Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

Do you think there will be a Deal or No Deal?

  • Total voters
    194
  • Poll closed .
Honest John said:
She said countless times that the only way to avoid no deal was to vote for a deal. There was only one deal on the table and it wasn't that far away from Labour's ideas, well at least what sense you could make of them. All 27 other EU countries had signed. It was the shortest and I reckon the most painless way to leave. Forget the headbangers sitting at the extremes in Parliament. They were always going to vote against it. This thing was only going to get through if voted for by the more moderate majority of which a fair chunk of the Labour party is. Corbyn therefore had it in his gift to get it through but whipped his party to vote it down for no other reason than gaining political advantage. His ambivalence has served to prolong this debacle and put working class and poor people even more at risk of further decline and job losses. In that sense May showed more inclination for the good of the country than he did.
Click to expand...
This won't go down well on here, but just for the record I agree with most of it.
 
DiseaseOfTheAge said:
Cause it was reckless in the circumstances.
Click to expand...

I don't really agree. Salem himself has come out and defended her on the matter. I can see the issue with some of the semantics, although I think its far too slight and nuanced to amount to anywhere close to the reaction there has been from the Corbynites that are desperate to take her down.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I don't really agree. Salem himself has come out and defended her on the matter. I can see the issue with some of the semantics although I think its far too slight and nuanced to amount to anywhere close to the reaction there has been from the Corbynites that are desperate to take her down.
Click to expand...
Think I'd be inclined to calm things down today, if I were him, too, to be honest. Enough on his plate without a load of bored and angry retired white men ranting at him.

I'm sure a lot of the anger at Laura Kuenssberg is due to people's views of her previous actions, yeah. On its own it wouldn't elicit this response.
 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...no-deal-stephen-barclay-october-a9111756.html

Its pretty evident that the UK is buying time. I believe that if the UK wants further delays then they should pay up those 39b upfront and agree to the backstop. If the UK comes out with an alternative to the backstop then the backstop won't be activated. Considering that the UK doesn't trust the EU with the backstop then why on earth should the EU trust the UK with their commitment of paying up the 39b and in not dealing in bad faith?
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I'm not seeing why she should apologise for linking his account at all. His account is used specifically to influence political narrative on a public platform.
Click to expand...

An apology would be a bit odd to be honest but that doesn't make either of her tweets right. I'd just like the BBC not to use such methods in the future. If the likes of the BBC start identifying the political background of anyone with a view so the other side can dismiss it at best or hurl abuse at worse then we're screwed.

I fear anyone who can't see why its poor behaviour is so entrenched in some wierd pro laura view or is a bit of sociopath.
 
Smores said:
An apology would be a bit odd to be honest but that doesn't make either of her tweets right. I'd just like the BBC not to use such methods in the future. If the likes of the BBC start identifying the political background of anyone with a view so the other side can dismiss it at best or hurl abuse at worse then we're screwed.

I fear anyone who can't see why its poor behaviour is so entrenched in some wierd pro laura view or is a bit of sociopath.
Click to expand...

The BBC's reaction has been what I've found a bit weird to be honest: the sort of non-apology posted on what looked like an iPhones note screenshot or something, and a RT'd Spectator article defending her.

I do think Kuenssberg comes in for an unwarranted level of criticism sometimes from all sides and I don't think this should be a reason for her sacking or anything, but it's definitely poor practice and certainly not a case where the BBC have covered themselves in glory.
 
Smores said:
An apology would be a bit odd to be honest but that doesn't make either of her tweets right. I'd just like the BBC not to use such methods in the future. If the likes of the BBC start identifying the political background of anyone with a view so the other side can dismiss it at best or hurl abuse at worse then we're screwed.

I fear anyone who can't see why its poor behaviour is so entrenched in some wierd pro laura view or is a bit of sociopath.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like they were digging around for dirt. It just isn't true. She was repeating what was already reported elsewhere and something Salem seems very happy to let people know and doesn't feel compromises his position. He was happy to take the story public and use it for political currency so the BBC extending his platform is not controversial in my opinion.

I agree that her stating 'he's a labour activist' could be construed as overstepping impartiality in a small way but I'm hugely sceptical she was initiating a right wing Twitter pile on to protect BoJo.

Is this 'you're either with us or a sociopath' going to be a tactic the Corbynistas are going to use going forward? If it is, I don't think it's a good one.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
You make it sound like they were digging around for dirt. It just isn't true. She was repeating what was already reported elsewhere and something Salem seems very happy to let people know and doesn't feel compromises his position. He was happy to take the story public and use it for political currency so the BBC extending his platform is not controversial in my opinion.

I agree that her stating 'he's a labour activist' could be construed as overstepping impartiality in a small way but I'm hugely sceptical she was initiating a right wing Twitter pile on to protect BoJo.

Is this 'you're either with us or a sociopath' going to be a tactic the Corbynistas are going to use going forward? If it is, I don't think it's a good one.
Click to expand...

Has someone made a bet with you to include the word Corbynistas in every post or something? Very childish. This is not a corbyn issue, it's you lot with the agenda that have decided it is so you must defend poor laura.

My point was evidently that those who can't find the empathy to see why any action inviting trolls onto a father with a sick baby are missing some very needed social intelligence.
 
Smores said:
Has someone made a bet with you to include the word Corbynistas in every post or something? Very childish. This is not a corbyn issue, it's you lot with the agenda that have decided it is so you must defend poor laura.

My point was evidently that those who can't find the empathy to see why any action inviting trolls onto a father with a sick baby are missing some very needed social intelligence.
Click to expand...

It is a Corbyn issue though isn't it. It's grown out of the idea that the BBC give Corbyn a hard time and purposefully work against his political movement. It's Corbyn's supporters jumping on an event to push their own political agenda against Kuenssberg and the BBC. She wasn't inviting him to troll them either.
 
Love to see the two BBC News reporter heavyweights go head to head in a live contest;

Laura Kuenssberg (Political Editor) v Emily Maitlis (Newsnight Presenter)

The contest would be focused on;
Which one is thought to exhibit most bias?
Which one is best at covering up their bias?
Which one can deliver the best 'fake news' story and make it sound real?

For guidance, for the uninitiated, or for those who are unsure, the consensus seems to be that Kuenssberg is 'Pro-Boris' and Maitlis 'Anti-Boris'
 
Maticmaker said:
Love to see the two BBC News reporter heavyweights go head to head in a live contest;

Laura Kuenssberg (Political Editor) v Emily Maitlis (Newsnight Presenter)

The contest would be focused on;
Which one is thought to exhibit most bias?
Which one is best at covering up their bias?
Which one can deliver the best 'fake news' story and make it sound real?

For guidance, for the uninitiated, or for those who are unsure, the consensus seems to be that Kuenssberg is 'Pro-Boris' and Maitlis 'Anti-Boris'
Click to expand...

Celebrity Journalist Deathmatch
 
Classical Mechanic said:
It is a Corbyn issue though isn't it. It's grown out of the idea that the BBC give Corbyn a hard time and purposefully work against his political movement. It's Corbyn's supporters jumping on an event to push their own political agenda against Kuenssberg and the BBC. She wasn't inviting him to troll them either.
Click to expand...
The easiest way to dismiss this claim would be to link her pointing out the political leanings of the various Tory councillors/activists/candidates that find their way onto the BBC to broadcast their opinions every time Question Time is on air. Then again for the financial and political interests of the various think tank talking heads that you see at least 2 of on any given day's BBC political programming.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I think its a really weak point for the Corbynites to go rabid over. Salem seems to think so too. It's a poor battle to go full force into and doesn't really help to enhance any idea of her bias towards the Tories in my opinion. It more supports the idea of an agenda against her more.
Click to expand...
Possibly although the only people I've seen support the idea of an a agenda against her are well.....other westminster journalists. Protect your own(They seem to be a bit like British football managers).

The problem with the ''Corbynites''/left argument, like many issues in life, no one is listening to good old Noam Chomsky. The argument should not be about a individual but about a system. Chomsky interview with Andrew Marr

Marr: “How can you know that I’m self-censoring? How can you know that journalists are..”

Chomsky: “I’m not saying your self censoring. I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believe something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting.”
Click to expand...

Laura Kuenssberg is a privately educated, upper class white women who is viewed as a ''outsider'' because she turned down Cambridge and has a accent. This is system we are dealing with(Not to forget the constant need to feed the news cycle that comes along with both 24 hour news and apps like twitter).

Again Chomsky interview with Marr

Chomsky: “It’s a, well actually, Orwell you may recall has an essay called ‘Literary censorship in England’, which was supposed to be the introduction to Animal Farm except that it never appeared. And which he points out, look, I’m writing about a totalitarian society but in free democratic England it’s not all that different. And then he says, unpopular ideas can be silenced without any force. [Marr: How? {inaudible}] He gives a two sentence response, which is not very profound, but captures it2. He says two reasons, first the press is owned by wealthy men who have every interest in not having certain things appear, but second the whole educational system from the beginning on through just gets you to understand that there are certain things you just don’t say. Well, spelling these things out, that’s perfectly correct. I mean, the first sentence is what we expanded on…”

Marr: “This is what I don’t get, because it suggests that - I mean I’m a journalist - people like me are self-censoring.”

Chomsky: “No, not self-censoring. You’re, there’s a filtering system, that starts in kindergarten, and goes all the way through, and it’s not going to work 100% but it’s pretty effective. It selects for obedience, and subordination, and especially I think… [Marr: So stroppy people won’t make it to positions of influence] There’ll be behavioural problems. If you read applications to a graduate school you’ll see that people will tell you, he’s not, he doesn’t get along too well with his colleagues, you know how to interpret those things.”
Click to expand...

Of course her coverage will be different towards a party of labour, then it is towards a tory government. Of course she will have biases, just like the rest of us. Kuenssberg isn't immune to the world we all live in, class didn't go away because some guy in the 2000's said we are all middle class. But sacking her won't make a difference(Although personally I get rid of her just on sheer incompetence). There's got be a systemic change of the system.(Christ I'm starting to sound like a bloody Matrix sequel. In short get rid of capitalism). The failure to not do so results in things like personal abusive and anti semitism in particular.

Now having said all of that, people in this thread and else where have made systematic arguments for why yesterday incident happened and yet still they were called ''conspiracy theorists''. Because really there is a certain Frank Grimes type ''liberal'' who isn't interested anything other than disagree with people on the left, they will happily drop their critical faculties if it means not having the same view as the left. Which basically kills the discussion.
 
Dobba said:
The easiest way to dismiss this claim would be to link her pointing out the political leanings of the various Tory councillors/activists/candidates that find their way onto the BBC to broadcast their opinions every time Question Time is on air. Then again for the financial and political interests of the various think tank talking heads that you see at least 2 of on any given day's BBC political programming.
Click to expand...
 
Funny I thought most Tories were of the opinion the Beeb is full of left wing luvvies.

If both sides say that it leans towards the opposition then it must be pretty much on the money for most things.
 
Honest John said:
Funny I thought most Tories were of the opinion the Beeb is full of left wing luvvies.

If both sides say that it leans towards the opposition then it must be pretty much on the money for most things.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. It could also mean that one side's definition of "leaning" (I'll say of the Tories here) is rather militant.
 
Honest John said:
Funny I thought most Tories were of the opinion the Beeb is full of left wing luvvies.

If both sides say that it leans towards the opposition then it must be pretty much on the money for most things.
Click to expand...

Marr said it the best:
"The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It's a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities, and gay people. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias."


I think conservatives when citing the left wing luvvies are generally referring to or at least have had their opinion shaped by the politically correct and culturally progressive creative portion of the BBC and I don't think many can argue that they are right.

In terms of actual politics, business and finance I don't think it's a big claim to say that they are more conservative.
 
Had a reply from the beeb:

Dear Mr

Thank you for contacting us. To allow us to reply promptly to your concerns, and to ensure we use our Licence fee resources as efficiently as possible, we’re sending this response to everyone. We’re sorry that for this reason we can’t reply personally to you on each point which has been made.

Laura Kuenssberg is a journalist that uses social media as part of her job.

Like many others, Laura quote-tweeted a thread by Omar Salem, who had written himself about his encounter with the PM on social media. He also describes himself as a Labour activist, so we don’t consider it was inaccurate to describe Mr Salem this way. Our editorial guidelines require us to give ‘appropriate information’ about the affiliations of the people involved in our News stories. Giving our audience as much information as possible enables them to make up their own minds and gives them the chance to hear the story in full. We also made it clear in our News coverage the reasons to why Mr Salem was at the hospital in the first place.

Mr Salem has stated on Twitter, “@bbclaurak is doing her job without fear or favour, which is a vital part of democracy.”

We strongly refute any suggestions that there was malicious intent behind Laura’s Tweets. News management have been made aware of your comments.

Kind Regards

BBC Complaints Team
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints
Click to expand...
 
That reply might as well have been: 'Dear Mr Pexy, piss off.'
 
The entertainment and political wings of the BBC are not homogeneous.
The entertainment side is naturally a lot more liberal and lefty, as creative industries tend to be, but the political News side is kinda centre right... at least at an editorial level.

Or it certainly seems that way. @MikeUpNorth is really the person to ask...???
 
Last edited:
nickm said:
How who what why when where.

She was doing the “who”.
Click to expand...


The other week when that bloke confronted Boris about not negotiating with the EU while he was walking around his town, and LK was standing right next to him, did she report that man's background and party affiliation?
 
Grinner said:
The other week when that bloke confronted Boris about not negotiating with the EU while he was walking around his town, and LK was standing right next to him, did she report that man's background and party affiliation?
Click to expand...

Damned if she does damned if she doesn’t, is that how it works?

Maybe those earlier heckles (which are common) weren’t interesting enough. Or maybe it needed a certain number for this one to cut through.

Or maybe it was the sight of a Tory PM caught lying on camera getting his comeuppance on sacred NHS turf by an upset father of a sick child is what made this cut through. I don’t know. All I can say is there can be valid reasons for why some stories are worth doubling down on, and some aren’t because not all stories cut through in the same way. Doesn’t make the journalist biased or evil.
 
Mockney said:
The entertainment and political wings of the BBC are not homogeneous.
The entertainment side is naturally a lot more liberal and lefty, as creative industries tend to be, but the political News side is kinda centre right... at least at an editorial level.

Or it certainly seems that way. @MikeUpNorth is really the person to ask...???
Click to expand...

Are they though or are they just scared of the tory thugs in parliament?
 
Mockney said:
The entertainment and political wings of the BBC are not homogeneous.
The entertainment side is naturally a lot more liberal and lefty, as creative industries tend to be, but the political News side is kinda centre right... at least at an editorial level.
Click to expand...
You might be right in terms of the political views of the people who worked there but the output at the BBC isn't exactly that liberal. Just look at the schedule of BBC One

https://www.bbc.co.uk/schedules/p00fzl6p

It's hardy re runs of John Berger and The Clangers/Fully realised communism.
 
Sweet Square said:
You might be right in terms of the political views of the people who worked there but the output at the BBC isn't exactly that liberal. Just look at the schedule of BBC One

https://www.bbc.co.uk/schedules/p00fzl6p

It's hardy re runs of John Berger and The Clangers/Fully realised communism.
Click to expand...

An hour long programme dedicated to Brexit every weeknight at 17:15 is over the top.
 
Pexbo said:
Had a reply from the beeb:
Click to expand...

Basically, they're saying that when they tweet or write a news story about someone they give "appropriate information’ about the affiliations of the people involved". A follow up complaint every time they don't that should do the trick to see what the response is then.
 
Balljy said:
Basically, they're saying that when they tweet or write a news story about someone they give "appropriate information’ about the affiliations of the people involved". A follow up complaint every time they don't that should do the trick to see what the response is then.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Their complete lack of information when various Tory stooges get to ask half the questions on Question Time is probably worth a mention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.