| Black Lives Matter 19:25 - May 31 with 16732 views | Thacks_Rabbits |
The most obvious of statements to anyone with quarter of a brain, and yet what a paradox when we have thousands of morons ignoring social distancing, to protest about something, when it’s medically thought that black people are more susceptible. (Yes I know it was not all black people bit majority was).
It appears that the ex police officer and the deceased had personal issues between themselves and as such it’s likely to have nothing to do with race, but that does not stop some protesting in the USA by getting themselves a new tv and burning down a shop.
In no way did he deserve to die, I am sure we all agree, he was a violent criminal but seemed to have turned his life around, but as the tail wags the dog in the USA, fleas start jumping around in the uk.
The police do nothing, had it been the EDL lot then they would have, but they are toothless and only good for telling pensioners off for not understanding the rules.
We have had Cummings hammered, deservedly all week (won’t watch the last leg any more as it’s so left wing it’s sick), but when the second spike hits, it will be down to Boris, not these dickheads ignoring all advice.
To summarise, of course all lives matter, but if you don’t know that already, you won’t ever learn it! |  |
| |  |
| Black Lives Matter on 13:05 - Jun 17 with 1104 views | DaleiLama |
| Black Lives Matter on 16:05 - Jun 2 by joecooke |
I have seen most of those clips and horrified was an understatement.
My reason for posting was to highlight that not all the police involved are as barbaric and cruel as the images that been highlighted, and as much as i felt repulsed by watching them ,i felt some gladness in seeing some restoration of faith in human nature in the ones i posted.
Suppose its the old hippy in me . |
We've all got a bit of hippy in us
|  |
| |
| Black Lives Matter on 13:36 - Jun 17 with 1061 views | BigDaveMyCock |
The only issue I have with arguments like this is if it’s consistently applied then the newspaper (or media outlet) you prefer will also have to be subject to the same criteria, and people don’t often want that. People don’t tend to see news being presented in a ‘version’ which is agreeable to them as the problem. It’s the other sides media that’s the problem. For example, Brexiters will probably not take issue with Euro-sceptic newspapers providing Euro-sceptical articles. That’s freedom. However, they will take issue with pro-European newspapers providing pro-European articles. That’s propaganda. This example works both ways of course. |  |
| |
| Black Lives Matter on 13:51 - Jun 17 with 1044 views | krafty80 |
Been biting my lip on this thread but I just wanted to make a couple of comments as I think maybe I have some relevant experience.
First, I work as journalist/editor, albeit in a very niche business to business market and NOT as 'MSM' like the BBC or the newspapers. Nevertheless, ask any professional journalist or editor and penny to a pound they will say that while some criticism of reporting is fair, the majority of criticism is arguably driven by audience members not wishing to confront their own implicit assumptions.
A classic example is when people say 'oh, the media should do its research and report more detailed stories instead of just making quick clickbait online!' Guess what? They want to...but people don't read it and advertisers consequently won't support it. Vicious circle. It is no secret that most media companies have staffing levels a fraction of those of 25 years ago (again, because people want all their news online *for free*).
How many of us can honestly say when we buy a (broadsheet) paper we ever read the World News stuff buried in the middle? Very few of us I reckon. But it still matters and still has a vital role to play in helping us to understand the wider world. if more journalism about the emerging markets were consumed and funded, how might it affect (for example) our perception of controversial topics like the foreign aid budget? And do you really trust (say) an organisation like the Taxpayers' Alliance (which does not declare who funds it) over a journalist from the Times to tell you about what's going on in Africa, or anything else for that matter? I know I wouldn't.
FWIW I don't think the Emily Maitlis problem quoted above was about her politics, it was about the fact it blurred the line between op-ed and 'straight news'. Maybe she or the BBC could have highlighted it differently, as a newspaper usually would. But as traditional newspapers disappear and people consume more from feeds, social media, aggregator sites etc then this problem is going to get worse and nobody, including overworked and shortstaffed media companies, has the answer yet.
Second, on BLM itself. The hardest thing for any of us as adults to do (in my opinion) is to properly analyse our unconscious bias. My missus is both black and American, so obviously that has given me a certain perspective on what is happening over there, and over here to be honest.
I just have a polite request for everyone reading this and posting on this forum. Just have a think next time you walk onto the Sandy Lane end (whenever that might be) and ask yourself how many non-white faces there are around you? Until a few years ago, that question had never crossed my mind. But then put yourself in the shoes of a black person, and try to imagine whether it is the exact same experience of going to a game surrounded by people who do NOT look like you.
Nothing bad or racist or whatever would happen on the Sandy Lane end because Dale fans are good people and we are rightly proud of the community role our club has. But the point is nothing bad *needs* to happen for someone to feel different. Maybe the only other black people a fan might see from the Sandy on a Saturday are the players on the pitch!
This does not mean we have a specific race problem, it is just a question of empathy and understanding and trying to put ourselves in someone else's shoes, which is extremely difficult to do.
In my personal opinion, people commenting on here with 'all lives matter' and other forms of discredited whataboutery need to try a bit harder to put themselves in the position of others. |  | | |
| Black Lives Matter on 15:58 - Jun 17 with 952 views | rochdaleriddler |
| Black Lives Matter on 13:51 - Jun 17 by krafty80 |
Been biting my lip on this thread but I just wanted to make a couple of comments as I think maybe I have some relevant experience.
First, I work as journalist/editor, albeit in a very niche business to business market and NOT as 'MSM' like the BBC or the newspapers. Nevertheless, ask any professional journalist or editor and penny to a pound they will say that while some criticism of reporting is fair, the majority of criticism is arguably driven by audience members not wishing to confront their own implicit assumptions.
A classic example is when people say 'oh, the media should do its research and report more detailed stories instead of just making quick clickbait online!' Guess what? They want to...but people don't read it and advertisers consequently won't support it. Vicious circle. It is no secret that most media companies have staffing levels a fraction of those of 25 years ago (again, because people want all their news online *for free*).
How many of us can honestly say when we buy a (broadsheet) paper we ever read the World News stuff buried in the middle? Very few of us I reckon. But it still matters and still has a vital role to play in helping us to understand the wider world. if more journalism about the emerging markets were consumed and funded, how might it affect (for example) our perception of controversial topics like the foreign aid budget? And do you really trust (say) an organisation like the Taxpayers' Alliance (which does not declare who funds it) over a journalist from the Times to tell you about what's going on in Africa, or anything else for that matter? I know I wouldn't.
FWIW I don't think the Emily Maitlis problem quoted above was about her politics, it was about the fact it blurred the line between op-ed and 'straight news'. Maybe she or the BBC could have highlighted it differently, as a newspaper usually would. But as traditional newspapers disappear and people consume more from feeds, social media, aggregator sites etc then this problem is going to get worse and nobody, including overworked and shortstaffed media companies, has the answer yet.
Second, on BLM itself. The hardest thing for any of us as adults to do (in my opinion) is to properly analyse our unconscious bias. My missus is both black and American, so obviously that has given me a certain perspective on what is happening over there, and over here to be honest.
I just have a polite request for everyone reading this and posting on this forum. Just have a think next time you walk onto the Sandy Lane end (whenever that might be) and ask yourself how many non-white faces there are around you? Until a few years ago, that question had never crossed my mind. But then put yourself in the shoes of a black person, and try to imagine whether it is the exact same experience of going to a game surrounded by people who do NOT look like you.
Nothing bad or racist or whatever would happen on the Sandy Lane end because Dale fans are good people and we are rightly proud of the community role our club has. But the point is nothing bad *needs* to happen for someone to feel different. Maybe the only other black people a fan might see from the Sandy on a Saturday are the players on the pitch!
This does not mean we have a specific race problem, it is just a question of empathy and understanding and trying to put ourselves in someone else's shoes, which is extremely difficult to do.
In my personal opinion, people commenting on here with 'all lives matter' and other forms of discredited whataboutery need to try a bit harder to put themselves in the position of others. |
Well said |  |
| |
| Black Lives Matter on 17:01 - Jun 17 with 889 views | BigDaveMyCock |
| Black Lives Matter on 13:51 - Jun 17 by krafty80 |
Been biting my lip on this thread but I just wanted to make a couple of comments as I think maybe I have some relevant experience.
First, I work as journalist/editor, albeit in a very niche business to business market and NOT as 'MSM' like the BBC or the newspapers. Nevertheless, ask any professional journalist or editor and penny to a pound they will say that while some criticism of reporting is fair, the majority of criticism is arguably driven by audience members not wishing to confront their own implicit assumptions.
A classic example is when people say 'oh, the media should do its research and report more detailed stories instead of just making quick clickbait online!' Guess what? They want to...but people don't read it and advertisers consequently won't support it. Vicious circle. It is no secret that most media companies have staffing levels a fraction of those of 25 years ago (again, because people want all their news online *for free*).
How many of us can honestly say when we buy a (broadsheet) paper we ever read the World News stuff buried in the middle? Very few of us I reckon. But it still matters and still has a vital role to play in helping us to understand the wider world. if more journalism about the emerging markets were consumed and funded, how might it affect (for example) our perception of controversial topics like the foreign aid budget? And do you really trust (say) an organisation like the Taxpayers' Alliance (which does not declare who funds it) over a journalist from the Times to tell you about what's going on in Africa, or anything else for that matter? I know I wouldn't.
FWIW I don't think the Emily Maitlis problem quoted above was about her politics, it was about the fact it blurred the line between op-ed and 'straight news'. Maybe she or the BBC could have highlighted it differently, as a newspaper usually would. But as traditional newspapers disappear and people consume more from feeds, social media, aggregator sites etc then this problem is going to get worse and nobody, including overworked and shortstaffed media companies, has the answer yet.
Second, on BLM itself. The hardest thing for any of us as adults to do (in my opinion) is to properly analyse our unconscious bias. My missus is both black and American, so obviously that has given me a certain perspective on what is happening over there, and over here to be honest.
I just have a polite request for everyone reading this and posting on this forum. Just have a think next time you walk onto the Sandy Lane end (whenever that might be) and ask yourself how many non-white faces there are around you? Until a few years ago, that question had never crossed my mind. But then put yourself in the shoes of a black person, and try to imagine whether it is the exact same experience of going to a game surrounded by people who do NOT look like you.
Nothing bad or racist or whatever would happen on the Sandy Lane end because Dale fans are good people and we are rightly proud of the community role our club has. But the point is nothing bad *needs* to happen for someone to feel different. Maybe the only other black people a fan might see from the Sandy on a Saturday are the players on the pitch!
This does not mean we have a specific race problem, it is just a question of empathy and understanding and trying to put ourselves in someone else's shoes, which is extremely difficult to do.
In my personal opinion, people commenting on here with 'all lives matter' and other forms of discredited whataboutery need to try a bit harder to put themselves in the position of others. |
Apologies, marked down by mistake. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
