton TID]

She gets up too early

 

[Triggaaar]

Wow, it's unusual for the interviewer to be totally owned like that, she was talking complete shit from start to finish (actually, I haven't got past 3:30)

 

[Steve.S]

I think Kay was right, why put someone forward that you don't really want to lead the party? All very well saying you want a diverse range of candidates in the leadership election. But what if he wins? He is only in the leadership race because people in the Labour Party thought that he could not win and he was a token candidate for the left. This woman put someone forward that she did not want to win, where is the sense in that.

 

[Seagull58]

Burley is intensely dislikeable. I hope its just her TV persona for her sake.

 

[brightn'ove]

We can look forward to more fantastic investigative news programming such as this when the tories destroy the BBC.

Trash american FOX-esque bullshit in my view.

 

[Soulman]

Was Kay Burley doing an impression of Anne Robinson, she certainly sounded the same, had the same approach as on weakest link.

 

[Triggaaar]

I think Kay was right, why put someone forward that you don't really want to lead the party?

That's one small part of the interview, and a matter of opinion. Was she right to interrupt Dawn twice, suggesting her question (do you want him to win) wasn't being answered, when it was? Was it right to ask what the point of putting him forward was, 3 times, when she'd already been told? When Dawn said Andy Burnham had said Jeremy could be in his shadow cabinet, was Kay right to say 'no he didn't', and then completely ignore her cock up when she realised she got it wrong, and just pretend it was Dawn who was wrong by saying 'he said on the telly...' etc. Kay was trying to be Paxman, but made a mess of it.

 

[Steve.S]

That's one small part of the interview, and a matter of opinion. Was she right to interrupt Dawn twice, suggesting her question (do you want him to win) wasn't being answered, when it was? Was it right to ask what the point of putting him forward was, 3 times, when she'd already been told? When Dawn said Andy Burnham had said Jeremy could be in his shadow cabinet, was Kay right to say 'no he didn't', and then completely ignore her cock up when she realised she got it wrong, and just pretend it was Dawn who was wrong by saying 'he said on the telly...' etc. Kay was trying to be Paxman, but made a mess of it.

The only people who are going to look stupid in this is the Labour Party. He did not have enough backers in MPs to put him forward in the first place, so people were persuaded to put him forward even though they did not want him to win. Meanwhile public opinion is starting to get behind him and he could well lend up winning the contest. So in September he could well lead a party. That does not really want him, and you say Kay looks the idiot. Like you say Kay looks the idiot here because the Labour Party has managed to put a candidate forward that they did not want to win. Careful what you wish for.

 

[Ernest]

The only people who are going to look stupid in this is the Labour Party. He did not have enough backers in MPs to put him forward in the first place, so people were persuaded to put him forward even though they did not want him to win. Meanwhile public opinion is starting to get behind him and he could well lend up winning the contest. So in September he could well lead a party. That does not really want him, and you say Kay looks the idiot. Like you say Kay looks the idiot here because the Labour Party has managed to put a candidate forward that they did not want to win. Careful what you wish for.

Are you Kay Burley as you're making yourself look an idiot by not answering the question or understanding any answers ?Plenty of other threads for you to peddle your moronic comments about Jeremy Corbyn

 

[Da Man Clay]

Horrible woman. I have no idea how she manages to retain a job with sky.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

The only people who are going to look stupid in this is the Labour Party. He did not have enough backers in MPs to put him forward in the first place, so people were persuaded to put him forward even though they did not want him to win. Meanwhile public opinion is starting to get behind him and he could well lend up winning the contest. So in September he could well lead a party. That does not really want him, and you say Kay looks the idiot. Like you say Kay looks the idiot here because the Labour Party has managed to put a candidate forward that they did not want to win. Careful what you wish for.

Wow. Are you for real? Are you that much of a Tory fanboy that you cannot acknowledge that a Labour MP answered a question fully and was repeatedly asked the same question by a TV presenter who made herself look stupid? Really? The details are irrelevant. She was asked why she nominated Corbyn and did she want him to win. She answered. And was asked again. And was answered again. Then she was asked another question which she answered. And Kay Burley lost it again. Other than tying to score some kind of political points, are you unable to concede the basic point of this thread?

 

[Steve.S]

Wow. Are you for real? Are you that much of a Tory fanboy that you cannot acknowledge that a Labour MP answered a question fully and was repeatedly asked the same question by a TV presenter who made herself look stupid? Really? The details are irrelevant. She was asked why she nominated Corbyn and did she want him to win. She answered. And was asked again. And was answered again. Then she was asked another question which she answered. And Kay Burley lost it again. Other than tying to score some kind of political points, are you unable to concede the basic point of this thread?

The point she was trying to make and yes crassly,
So you have nominated someone. Are you agreeing with that point? This woman nominated someone to run for the leadership. But having nominated that person, she does not really want him to win. Yes Kay maybe be stupid, but no more stupid then backing someone you don't really want to win. Oh by the way, I am labour and don't think any of the candidates are the way forward.

 

[KZNSeagull]

She has been adopting this style for a while now. I suspect that is why she is never on in the evenings when people are actually watching.

 

[Cloughie]

I remember during the riots in London she interviewed a shop owner who said he saw 4-5 young black males smashing up his shopfront and start looting. She then interrupted, told him that that wasn't what he saw and then attempted to tell him what he did see (without her even being there). The interviewee had none of it though and angrily asked her if she was actually there. When she didn't respond he reiterated that he saw the black youths carry out a series of crimes before she rudely cut him off. Perhaps she was under instructions as to not discuss the demographics. Either way she Coulve handeled it far better.

Does anyone remeber the Dutch fella who was interviewed by her outside of the hospital when Kate and William had their kid? That was classic!

 

[Beach Hut]

Jesus we really have lurched to the looney left, next thing will be the return of Militant and Degsi Hatton

 

[Pavilionaire]

Moronic Kay interviewing a woman who nominated a man she didn't want to win who is now ahead in the polls.

Politically it's an irrelevance but great TV nonetheless.

 

[Eeyore]

If i was the Sky controller, it would be a case of 'You're getting sacked in the morning'. Dreadful interview.

 

[W.C.]

Jesus we really have lurched to the looney left, next thing will be the return of Militant and Degsi Hatton

huh?

 

[W.C.]

Wow, it's unusual for the interviewer to be totally owned like that, she was talking complete shit from start to finish (actually, I haven't got past 3:30)

Was thinking exactly the same. How often do you watch an interview with a politician and end up being on their side? That was farcical.