(08-28-2020, 02:29 PM)Ossian Wrote: [ -> ]All news and media outlets will have editorial guidelines which inevitably give their output a certain slant. In some cases that will result in an editorial stance which some will see as driven by agendas*. The Sun has a certain perspective, so does The Mail, andThe Guardian and Sky News, and yes, also The BBC. As do sites like Guido - which I wouldn't regard as a news outlet, but some do and that's their choice, which I defend.
But any suggestion that there's a preponderance of leftist agendas in the media when taken as a whole - particularly the print media - is just fanciful. Ironically this faux outrage seems to be much more a characteristic of the right, who already hold a significant balance of power when it comes to current affairs and particularly political reporting in the UK. And perhaps that's the real key to what's going on here: holding most of the cards isn't enough - their preference would be custody of the entire deck. That way any dissenting opinion doesn't get to see daylight. That way lies fascism.
* Yes, okay, agenda is already a plural noun, derived from the singular agendum. But it's probably sufficiently anglicised by now to be able to stand an 's' at the end.
Exactly the fanciful argument that the media balance in this country is driven by a left wing agenda flies In the face of reality but when has that been an issue over the last few years? Heck we have one poster on here proclaiming LBC as left wing (presenters at the time included Farage, Nick Ferrari and Ian Dale) and he thinks his opinions are balanced!
(08-28-2020, 04:42 PM)hudds Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 03:22 PM)Ossian Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 03:16 PM)hudds Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 02:29 PM)Ossian Wrote: [ -> ]* Yes, okay, agenda is already a plural noun, derived from the singular agendum. But it's probably sufficiently anglicised by now to be able to stand an 's' at the end.
It's French - the singular is agendeau
Latin ay it?
Well, wor it - once upon a time?
Yo God saft mawkin - it wor French!!! O' course iss Latin, ah wos only plaerguin yer.
French is really what Latin became apparently.
Look, I'm from Tipton. I've tried to improve myself (Lord knows there was plenty of scope) but there's only so much can be done with base metal.
(08-27-2020, 05:36 PM)Fido Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2020, 04:43 PM)Spandaubaggie Wrote: [ -> ] (08-27-2020, 03:49 PM)Squid Wrote: [ -> ] (08-26-2020, 08:27 PM)Duffers Wrote: [ -> ] (08-26-2020, 08:20 PM)Spandaubaggie Wrote: [ -> ]Cheers Duffers. I think most will agree with me though. Banter, banter.
Yeah but you’re very much preaching to the converted on here though. Another way to look to look at it is what business is it of yours and what place is it of yours to judge? How someone chooses to identify is entirely down to them, fuck all to do with anyone else. To start going on about genetics and the DNA being wrong is a pretty grim stance to take.
Between this and the “proper English names” post a couple of weeks back I’m starting to form an opinion.
Disagree. Here is a biological male, deciding that they are female and winning medals. Stonewall are saying it's "transphobic" that males aren't allowed in women's rugby.
I'd quite like to join a girl's hockey team and identify as a 19-year-old girl called Lucy for a day, so I can shower with them. However, as I'm over 50, over 6ft, have a beard and genitals very different to the other girls, I think the young ladies might not be so happy.
We all judge, we 'allegedly' have free speech, but we live in an era where debate has been shut down or reduced to screaming and shaming. It's a problem and why we have lunatics like Trump who court the extreme dangerous intolerant lunatics, rather than people who are a mix of liberal and conservative views, like most are, who get called out for deviating from the PC path, which is more rigid than any dictators rule book.
How has this little nugget of information gone so long without being uncovered?
He’ll be saying he’s not a fat cunt as well next.
(08-28-2020, 04:42 PM)hudds Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 03:22 PM)Ossian Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 03:16 PM)hudds Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 02:29 PM)Ossian Wrote: [ -> ]* Yes, okay, agenda is already a plural noun, derived from the singular agendum. But it's probably sufficiently anglicised by now to be able to stand an 's' at the end.
It's French - the singular is agendeau
Latin ay it?
Well, wor it - once upon a time?
Yo God saft mawkin - it wor French!!! O' course iss Latin, ah wos only plaerguin yer.
French is really what Latin became apparently.
I think Giuseppe would like a word.
(08-28-2020, 05:41 PM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 02:29 PM)Ossian Wrote: [ -> ]All news and media outlets will have editorial guidelines which inevitably give their output a certain slant. In some cases that will result in an editorial stance which some will see as driven by agendas*. The Sun has a certain perspective, so does The Mail, andThe Guardian and Sky News, and yes, also The BBC. As do sites like Guido - which I wouldn't regard as a news outlet, but some do and that's their choice, which I defend.
But any suggestion that there's a preponderance of leftist agendas in the media when taken as a whole - particularly the print media - is just fanciful. Ironically this faux outrage seems to be much more a characteristic of the right, who already hold a significant balance of power when it comes to current affairs and particularly political reporting in the UK. And perhaps that's the real key to what's going on here: holding most of the cards isn't enough - their preference would be custody of the entire deck. That way any dissenting opinion doesn't get to see daylight. That way lies fascism.
* Yes, okay, agenda is already a plural noun, derived from the singular agendum. But it's probably sufficiently anglicised by now to be able to stand an 's' at the end.
Exactly the fanciful argument that the media balance in this country is driven by a left wing agenda flies In the face of reality but when has that been an issue over the last few years? Heck we have one poster on here proclaiming LBC as left wing (presenters at the time included Farage, Nick Ferrari and Ian Dale) and he thinks his opinions are balanced!
We have one poster on here who’s claimed the Conservatives want to defund the BBC because they don’t like scrutiny then says it has “client journos” who just parrot the Conservative party line and he thinks his views more relevant than anyone else’s.
When that poor 14 year had that private moment, who'd have guessed that the result would elicit such mass debate?
(08-29-2020, 08:12 AM)JOK Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 05:41 PM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 02:29 PM)Ossian Wrote: [ -> ]All news and media outlets will have editorial guidelines which inevitably give their output a certain slant. In some cases that will result in an editorial stance which some will see as driven by agendas*. The Sun has a certain perspective, so does The Mail, andThe Guardian and Sky News, and yes, also The BBC. As do sites like Guido - which I wouldn't regard as a news outlet, but some do and that's their choice, which I defend.
But any suggestion that there's a preponderance of leftist agendas in the media when taken as a whole - particularly the print media - is just fanciful. Ironically this faux outrage seems to be much more a characteristic of the right, who already hold a significant balance of power when it comes to current affairs and particularly political reporting in the UK. And perhaps that's the real key to what's going on here: holding most of the cards isn't enough - their preference would be custody of the entire deck. That way any dissenting opinion doesn't get to see daylight. That way lies fascism.
* Yes, okay, agenda is already a plural noun, derived from the singular agendum. But it's probably sufficiently anglicised by now to be able to stand an 's' at the end.
Exactly the fanciful argument that the media balance in this country is driven by a left wing agenda flies In the face of reality but when has that been an issue over the last few years? Heck we have one poster on here proclaiming LBC as left wing (presenters at the time included Farage, Nick Ferrari and Ian Dale) and he thinks his opinions are balanced!
We have one poster on here who’s claimed the Conservatives want to defund the BBC because they don’t like scrutiny then says it has “client journos” who just parrot the Conservative party line and he thinks his views more relevant than anyone else’s.
One poster makes a good point many Conservative’s and right wing commentators and supporters would rather the BBC be replaced by a commercial channel or just not exist at all. The BBC knows this and knows it’s survival is dependant on the government’s support so would rather not rock the boat. This has meant some of its high profile senior journalists regurgitate verbatim ‘sources close to No 10 etc’ Which by any measure is client journalism if it is not scrutinised which invariably it wasn’t notably during the last election. That is not just this particular posters opinion but those of respected journalists like Peter Oborne ex Telegraph Political editor who we can both agree is is far more qualified to opine on this than you or the other poster.
In summary... I imagine it’s hard for a publicly funded media organisation to keep its objectivity when it has the constant threat of a metaphorical gun to its head.
(08-29-2020, 08:58 AM)baggiebloke Wrote: [ -> ]When that poor 14 year had that private moment, who'd have guessed that the result would elicit such mass debate?
This thread has certainly meandered into something quite unexpected and your pun is apt. Modern life the battle of left v right, right v wrong, etc etc is encapsulated in this.
What it epitomises though is the way it is so difficult to debate via social media without engendering fury.
We live in a society now where everyone finds themselves apologising for everything and social media being scrutinised for every minor indiscretion.
I just wish at times the world seemed more sensible. It just seems though there’s more and more micro- minorities wanting to push for more and more.
(08-29-2020, 05:50 AM)Brentbaggie Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 04:42 PM)hudds Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 03:22 PM)Ossian Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 03:16 PM)hudds Wrote: [ -> ] (08-28-2020, 02:29 PM)Ossian Wrote: [ -> ]* Yes, okay, agenda is already a plural noun, derived from the singular agendum. But it's probably sufficiently anglicised by now to be able to stand an 's' at the end.
It's French - the singular is agendeau
Latin ay it?
Well, wor it - once upon a time?
Yo God saft mawkin - it wor French!!! O' course iss Latin, ah wos only plaerguin yer.
French is really what Latin became apparently.
I think Giuseppe would like a word.
Peut etre. But Italian ay Latin and Italian isn't (wasn't) a single language per se (oo, get me!). In that context, I recall readin someweer that the vulgar Latin of the Gauls is what Latin splintered into but j'oublie.