|
|
Post by mick on Jan 19, 2023 10:34:21 GMT
Am I right with the p and not the P. Once more I don't want party to intrude - my points are supposed to be general.
I'm thoroughly fed up with one party automatically rubbishing the ideas of the other. I'm fed up with MP's failing to say anything meaningful because firstly, every word, every dot and comma, everything not said and every nuance will be analysed to death and (almost certainly) erroneous conclusions drawn. Secondly, a politician isn't allowed to change his/her mind, and so they say nothing now in case it comes back to bite them in 10 years time.
I'm fed up with 'balanced' TV programmes that end up in petty squabbles about whether the water is three or four inches deep when the boat is sinking. I long for an articulate, but unaligned member of the public to be on the panel to expose the obfuscation and sheer nonsense that the panellist spouts. I'd love that job myself, except that I’m not articulate enough. I could be really, and I mean really, rude to almost all the panellists. I frequently am in the privacy of my own home!
Rant over. I feel a bit better now.
Mick
|
|
|
|
Post by nickr on Jan 19, 2023 10:50:38 GMT
Am I right with the p and not the P. Once more I don't want party to intrude - my points are supposed to be general.
I'm thoroughly fed up with one party automatically rubbishing the ideas of the other. I'm fed up with MP's failing to say anything meaningful because firstly, every word, every dot and comma, everything not said and every nuance will be analysed to death and (almost certainly) erroneous conclusions drawn. Secondly, a politician isn't allowed to change his/her mind, and so they say nothing now in case it comes back to bite them in 10 years time.
I'm fed up with 'balanced' TV programmes that end up in petty squabbles about whether the water is three or four inches deep when the boat is sinking. I long for an articulate, but unaligned member of the public to be on the panel to expose the obfuscation and sheer nonsense that the panellist spouts. I'd love that job myself, except that I’m not articulate enough. I could be really, and I mean really, rude to almost all the panellists. I frequently am in the privacy of my own home!
Rant over. I feel a bit better now.
Mick
I very much agree with you, actually. I've largely stopped listening to politicians as a result. For some of it, I blame Thatcher. No, hear me out... The changing of minds bit. "The lady's not for turning", the idea that changing one's mind in the face of evidence was somehow a sign of weakness. I could be wrong and it could predate her, in which case I apologise, but at my age, she's the first one I can remember not only stating it, but trying to make political capital out of it. For me, admitting you have made a mistake or got something wrong is absolutely not weakness, but strength. I don't expect anyone to be infallible, certainly not politicians, and a decent politician will make what they think is the right decision at the time in the light of the evidence available. If situations change, if new information surfaces, or if they just got it wrong, then it's not weak to say so and change one's mind. And this frankly stupid idea has become the orthodoxy, and the media blindly hold up "U-turns" as a failure on the part of politicians, rather than a strength, thus being utterly complicit in the stupidity. As to "balance" in the media, I'm firmly of the belief that if one party says it's raining and the other says it's sunny, balance isn't reporting both, but looking out of the window and sanying what's actually happening. The media spends far too much time trying to do exactly as you say, analyse words to find contradictions, rather than actually point out obvious untruths. That's just poor journalism. |
|
|
|
Post by don on Jan 19, 2023 11:37:42 GMT
I try and avoid main stream news for all of the reasons mentioned. I’ve made a real effort to avoid news stories for over two years now and I don’t miss them
|
|
|
|
Post by dorsetmike on Jan 19, 2023 12:51:44 GMT
I try and avoid main stream news for all of the reasons mentioned. I’ve made a real effort to avoid news stories for over two years now and I don’t miss them One of the many reasons I gave up TV about 9 years ago, I no longer own one, and quite frankly I don't miss it. |
|
|
|
Post by mick on Jan 20, 2023 8:32:34 GMT
I very much agree with you, actually. I've largely stopped listening to politicians as a result. As to "balance" in the media, I'm firmly of the belief that if one party says it's raining and the other says it's sunny, balance isn't reporting both, but looking out of the window and sanying what's actually happening. The media spends far too much time trying to do exactly as you say, analyse words to find contradictions, rather than actually point out obvious untruths. That's just poor journalism. The problem with your idea of balance is that so much is opinion and not plain fact. The old glass half full/empty issue.
I also should have added that it seems to be the belief that Joe Public can't handle any numbers. Almost all the braodcast media avoid reporting anything but a single headline number and it's pretty well impossible to fully understand a complex situation without more data.
I'll also add the reporting of almost anything in a way that tries to make it all shock/horror/outrage. I saw a TV report that purported to answer the question,
"wholesale gas prices are falling but the price to me isn't - why?". The presenter did his best to turn the answer into some sort of outrage. Of course the simple answer is that, through Government action, we are already paying well below the market price and although wholesale prices are falling they are not yet below the subsidised price that we are already paying. If wholesale prices fall further and go below the current subsidised price then we should expect the price to us to fall.
Simple really.
Mick
|
|
|
|
Post by mick on Jan 23, 2023 9:04:20 GMT
Here we go again!!
I'm referring to Zahawi of course.
How do things like this get into the public domain? Did he think that it wouldn't become public?
Mick
|
|
|
|
Post by nickr on Jan 23, 2023 11:02:42 GMT
The problem with your idea of balance is that so much is opinion and not plain fact. The old glass half full/empty issue. Actually, I think that the basic problem is that a lot of what should be considered a matter of fact is now defined as a matter of opinion, and people are using "alternative facts" that are simply lies. We pretty much live in a post-factual world, and that has given politicians licence to lie all they like, knowing that they won't get caught out, or if they do, they'll simply say it's a matter of opinion and brazen it out. Yes, there are and should be alternative ways of looking at and interpreting the facts, but the facts themselves have to be respected, otherwise you're on a very slippery slope. Absolutely. I'm generally in agreement with the sense of that, but not entirely with the specific example. The "subsidy" is simply a delay in partial payment by the consumer, not what I think most people would think of as a subsidy, and vastly less than what some other countries have done. There's a story there, quite possibly one we SHOULD be outraged by, particularly when contrasted with how some senior Tory politicians have enriched themselves whilst doing arguably the minimum possible for everyone else, but as you say, it's not that particular example. |
|
|
|
Post by andy on Jan 23, 2023 12:14:10 GMT
Here we go again!! I'm referring to Zahawi of course. How do things like this get into the public domain? Did he think that it wouldn't become public? Mick Perhaps he's been getting away with it for years. |
|
|
|
Post by JohnY on Jan 23, 2023 18:47:08 GMT
Here we go again!! I'm referring to Zahawi of course. How do things like this get into the public domain? Did he think that it wouldn't become public? Mick Perhaps he's been getting away with it for years. I was tempted to make a joke about people with foreign names. Better not. I have got into trouble commenting about the leader of Tower Hamlets.
|
|
|
|
Post by andy on Jan 23, 2023 20:07:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by kate on Jan 23, 2023 20:13:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by andy on Jan 23, 2023 20:26:09 GMT
They've just had their second daughter a couple of months ago. Out of my 6 nieces and nephews 4 are mixed race and the other 2 are half Italian  . |
|
|
|
Post by mick on Jan 24, 2023 9:20:55 GMT
I'm generally in agreement with the sense of that, but not entirely with the specific example. The "subsidy" is simply a delay in partial payment by the consumer, not what I think most people would think of as a subsidy, and vastly less than what some other countries have done. Nick, Sorry for the delay in response. I'm not at all sure that I understand your point - especially your words "delay in partial payment". Would you mind explaining please.
Mick
|
|
|
|
Post by mick on Jan 30, 2023 8:38:33 GMT
Well he's gone (Zahawi that is) and I suppose that was inevitable under the circumstances.
Picking up on my theme of toxicity in politics generally it was interesting to note that Sunak was criticised and accused of being weak for not firing him based on accusation, innuendo and rumour. Sunak had an investigation by his ethics advisor and that came down against Zahawi and he was immediately fired. Sunak was then criticised for being weak and "crumbling to public pressure". Damned if you do and damned if you don't!!
Yesterday on radio an MP (happened to be Labour) insisted, several times, that the ethics advisor had written that Zahawi "lied". The advisor's report doesn't accuse Zahawi of lying. The nub of the matter is that Z denied that he was under investigation by HMRC. He claims that he didn't realise and thought that he was answering questions "for clarification". The ethics man came to the conclusion that any reasonable person undergoing the questioning (and receiving communications that are not in the public domain) should have realised that he was indeed under investigation. My take is that the advisor was leaving open the question of lying but offering incredible stupidity as an alternative.
Whatever one's personal opinion the report does not directly accuse Z of lying. Of course one can form one's own opinion, as I have - and I do not believe that Z is incredibly stupid.
Finally, before anyone gets the wrong end of the stick, none of the above is to be taken in any possible way as a defence of Zahawi. He broke the rules, he's gone and it was right that he went.
MIck
|
|
|
|
Post by squeamishossifrage on Jan 30, 2023 9:15:15 GMT
US law is somewhat better on this issue - if a person is being questioned as part of an investigation, they must be told if they are a target in that investigation. Had that been done in this case, then the whole thing may (or may not) have gone away. The 'genuine mistake' defence could not have been applied.
|
|
