The Newsroom

New Discovery & Murdoch News Channels?

Prime Time Only Murdoch Channel - Page 12 (August 2020)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
CI
cityprod
james-2001 posted:
London Lite posted:
Soupnzi posted:


(Anyone suggesting Sky News was a bit towards the right would have slightly more of an argument, given the live coverage of migrants the other week).


Which even BBC news were guilty of as well.

The closest to Sky ever being Fox News was The Pledge, a watered down version of the The Five format.


Richard Littlejohn had a show on there at one time too...


...which was just a watered down version of The O'Reilly Factor, which at the time was the most popular show on Fox News.
CI
cityprod
That fundamentally is true. And journalism reflects multiple views and presents facts.

The current problem is progressive/left/woke (whatever phrase you want to use) types aggressively advocate no platforming - with them as the decider of who should be excluded. Thats not appropriate in a democracy.

Showing views can kill their power. The vile BNP arguably quickly fall apart after Nick Griffin the leader appeared on Question Time. Showing extreme views to people rather than repressing them is the best way to deal with things.


Depends on the person in question. Nick Griffin was a completely useless waste of time. He had no charisma, nothing even remotely likeable about him. Whereas Farage, as much as I despise his views, was intensely charismatic, and gave off an everyday person vibe that Nick Griffin couldn't hope to achieve. In other words, Nick Griffin was remotely televisual, and Nigel Farage was. That's why Farage kept being invited back to programmes like Question Time, cos he could come across well on television.
AN
another_beauty
Nigel Farage is not Nick Griffin.
NL
Ne1L C
I initially thought the BBC had lost their collective mind when they invited Griffin on the show but he made such a prat of himself that the BNP lost its influence. Begs the question of what would happen if Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (AKA Tommy Robinson) ever appeared on QT
LL
London Lite Founding member
another_beauty posted:
Nigel Farage is not Nick Griffin.


He's certainly a more charismatic character who is able to project his beliefs without sounding like a complete prat.

However, he does share characteristics with Tommy Robinson and co, especially with his latest stunt of going down to Dover to look at asylum seekers coming across the channel on dinghies.
LL
London Lite Founding member
Tommeh on Sunday Politics.

NL
Ne1L C
London Lite posted:
Ne1L C posted:
cityprod posted:

Depends on the person in question. Nick Griffin was a completely useless waste of time. He had no charisma, nothing even remotely likeable about him. Whereas Farage, as much as I despise his views, was intensely charismatic, and gave off an everyday person vibe that Nick Griffin couldn't hope to achieve. In other words, Nick Griffin was remotely televisual, and Nigel Farage was. That's why Farage kept being invited back to programmes like Question Time, cos he could come across well on television.


I initially thought the BBC had lost their collective mind when they invited Griffin on the show but he made such a prat of himself that the BNP lost its influence. Begs the question of what would happen if Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (AKA Tommy Robinson) ever appeared on QT


Tommeh on Sunday Politics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opy5fXrTGEA


Now that I didn't know .
AN
another_beauty
Perfect example recently published by Sky

https://news.sky.com/story/us-election-2020-is-trump-trying-to-sabotage-postal-service-to-rig-vote-heres-what-we-know-12053466

US election 2020: Is Trump trying to sabotage postal service to rig vote? Here's what we know
Quote:


Until anything is proven, and something is fact, such a headline is sensational clickbait. And Sky know it.

A much more sensible headline would be something like "United States Postal Service due to give evidence before senators on Friday following allegations regarding US election"
LL
London Lite Founding member
another_beauty posted:
Perfect example recently published by Sky

https://news.sky.com/story/us-election-2020-is-trump-trying-to-sabotage-postal-service-to-rig-vote-heres-what-we-know-12053466

US election 2020: Is Trump trying to sabotage postal service to rig vote? Here's what we know
Quote:


Until anything is proven, and something is fact, such a headline is sensational clickbait. And Sky know it.

A much more sensible headline would be something like "United States Postal Service due to give evidence before senators on Friday following allegations regarding US election"


If you read the copy, it's clearly an impartial piece looking analytically about the issues surrounding the post office and postal votes.

They may have wrapped it in a headline designed to grab peoples attention as any publication does, but it doesn't make it a left-wing outlet.
AN
another_beauty
London Lite posted:
another_beauty posted:
Perfect example recently published by Sky

https://news.sky.com/story/us-election-2020-is-trump-trying-to-sabotage-postal-service-to-rig-vote-heres-what-we-know-12053466

US election 2020: Is Trump trying to sabotage postal service to rig vote? Here's what we know
Quote:


Until anything is proven, and something is fact, such a headline is sensational clickbait. And Sky know it.

A much more sensible headline would be something like "United States Postal Service due to give evidence before senators on Friday following allegations regarding US election"


If you read the copy, it's clearly an impartial piece looking analytically about the issues surrounding the post office and postal votes.

They may have wrapped it in a headline designed to grab peoples attention as any publication does, but it doesn't make it a left-wing outlet.


I have not said it is a left wing outlet, or even bias, just left leaning. This headline is a left leaning headline. Anyway, I think we will have to agree to disagree.
LL
London Lite Founding member
another_beauty posted:


The media bubble has always been against Corbyn and Brexit. This will never change because those in the bubble simply cannot understand why both events occurred. And of course they hate that they did. This clouds their judgement. They try to understand, but they do not truly, and I think this terrifies them. They try to latch onto what they think is current in the public mood, but Twitter does not equal the public mood. Again and again events keep occurring which are beyond their comprehension. They are out of touch and their downfall will be a slow but certain affair. What is it that is coming? I really have no idea. I suspect we will end up with what America has. Real biased news with both sides taking extremes to get the views and clicks.


People old enough to remember Corbyn and his socialist pals known exactly what he was like in 2016, the fact he shared a platform with Palestinian and Irish terrorists shows you the type of character he is. What he did was repackage his 1970s soclialism for a younger audience and turned it into a cult, helped by Momemtum and outriders such as Ash Sarkar, Owen Jones and Aaron Bastani along with hard-left websites such as The Canary and Squawkbox who publish propaganda on behalf of them.

Corbynism revitalised the old socialists, some of them antisemitic thanks to their pro-Palestine beliefs thanks to his young intake.

As for Brexit, I don't think anyone saw Brexit coming, except for the angry working class people who have been disenfranchised and didn't see in their day to day lives the benefits of being part of the European Union. That's understandable, but there was a xenophobic undercurrent, not helped by messers Farage and co who packaged it up in a way that reasonable people could vote for.

Neither of this is the fault of mainstream tv news providers who are providing regardless of what some people think is still an impartial news service.
NL
Ne1L C
It’s a fascinating discussion but I’m a bit worried the mods are going to step I even though there’s a reference to tv at the end.

Newer posts