Found out that he's an activist? Probably because it says clearly on his twitter account.
Ah. I was thinking about how they found out his name, which led them to his Twitter.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
Ah. I was thinking about how they found out his name, which led them to his Twitter.
Oh. Might have just been someone doing a search on twitter and found his posts as he tagged the hospital a few times.
So when a Labour activist tells the truth about the NHS they are lies because he is a Labour activist?
Terrified implies that it's a decision of expediency and not one of ideological congruity. I think there's definitely an aspect of the former but I'd attribute it by and large to the latter.
Agreed.
Welcome to the machine.
From the Trump handbook. Stuff said by someone of a different political affiliation = fake news, regardless of whether it is true or not.
..where truth becomes a lie.
"Are you a racist? No."
"I just laugh at how Muslims dress"
I keep seeing these get ready for Brexit adverts everywhere.
Great, but how do I get ready?
Things are going to change.
Alright but how are they going to change?
The country will be brought to its knees and all the rest of th World will laugh at us, apart form Trump, who will be rubbing his hands together.
Great, but how do I get ready?
Things are going to change.
Alright but how are they going to change?
The country will be brought to its knees and all the rest of th World will laugh at us, apart form Trump, who will be rubbing his hands together.
I've complained to the BBC about Kuenssberg.
Fit solar panels, and download dog-meat recipes.
Think she will probably get in to a little bit of trouble over that. The first one is questionable but giving out his handle seems very poor behaviour for a reporter given the circumstances.
Starve yourself and move into a treehouse.
Bingo. There was also pressure coming from other rival companies ,mostly Murdoch owned.
Glad someone as said it .Because that is exactly what he as been doing.
Google survivalist preparation. Basically, start stocking conserved foods and munition, get some solar power for your laptop and phone. Watch mad max.
Personally, I think allowing a second referendum to happen but remaining neutral on the campaign trail gives credibility to implement whatever the outcome is.
With the extremely divisive and dangerous way Brexit has evolved, this may well be the most reasonable and balanced response. Quite Liberal if you will!
You assume. With your bias.
Personally, I think allowing a second referendum to happen but remaining neutral on the campaign trail gives credibility to implement whatever the outcome is.
With the extremely divisive and dangerous way Brexit has evolved, this may well be the most reasonable and balanced response. Quite Liberal if you will!
The only issue that wont get resolved unless it Is a Brexit is 'hard leavers' reaction to Immigration/Immigrants.
Boris has just been relentlessly rekt since day one, hasn't he?
Out of interest, what if we had a second referendum and Leave, whichever version it is, wins?
Is that the end of it? Some have already said it wouldn't be. What then?
Is that the end of it? Some have already said it wouldn't be. What then?
I heard that the man in the video beat up her 7 year old daughter to be able to get in the hospital and tell shit about the NHS
Oh please. His quotes were obviously newsworthy. Embedding them in a tweet is just a way of quoting them. It's not poor behaviour... quoting what people say is what reporters do.
She will get into no trouble over this.
I don't see why giving out his twitter handle would get her in any trouble. It's not like it was a secret. It's exactly what I'd expect a reporter on social media to do given that a) it's newsworthy and b) he actually tweeted about the encounter himself. Randomly deciding that something which is intended to be public should be kept private would be weird.
Last edited:
Are you related to her?
I'm not meaning legally but by the BBC she will.
There's absolutely nothing newsworthy or in the public interest about his Twitter handle and inciting a twitter mob onto someone in such a situation is something everyone apart from the biggest cnuts would find despicable.
Like this pleasant individual
But he was literally tweeting about the incident in the tweet she highlighted, while also quoting an actual newspaper report about the incident. How is that not newsworthy? And more to the point, how on earth can anyone who takes to social media to highlight a high profile incident they were involved in complain in the slightest when a journalist retweets them? He obviously actively wanted people to see his tweets.
I really don't think it should be hard for you to understand why anyone never mind a journalist should show utmost sensitivity to someone with a newborn sick child.
What is wrong with you man.
That makes absolutely no sense.
If you're involved in a high profile and newsworthy incident, you draw attention to newspaper articles about said incident and you repeatedly tweet about said incident on a public forum then you presumably want as many people as possible to know your opinion. It would be absolutely ludicrous to then object to a journalist who is already covering the incident highlighting the posts that you actively want a huge audience to see. I don't see what lack of sensitivity is shown by highlighting something the father blatantly wants to be highlighted.
It's not like he in any way whatsoever didn't want people to see the tweet she retweeted. In fact exactly the opposite is the case, because that's the point of twitter.
I don't necessarily disagree with any of this, however it's a well known thing on twitter than people with bigger followings use that specific tactic because they know their followers will go after the target.
And going by how she basically says "this is the guy" rather than just replying to him, kind of looks like it's what she is doing.
This all being said, I agree with you in that if he wants to promote it across twitter, then he's going to have to take the rough with the smooth. However, she shouldn't be playing that game in her position. After all, she knows damn well people will find him if they want. No need to pour that kind of fuel on the fire.
No, I'm just not weirdly triggered by this silly conspiracy nonsense.
Last edited:
But I see no real evidence that is what she was intending to do, it's only an inference a bunch of seemingly paranoid people are making. But what she did is also completely congruent with reporting a story... which is her job.
I don't happen to believe the BBC is particularly biased on the whole. I do think people who have particularly polarised or tribal views, think the BBC is biased, and you see it on the left and right.
Last edited:
Precisely.
It would depend on the context and specifics - but by and large, yes, I think that most remainers (including myself) would accept that. I do not respect the result of the first referendum for a variety of reasons, and nor do I think a referendum is the right method to resolve this sort of issue. However, if we had another vote, with the knowledge and experience of the last three years, and most of the country still voted leave then so be it. Emigration it would be. Maybe.
Kuenssberg is the political editor of the BBC, with a twitter following of over 1 million people of varying political beliefs. Why the assumption that her followers would react by going after the "target" rather than agreeing with him, as so many on twitter do? It isn't like it was Tommy Robinson retweeting him.
No you're absolutely right when you think about it she's actually a saint isn't she.
This story was already big in the news but you're right being hounded on Twitter by Boris bots is exactly what he needed and wanted. I mean he put something on Twitter so feck him who cares he has it coming right
Has anyone looked at his twitter so see if he's getting twatted?
What on earth are you on about? She didn't sick a pack of baying hounds onto him. She retweeted something he wanted to be publicly known to the broad following of people who inevitably follow the political editor of the BBC.
It's not like she invaded his privacy, or misrepresented him in any way, or highlighted something he didn't want to be highlighted, or only provided the information to people who disagreed with him. I see more people supporting him in the replies to that tweet than attacking him, many of whom will have been directed to the tweet via Kuenssberg.
The assumption that people would automatically react by attacking him is bizarre. He didn't do anything wrong.
Last edited: