| General Election? 10:30 - Apr 18 with 36933 views | ElHoop |
What's May up to? - Downing St 11.15am. |  | | |  |
| General Election? on 20:23 - Apr 21 with 3003 views | MrSheen |
| General Election? on 18:15 - Apr 21 by TacticalR |
Mehdi Hasan's 'Bias and the BBC' (2009):
As well as pointing out that 'Nick Robinson was chair of the Young Conservatives, in the mid-1980s, at the height of Thatcherism', Hasan has the following to say about Andrew Neil:
'In November 2005, a well-known BBC presenter delivered the 14th annual Hayek lecture at the Institute of Economic Affairs, in which he called for "a reorientation of British foreign policy away from Europe . . . a radical programme to liberalise the British economy; a radical reduction in tax and public spending as a share of the economy; a flat tax . . . the injection of choice and competition into the public sector on a scale not yet contemplated . . . excellence in schools with vouchers for all".
These are views, drawing on the libertarian philosophy of the long-dead Austrian free-marketeer Friedrich Hayek, that are to the right even of the modern Conservative Party. The BBC presenter was Andrew Neil, whose shadow looms large over the corporation's coverage of Westminster. Neil is on air roughly four hours a week, presenting Daily Politics, Straight Talk and This Week - where one of his co-hosts is the former Tory defence secretary Michael Portillo.'
'Bias and the BBC'
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2009/08/mehdi-hasan-bbc-wing-bias-corpor |
Well, yes, but...
Hasan doesn't mention that Portillo and Neil's co-host on the Daily Politics at the time was Diane Abbott, or that the Economics Editor of Newsnight was the former member of Workers' Liberty and future star of "Why It's Kicking Off Everywhere", Paul Mason, or that one of Newsnight's hosts was Kirsty Wark, one of the great and good of Scottish Labour. You might even suspect Hasan of a bit of bias. |  | | |
| General Election? on 21:27 - Apr 21 with 2955 views | DannytheR |
On the BBC and its bias, also worth saying the new-ish editor of the Today programme is Sarah Sands, ex of the Telegraph and editor of the Standard while it was openly campaigning for Zak Goldsmith in the last Mayoral election. |  | | |
| General Election? on 21:47 - Apr 21 with 2933 views | TacticalR |
First the details...
Hasan does mention Diane Abbott is on the show in that article.
That article was written in 2009, so I am not sure how high profile Paul Mason was then. I believe Mason has parted company with his former comrades and more importantly with his former political theories.
Kirsty Walk did a very embarrassing interview with Glenn Greenwald in 2013 about Edward Snowden when she showed herself to be the most gullible defender of the security apparatus of the British state.
But isn't the main point that on the whole the BBC is bashed by the right wing press for being a hotbed of leftism/anti-British etc (the 'Bashing Britain Corporation' as Thatcher used to call it)? |  |
| |
| General Election? on 22:05 - Apr 21 with 2923 views | QPR_John |
| General Election? on 19:27 - Apr 21 by izlingtonhoop |
Ok. Let's compare like for like. Upon conceding the referendum, Nigel Farage declared (I paraphrase) "we've lost, but the fight will go on."
Since it has turned out that they won , I have heard the man himself, on his LBC show state: "Leave won. So shut up and let's get on with it together..."
This does not match. |
OK I not being critical just commenting on your original example |  | | |
| General Election? on 22:06 - Apr 21 with 2918 views | QPR_John |
| General Election? on 19:29 - Apr 21 by ted_hendrix |
I too live in a Tory stronghold in West Berkshire and have done now for nigh on 40 Years, on the evening of the general election the Missus and me will do what we always do and walk through the village up to the village hall and cast our votes.
As a lifelong Labour supporter I couldn't not vote, in my own stupid way it means a huge amount to me to have the benefit and freedom to put a X with a pencil on a piece of paper, Its just a small thing really and definitely my own personal X will have no bearing on the outcome in our constituency when the votes are counted.
This Country's great for all it's faults a small part of it's greatness is having the right to vote. |
Could not agree more | | | |
| General Election? on 09:42 - Apr 22 with 2784 views | Dorse |
I got the local council election leaflet from the Conservative candidate through the door yesterday. Here he is:
So, I instantly drew a Hitler moustache on his photo and wrote 'Turmoil' on his forehead. I then turned to the inside and saw a wider shot of Dr Carr-Jones and realised ...
It is rare that I have felt such a kunt. I blame Theresa May.
Searing political insight from North Dorset. |  |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| General Election? on 10:50 - Apr 22 with 2750 views | MrSheen |
| General Election? on 21:27 - Apr 21 by DannytheR |
On the BBC and its bias, also worth saying the new-ish editor of the Today programme is Sarah Sands, ex of the Telegraph and editor of the Standard while it was openly campaigning for Zak Goldsmith in the last Mayoral election. |
...and the editor of Newsnight is Ian Katz, formerly of the Guardian, inventor of the brilliant scheme to get Clark County Ohio to vote against George W Bush in 2004 (they didn't). So what? I don't have any problem with people interested enough to cover politics and economics for a living having a history of involvement. It's like people getting the vapours when they find that a referee supported a particular team as a boy. Do they think they should be chosen based on their lack of interest in the subject?
The BBC is in a difficult position, because we are all forced to pay for it. Whatever you think of that principle, at least people then draw from it (at least in part) as a common source, unlike other models where people only watch the channel that shares their established view of the world and never see the other side's arguments. Not just the US, there are European countries where parties have control over individual TV channels. | | | |
| General Election? on 11:20 - Apr 22 with 2731 views | DannytheR |
| General Election? on 10:50 - Apr 22 by MrSheen |
...and the editor of Newsnight is Ian Katz, formerly of the Guardian, inventor of the brilliant scheme to get Clark County Ohio to vote against George W Bush in 2004 (they didn't). So what? I don't have any problem with people interested enough to cover politics and economics for a living having a history of involvement. It's like people getting the vapours when they find that a referee supported a particular team as a boy. Do they think they should be chosen based on their lack of interest in the subject?
The BBC is in a difficult position, because we are all forced to pay for it. Whatever you think of that principle, at least people then draw from it (at least in part) as a common source, unlike other models where people only watch the channel that shares their established view of the world and never see the other side's arguments. Not just the US, there are European countries where parties have control over individual TV channels. |
Yeah, I know, I used to work with him. I'd be amazed if Ian had voted Labour in his life.
Also, no, I don't accept that journalists should have a "history of involvement" of that kind, at least not so recently or so controversially. The Standard's coverage of the Mayoral election under Sands was seen across the political spectrum as unusually partisan and pushing to the brink what was acceptable to publicly infer about "rival" candidates - up to and including parroting Goldsmith's toxic nonsense about Sadiq Khan's supposed links to terrorism.
To then appoint her editor of the Today programme is a pretty bold statement, particularly given she had no experience in broadcast journalism. Almost as bold as Lebedev's appointment of her successor at the Standard, which presumably you would see as another unproblematic example of someone "interested enough" taking a hugely influential media role. | | | |
| General Election? on 11:46 - Apr 22 with 2699 views | TacticalR |
As mentioned on the Trump thread, with the death of opposition (based upon alternative schemes for running capitalism) not only do all debates take place on the right, but in many cases they take place within the same party. We have seen this in America with the defeat of Trumpcare. We saw it during Brexit when the pro and anti camps were led by members of the same party.
Sunday Times journalist Tim Shipman reported this about Osborne's appointment as editor of The Evening Standard:
'Four-letter epithets abounded as the announcement emerged just minutes before May was due to make her big speech to the Tory spring conference. Her aides have been watching Osborne’s activities with growing suspicion. "They are obsessed and consumed by what he is up to," a minister said. "They regard him as the real leader of the opposition."' | |
| |
| General Election? on 11:53 - Apr 22 with 2696 views | MrSheen |
| General Election? on 11:20 - Apr 22 by DannytheR |
Yeah, I know, I used to work with him. I'd be amazed if Ian had voted Labour in his life.
Also, no, I don't accept that journalists should have a "history of involvement" of that kind, at least not so recently or so controversially. The Standard's coverage of the Mayoral election under Sands was seen across the political spectrum as unusually partisan and pushing to the brink what was acceptable to publicly infer about "rival" candidates - up to and including parroting Goldsmith's toxic nonsense about Sadiq Khan's supposed links to terrorism.
To then appoint her editor of the Today programme is a pretty bold statement, particularly given she had no experience in broadcast journalism. Almost as bold as Lebedev's appointment of her successor at the Standard, which presumably you would see as another unproblematic example of someone "interested enough" taking a hugely influential media role. |
I put the value of the Evening Standard's editorial choice at the same level the readers put on the paper - zero. I don't think anyone's influenced by that comic. | | | |
| General Election? on 12:00 - Apr 22 with 2681 views | TacticalR |
Whenever I read MrSheen's posts I always feel he is annoyed by something, but I am never quite sure what that is. | |
| |
| General Election? on 12:07 - Apr 22 with 2672 views | MrSheen |
| General Election? on 12:00 - Apr 22 by TacticalR |
Whenever I read MrSheen's posts I always feel he is annoyed by something, but I am never quite sure what that is. |
 | | | |
| General Election? on 13:31 - Apr 22 with 2628 views | Boston |
| General Election? on 12:07 - Apr 22 by MrSheen |
|
Agree Sheen, canine dental care should be partially covered by the NHS. | |
| |
| General Election? on 13:42 - Apr 22 with 2618 views | Boston |
| General Election? on 18:44 - Apr 21 by CliveWilsonSaid |
For the record I'm not particularly party political but I will be voting for one of them in this election. Although in truth there was really no need for me to post about this on this forum. I'd imagine most football clubs supporters were majority labour supporters historically. |
Recent history y'mean, Labour Party didn't exist until 1900, same as Chelsea! | |
| |
| General Election? on 13:56 - Apr 22 with 2602 views | danehoop |
| General Election? on 11:53 - Apr 22 by MrSheen |
I put the value of the Evening Standard's editorial choice at the same level the readers put on the paper - zero. I don't think anyone's influenced by that comic. |
Apologies, wasn't trying to down arrow. Was going to say how difficult it was to take anything seriously from a tabloid owned by a former KGB man matey with Vlad P. |  |
| Never knowingly understood |
| |
| General Election? on 15:43 - Apr 22 with 2533 views | derbyhoop |
There are scenarios where it could all backfire on the Blessed Theresa.
Scotland is unlikely to change much, so she has to make gains in England and Wales. The Lib Dems were wiped out in the SW in 2015 and lost seats around London. If they can regain a number of the SW seats and some of those around London (20-30 possible), May has to win in the Midlands and the North.
I would argue that last time out, UKIP took votes off Labour more than the Tories. This time UKIP are close to an irrelevance. If Labour's vote share holds up then Tory gains in the North and Midlands are unlikely to be enough to compensate for the Lib Dem gains. |  |
| Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one’s lifetime. (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop |
| |
| General Election? on 21:29 - Apr 22 with 2444 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| General Election? on 13:42 - Apr 22 by Boston |
Recent history y'mean, Labour Party didn't exist until 1900, same as Chelsea! |
Yes sorry recent history. There was no need to bring up the C word! |  |
| |
| General Election? on 09:11 - Apr 23 with 2342 views | 2Thomas2Bowles |
First 8 mins on the Andrew Marr show and it's been a party political broadcast for the Tories then moves to the election in France
No bias here!!!! |  |
| |
| General Election? on 10:20 - Apr 24 with 2247 views | FDC |
Laura Kuenssberg non-biased hot-take latest
|  | | |
| General Election? on 10:41 - Apr 24 with 2228 views | stevec |
| General Election? on 10:20 - Apr 24 by FDC |
Laura Kuenssberg non-biased hot-take latest
|
Have your boys got any actual costed policies?
I don't mean 'saving the NHS' or 'being nice to everybody'. Actual fckin policies and how they'll be paid for and by whom. |  | | |
| General Election? on 11:18 - Apr 24 with 2194 views | FDC |
Labour are hardly 'my boys', and I don't think any of the parties have released their manifestos yet have they?
But, of the announced policies that I'm aware of (that carry a cost): cutting business rates for small businesses is to be covered by reversing Corporation Tax cuts, which frees up £60b-odd so plenty left over; building extra council homes to be paid for by allowing councils to borrow against existing assets; increase in carer's allowance to be paid for by increasing inheritance tax; free school meals paid for by VAT on independent schools
I think there's a major misunderstanding about what governing actually is. The Tories bang on about 'competence' a lot, as if governing is a technocratic skill - as if the economy is this bucking bronco that only severe looking men and women in dark suits understand. But politics is about choices, deciding what to do.
I'd like more money in my pocket, ultimately. So I'm going to vote for the party that I think will make decisions that represent my interests.
Wealth redistribution will benefit the vast majority in this country. It barely needs saying, but the level of inequality that we've allowed this country to get to is staggering.
Edit: Billion, not million [Post edited 24 Apr 2017 11:38]
| | | |
| General Election? on 12:52 - Apr 24 with 2112 views | stevec |
| General Election? on 11:18 - Apr 24 by FDC |
Labour are hardly 'my boys', and I don't think any of the parties have released their manifestos yet have they?
But, of the announced policies that I'm aware of (that carry a cost): cutting business rates for small businesses is to be covered by reversing Corporation Tax cuts, which frees up £60b-odd so plenty left over; building extra council homes to be paid for by allowing councils to borrow against existing assets; increase in carer's allowance to be paid for by increasing inheritance tax; free school meals paid for by VAT on independent schools
I think there's a major misunderstanding about what governing actually is. The Tories bang on about 'competence' a lot, as if governing is a technocratic skill - as if the economy is this bucking bronco that only severe looking men and women in dark suits understand. But politics is about choices, deciding what to do.
I'd like more money in my pocket, ultimately. So I'm going to vote for the party that I think will make decisions that represent my interests.
Wealth redistribution will benefit the vast majority in this country. It barely needs saying, but the level of inequality that we've allowed this country to get to is staggering.
Edit: Billion, not million [Post edited 24 Apr 2017 11:38]
|
Well that's more like it, concentrate on policy instead.
VAT on Independent schools, can't argue with that. Building extra council homes by borrowing against existing assets, seems a good idea. I've been running a business most of my adult life so the idea of Labour cutting business rates, i'll believe it when I see it.
Labour hate small business/any business so it's highly unlikely to happen.
What's most noticeable about all of these things, they don't really clobber those with real wealth. Inheritance tax is only ever paid by those whose parents have one main vaulable asset, those with real wealth, multiple homes and shareholdings are able to pass off anything beyond that one main asset way before Inheritance tax kicks in.
The key to wealth distribution lays in taxing wealthy individuals total assets during life not death. When will someone on the Left grasp this? | | | |
| General Election? on 13:09 - Apr 24 with 2077 views | Phildo |
| General Election? on 12:52 - Apr 24 by stevec |
Well that's more like it, concentrate on policy instead.
VAT on Independent schools, can't argue with that. Building extra council homes by borrowing against existing assets, seems a good idea. I've been running a business most of my adult life so the idea of Labour cutting business rates, i'll believe it when I see it.
Labour hate small business/any business so it's highly unlikely to happen.
What's most noticeable about all of these things, they don't really clobber those with real wealth. Inheritance tax is only ever paid by those whose parents have one main vaulable asset, those with real wealth, multiple homes and shareholdings are able to pass off anything beyond that one main asset way before Inheritance tax kicks in.
The key to wealth distribution lays in taxing wealthy individuals total assets during life not death. When will someone on the Left grasp this? |
VAT on school fees sounds great in principle but it is not cost neutral. A percentage of parents paying privately will be able to afford it but a fair percentage will not and will move kids back to the state sector- which does not have the capacity and then has to pay for these kids. That is why successive governments have looked at this and not done it. It is popular though with all demographics so may happen whoever gets in. If your beef with private schools is that it causes inequality then they ought to be abolished out right as this is a move that would make them even more elitist. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
