« Topics
1234...31323334
Brekkie27,366 posts since 4 Jan 2003
HTV Wales Wales Today
Your signature has it about right but I think for every person who argues the broadcasters are too left wing there is somebody who argues they're too right wing, so ultimately they probably do achieve bias. I personally don't think Brexit would ever had happened if the broadcasters hadn't been forced by impartiality to broadcast the blatant lies of the Vote Leave campaign last year and prior to that give a platform to the blatantly racist UKIP whom it is pretty clear now are the BNP in all but name.
Shouldn't that have been posted in the "John Logie Baird has Invented Television" thread?
3
gottago, Night Thoughts and UBox gave kudos
newsman1
UTV Newsline
Your signature has it about right but I think for every person who argues the broadcasters are too left wing there is somebody who argues they're too right wing, so ultimately they probably do achieve bias. I personally don't think Brexit would ever had happened if the broadcasters hadn't been forced by impartiality to broadcast the blatant lies of the Vote Leave campaign last year and prior to that give a platform to the blatantly racist UKIP whom it is pretty clear now are the BNP in all but name.


It was up to Stronger In to prove that Vote Leave was lying.
davidhorman1,652 posts since 8 Mar 2005
Channel Channel Islands
It was up to Stronger In to prove that Vote Leave was lying.


Off topic, but how do you prove a lie?

ever watched 'Would I lie to you?' on BBC One?


You do know that's not how lying works in the real world, don't you? People don't just push a big button and own up when asked by a genial Welshman.

As to how you prove a lie, I should think it's pretty obvious. If somebody makes a statement which you can show to be false, and show to have been known to be false by the other party (either because you have evidence of them saying so, or because it's so bleedin' obviously untrue that even an idiot in the street would be in no doubt), then it was a lie.
1
SomeRandomStuff gave kudos
SomeRandomStuff1,287 posts since 29 Apr 2009
It was up to Stronger In to prove that Vote Leave was lying.


Off topic, but how do you prove a lie?

A politician opens their mouth?


The point i'm trying to make is that Channel 4 news cant be relied upon to determine what is and is not 'fake news', because another news outlet could easily disagree with them. If you look back at the way news was presented in the 90s you can see a massive change, not just in presentation, but in the way that facts have become secondary to a good story. Emotion is now more important than rationality. 'WOAH' is more important than the other Ws. Political correctness is more important than truth.

I found this quite illuminating...
https://www.ft.com/content/fa332f58-d9bf-11e6-944b-e7eb37a6aa8e

One thing i'm certain of: If you thought 2016 was a bad year, 2017 will be worse.
Steve in Pudsey8,227 posts since 4 Jan 2003
Yorkshire Look North (Yorkshire)
Your signature has it about right but I think for every person who argues the broadcasters are too left wing there is somebody who argues they're too right wing, so ultimately they probably do achieve bias. I personally don't think Brexit would ever had happened if the broadcasters hadn't been forced by impartiality to broadcast the blatant lies of the Vote Leave campaign last year and prior to that give a platform to the blatantly racist UKIP whom it is pretty clear now are the BNP in all but name.


It was up to Stronger In to prove that Vote Leave was lying.


That's quite difficult to do when the (unashamedly) biased print media are printing the kind of exaggerated/just made up crap they have been, the truth gets suffocated by the abundance of BS. Maybe time for the Representation of the People Act to apply to print media and associated online outlets in the same way it does to broadcasters.
Write that down in your copybook now.
1
Brekkie gave kudos
newsman1
UTV Newsline
It was up to Stronger In to prove that Vote Leave was lying.


Off topic, but how do you prove a lie?

A politician opens their mouth?


The point i'm trying to make is that Channel 4 news cant be relied upon to determine what is and is not 'fake news', because another news outlet could easily disagree with them . If you look back at the way news was presented in the 90s you can see a massive change, not just in presentation, but in the way that facts have become secondary to a good story. Emotion is now more important than rationality. 'WOAH' is more important than the other Ws. Political correctness is more important than truth.

I found this quite illuminating...
https://www.ft.com/content/fa332f58-d9bf-11e6-944b-e7eb37a6aa8e

One thing i'm certain of: If you thought 2016 was a bad year, 2017 will be worse.


Here's a news outlet that would disagree with Channel 4 News.....Russia Today! Laughing
newsman1
UTV Newsline
It was up to Stronger In to prove that Vote Leave was lying.


Off topic, but how do you prove a lie?

A politician opens their mouth?


The point i'm trying to make is that Channel 4 news cant be relied upon to determine what is and is not 'fake news', because another news outlet could easily disagree with them. If you look back at the way news was presented in the 90s you can see a massive change, not just in presentation, but in the way that facts have become secondary to a good story. Emotion is now more important than rationality. 'WOAH' is more important than the other Ws. Political correctness is more important than truth.

I found this quite illuminating...
https://www.ft.com/content/fa332f58-d9bf-11e6-944b-e7eb37a6aa8e

One thing i'm certain of: If you thought 2016 was a bad year, 2017 will be worse.


Can you give me a summary of the article (considering it's behind a paywall)?
newsman1
UTV Newsline
Now that is a good bit of film making. Jon would have made a damned good actor in a different lifetime.

----Rant Incoming----

I'm not sure there is any consensus on what 'Fake News' is. It seems to mean something completely different depending on the political bent of the particular news outlet.

What Channel 4, BBC, Sky and ITV are guilty of is pro-globalist bias on issues such as Immigration, Brexit, Trump...

Whilst i would expect this sort of thing from the newspapers, i thought our broadcasters were supposed to be impartial. Yet on some issues their bias is as extremely left-wing as Fox News in their extreme right-wing views.

Broadcasters have watered down their facts in favour of, as Charlie Brooker put it 'WOAH'. To the point where if facts dont suit the 'story' then they are ignored in favour of emotional images or emotive voiceovers.

Whilst i dont believe that any news outlet would deliberately try to decieve their viewers, they seem to be so wrapped up in their ideological echo chambers it doesnt compute when someone tells them they are being biased, or that their 'facts' may have been contaminated by their own ideology. This also applies to University Students and Social Media users as well. The ability to ignore, 'block', or 'no-platform' opinions that you disagree with is creating large groups of very narrow minded people.


The main UK television news outlets are editorially independent.
SomeRandomStuff1,287 posts since 29 Apr 2009

Can you give me a summary of the article (considering it's behind a paywall)?

I dont have an FT subscription and It wasnt paywalled when i read it, and actually cant access it now. It was talking about why the trust in the media was at an all time low. Article dated 15th Jan 2017.
1