You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump
August 22 2019 11.35pm

Bias against Trump

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 300 of 365 < 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 >

 

View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Jun 19 3.56pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by W12

That used to work when the press themselves were more representative of the people they are supposed to represent (and when the country was more homogeneous). Now the BBC, Sky, Channel 4, ITV news (all the major broadcasters) follow the same political ideals (otherwise you couldn't get a job in the first place) and follow the same script (even in fictional shows).

i.e.

Orange man bad (and racist, sexist, etc)
All Migration good (and saying otherwise is racist)
Minorities cannot be criticized (that's racist)
Do not promote traditional family values (that's homophobic, transphobic, sexist etc)
Call the working class "right wing" to shut them up (they are all racists anyway)
Ignore actual crime figures (because if you look too close you might find conclusions you don't like)
Ignore terrorism (it's our fault anyway and you also might find conclusions you don't like)

[all the above in short form soundbite format]

Now they are moving on to sexualizing children and promoting racism against white people (even on the BBC, so we are paying for it). What's next I wonder?

In short the mainstream media operates for the left wing middle classes and minorities in the population. People who are still young enough are finding better alternatives online (typically long form and far more intelligent and diverse debate) and the mainstream media is in it's death throws.

All you have done there is demonstrate your own political outlook and bias. If you read a really left wing site then you would find just as many criticisms which make the polar opposite points.

Any commercial broadcaster is going to be mindful of their audience and generally not promote opinions that alienate them, so neither far right nor far left are going to feature too much. Except in the case of Murdoch owned outlets where a non to subtle lean to the right is obvious. That's especially true in newspapers. You could hardly describe the Sun as left leaning. Nor the Mail, the Express or the Telegraph.

The BBC are different but still come in from as much fire from the left as the right. I think myself they have the balance about right.

Your list of alleged "sins" gave me a laugh. Every one is just a distortion of reality as seen from a right wing viewpoint. Every one can be easily countered. For instance:- " Minorities cannot be criticised (that's racist)

Of course minorities can be criticised. It all depends how, and what for. Any individual can be criticised. Any group of individuals can be criticised, if they promote policies together deserving of criticism. What must not be done is to criticise individuals just because they happen to be part of a minority group. Whether it is racist depends on the criticism. It's the attempt to associate all the innocent people with the guilty which is not acceptable.

I agree that people are finding their "news" and information in different ways these days. This brings with it new challenges which have not yet been fully exposed and certainly not sufficiently scrutinised and regulated.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Spiderman's Profile Spiderman Flag Horsham 11 Jun 19 8.38pm Send a Private Message to Spiderman Add Spiderman as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

All you have done there is demonstrate your own political outlook and bias. If you read a really left wing site then you would find just as many criticisms which make the polar opposite points.

Any commercial broadcaster is going to be mindful of their audience and generally not promote opinions that alienate them, so neither far right nor far left are going to feature too much. Except in the case of Murdoch owned outlets where a non to subtle lean to the right is obvious. That's especially true in newspapers. You could hardly describe the Sun as left leaning. Nor the Mail, the Express or the Telegraph.

The BBC are different but still come in from as much fire from the left as the right. I think myself they have the balance about right.

Your list of alleged "sins" gave me a laugh. Every one is just a distortion of reality as seen from a right wing viewpoint. Every one can be easily countered. For instance:- " Minorities cannot be criticised (that's racist)

Of course minorities can be criticised. It all depends how, and what for. Any individual can be criticised. Any group of individuals can be criticised, if they promote policies together deserving of criticism. What must not be done is to criticise individuals just because they happen to be part of a minority group. Whether it is racist depends on the criticism. It's the attempt to associate all the innocent people with the guilty which is not acceptable.

I agree that people are finding their "news" and information in different ways these days. This brings with it new challenges which have not yet been fully exposed and certainly not sufficiently scrutinised and regulated.

Is that why they have recently been warned about their political bias.
[Link]

And before you say "that's the Express"... from the Guardian
[Link]

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View .TUX.'s Profile .TUX. Flag 11 Jun 19 9.04pm Send a Private Message to .TUX. Add .TUX. as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

All you have done there is demonstrate your own political outlook and bias. If you read a really left wing site then you would find just as many criticisms which make the polar opposite points.

Any commercial broadcaster is going to be mindful of their audience and generally not promote opinions that alienate them, so neither far right nor far left are going to feature too much. Except in the case of Murdoch owned outlets where a non to subtle lean to the right is obvious. That's especially true in newspapers. You could hardly describe the Sun as left leaning. Nor the Mail, the Express or the Telegraph.

The BBC are different but still come in from as much fire from the left as the right. I think myself they have the balance about right.

Your list of alleged "sins" gave me a laugh. Every one is just a distortion of reality as seen from a right wing viewpoint. Every one can be easily countered. For instance:- " Minorities cannot be criticised (that's racist)

Of course minorities can be criticised. It all depends how, and what for. Any individual can be criticised. Any group of individuals can be criticised, if they promote policies together deserving of criticism. What must not be done is to criticise individuals just because they happen to be part of a minority group. Whether it is racist depends on the criticism. It's the attempt to associate all the innocent people with the guilty which is not acceptable.

I agree that people are finding their "news" and information in different ways these days. This brings with it new challenges which have not yet been fully exposed and certainly not sufficiently scrutinised and regulated.

You can't be real.

 


Buy Litecoin.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Rubin's Profile Rubin Flag 11 Jun 19 10.18pm Send a Private Message to Rubin Add Rubin as a friend

Originally posted by W12

That used to work when the press themselves were more representative of the people they are supposed to represent (and when the country was more homogeneous). Now the BBC, Sky, Channel 4, ITV news (all the major broadcasters) follow the same political ideals (otherwise you couldn't get a job in the first place) and follow the same script (even in fictional shows).

i.e.

Orange man bad (and racist, sexist, etc)
All Migration good (and saying otherwise is racist)
Minorities cannot be criticized (that's racist)
Do not promote traditional family values (that's homophobic, transphobic, sexist etc)
Call the working class "right wing" to shut them up (they are all racists anyway)
Ignore actual crime figures (because if you look too close you might find conclusions you don't like)
Ignore terrorism (it's our fault anyway and you also might find conclusions you don't like)

[all the above in short form soundbite format]

Now they are moving on to sexualizing children and promoting racism against white people (even on the BBC, so we are paying for it). What's next I wonder?

In short the mainstream media operates for the left wing middle classes and minorities in the population. People who are still young enough are finding better alternatives online (typically long form and far more intelligent and diverse debate) and the mainstream media is in it's death throws.

Good post. Spot on analysis.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Jun 19 10.22pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Spiderman

Is that why they have recently been warned about their political bias.
[Link]

And before you say "that's the Express"... from the Guardian
[Link]

I read those reports! Did you?

What both say is neither surprising nor any kind of indication that actual bias exists. What they confirm is that the perception of bias has increased which is obviously true but not the same at all.

From the Express piece "The British broadcaster is still believed to be performing well “in many respects”."

From the Guardian "The impartiality of the corporation’s news output has come under attack from all sides in recent years, especially following the Brexit referendum. It has been at the focus of discussions over whether the national broadcaster should be giving airtime to individuals who represent extreme views in the name of balance.

Hall said that perceptions of the BBC’s impartiality had ‘“weakened in recent years”, adding: “We need to see what we can do to strengthen them.”

That Ofcom should investigate complaints of bias is quite right and is only doing it's duty. That doesn't mean that bias actually exists, especially if the source of the complaints is itself biased in one direction or the other.

Your own attitude is confirmation of a biased viewpoint. The BBC have a tricky path to find and then follow. I think they do pretty well.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Jun 19 10.26pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by .TUX.

You can't be real.

Of course I am. I see things as they really are and not from either a far left or far right viewpoint. That those on the extremes feel they don't get a fair hearing has been a complaint for a very long time. The difference is that the hard right are more energised and vocal at the moment. It doesn't mean they don't get the coverage they deserve. See my previous response to "Spiderman".

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 11 Jun 19 10.40pm Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Of course I am. I see things as they really are and not from either a far left or far right viewpoint. That those on the extremes feel they don't get a fair hearing has been a complaint for a very long time. The difference is that the hard right are more energised and vocal at the moment. It doesn't mean they don't get the coverage they deserve. See my previous response to "Spiderman".

Riiiiiiiiiiiight. Keep taking the meds.

If you don't see bias from all the major networks then you are the Stevie Wonder of the HOL.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Teddy Eagle's Profile Teddy Eagle Flag 11 Jun 19 10.49pm Send a Private Message to Teddy Eagle Add Teddy Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

Of course I am. I see things as they really are and not from either a far left or far right viewpoint. That those on the extremes feel they don't get a fair hearing has been a complaint for a very long time. The difference is that the hard right are more energised and vocal at the moment. It doesn't mean they don't get the coverage they deserve. See my previous response to "Spiderman".

Just out of interest who, among current politicians, fits your definition of “hard right”? Who are the equivalents to Corbyn and McDonnell in your opinion?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Jun 19 11.51pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Just out of interest who, among current politicians, fits your definition of “hard right”? Who are the equivalents to Corbyn and McDonnell in your opinion?

Most Tory MPs are not as hard to the right as some are on here, but there are enough. The Monday Club members fit the bill. Iain Duncan Smith, Peter Bone, Edward Leigh and Bill Cash come to mind as well known names but there are lots of others whose politics I don't much like.

That these folk are popular with rank and file Tories is true. Those rank and file Tories are not though typical of the average voter and that's why choosing a PM from the right would be a disastrous long term mistake. No party can succeed with policies on either margin. They must hold the middle and lean slightly one way. You might think it's boring but it's a fact.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 11 Jun 19 11.57pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Riiiiiiiiiiiight. Keep taking the meds.

If you don't see bias from all the major networks then you are the Stevie Wonder of the HOL.

That you disagree just shows your own bias doesn't it?

I think I prefer the professional judgement of experienced journalists to decide how and what gets presented than anyone posting here. Both of us included. They have carefully considered guidelines to follow. We don't.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Hrolf The Ganger's Profile Hrolf The Ganger Flag 12 Jun 19 8.53am Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger Add Hrolf The Ganger as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

That you disagree just shows your own bias doesn't it?

I think I prefer the professional judgement of experienced journalists to decide how and what gets presented than anyone posting here. Both of us included. They have carefully considered guidelines to follow. We don't.

It's quaint that you trust 'experienced journalists'.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View W12's Profile W12 Flag 12 Jun 19 9.18am Send a Private Message to W12 Add W12 as a friend

Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle

All you have done there is demonstrate your own political outlook and bias. If you read a really left wing site then you would find just as many criticisms which make the polar opposite points.

Any commercial broadcaster is going to be mindful of their audience and generally not promote opinions that alienate them, so neither far right nor far left are going to feature too much. Except in the case of Murdoch owned outlets where a non to subtle lean to the right is obvious. That's especially true in newspapers. You could hardly describe the Sun as left leaning. Nor the Mail, the Express or the Telegraph.

The BBC are different but still come in from as much fire from the left as the right. I think myself they have the balance about right.

Your list of alleged "sins" gave me a laugh. Every one is just a distortion of reality as seen from a right wing viewpoint. Every one can be easily countered. For instance:- " Minorities cannot be criticised (that's racist)

Of course minorities can be criticised. It all depends how, and what for. Any individual can be criticised. Any group of individuals can be criticised, if they promote policies together deserving of criticism. What must not be done is to criticise individuals just because they happen to be part of a minority group. Whether it is racist depends on the criticism. It's the attempt to associate all the innocent people with the guilty which is not acceptable.

I agree that people are finding their "news" and information in different ways these days. This brings with it new challenges which have not yet been fully exposed and certainly not sufficiently scrutinised and regulated.

All you have done there is demonstrate your own political outlook and bias

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 300 of 365 < 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Bias against Trump