All Tories Are Cunts thread

[Chris B]

15 minutes ago, Factotum said:

I must say I get rather uncomfortable with comments such as this.  I really think we need to stop with the attacks on journalists like Kuenssberg. The BBC are attacked by the right as they are seen as 'lefty' and now the left seems to be convinced there's a grand conspiracy against them on the BBC.  It just doesn't sit right with me. 

Also I'm not having a pop, just my own personal feelings on it.

The left seems to be convinced that the Tories have fundamentally changed the direction of the BBC, which they openly have. One of the traditional points of the BBC is that both left and right felt it was unbalanced - but the BBC have now outright said that it's too focused on the left-wing and needs to focus more on the right. That either means they did get it wrong before or they have shifted the goalposts. That they've done this after the Tories have repeatedly made clear that their licence fee is dependent on their editorial direction, and have placed more right-wing tories into senior positions makes which pretty clear.

And Kuennsberg is ludicrous. She's outright attacked people online before to defend Johnson, and regularly leaps to explain his actions. This is way, way beyond what was done before.

[patiirc]

Some one on twitter thinks that a paper review, sorry ordering of, paper headlines is example of systemic bias against the left and pro tory, even though as mentioned it was covered any way. 

I'm gunna invest in tonfoil if this is the strength of arguement out there condemning an entire organisation based on how it presented a paper review. Fml. 

It's  not really the Tories who've been brainwashed or doing the brainwashing g, if left supporters are so far down the Trumpian rabbit hole that they've been conditioned that all msm is biased against them and thus cant be trusted. 

Jesus Christ. 

 

 

[stumobir]

4 minutes ago, SuperBacon said:

The thing with Kuenssberg and Peston is it's just so predictable now so what is the point in getting annoyed at anything they do? We should just ignore them.

They're both absolute fucking shills who are genuinely lower than say Daily Star (sorry ooh ahh Daily Star) politics journalists, in what they come out with.

Getting angry at them is completely pointless.  It's irritating that they are the leading journalists for the two biggest TV channels but who is forming an opinion off what they say? Fuck them and their performative bullshit.

I do still wonder how on earth Peston got a career in TV though. Hes just such a charisma vacuum. Who on earth enjoys watching him?

Kuenssberg has as many Twitter followers as the Mail has readers, unfortunately what she says does matter.

The odd blip is excusable but “sources” defending Cummings, inviting a pile-on to someone who confronted Johnson, reporting a Labour activist punching someone based on zero evidence and leaping to his defence over crass comments made during a pandemic are absolutely inexcusable for the BBC’s political editor. It should be highlighted what a charlatan she (and Peston tbf) is at every opportunity.

[Carbomb]

Yeah, such conspiracy theorists. It's almost as if they were presenting it as the single latest example in a long-observed pattern of behaviour. 

Edited March 29, 2021 by Carbomb

[stumobir]

3 minutes ago, patiirc said:

Some one on twitter thinks that a paper review, sorry ordering of, paper headlines is example of systemic bias against the left and pro tory, even though as mentioned it was covered any way. 

I'm gunna invest in tonfoil if this is the strength of arguement out there condemning an entire organisation based on how it presented a paper review. Fml. 

It's  not really the Tories who've been brainwashed or doing the brainwashing g, if left supporters are so far down the Trumpian rabbit hole that they've been conditioned that all msm is biased against them and thus cant be trusted. 

Jesus Christ. 

 

 

And thus

[SuperBacon]

1 minute ago, stumobir said:

Kuenssberg has as many Twitter followers as the Mail has readers, unfortunately what she says does matter.

The odd blip is excusable but “sources” defending Cummings, inviting a pile-on to someone who confronted Johnson, reporting a Labour activist punching someone based on zero evidence and leaping to his defence over crass comments made during a pandemic are absolutely inexcusable for the BBC’s political editor. It should be highlighted what a charlatan she (and Peston tbf) is at every opportunity.

Yeah, don't get me wrong I think they are both awful and just absolute parrots, I just can't be arsed getting annoyed at them anymore. Which is probably a bad thing as it should make me angry at what they're getting away with. 

[Dead Mike]

If the electorate doesn't care they're being lied to what can you do?

The lies, cronyism and inconsistencies have been highlighted, picked apart and questioned repeatedly at PMQs, on TV by Piers Morgan etc. As it stands many will tolerate being lied to as long as it upsets people they don't like. Until that changes nothing can.

 

 

[Carbomb]

1 minute ago, Dead Mike said:

If the electorate doesn't care they're being lied to what can you do?

The lies, cronyism and inconsistencies have been highlighted, picked apart and questioned repeatedly at PMQs, on TV by Piers Morgan etc. As it stands many will tolerate being lied to as long as it upsets people they don't like. Until that changes nothing can.

Yep. Both the US and the UK have the same problem, which is there is now a right-wing electorate who are so focused on getting the one thing they want that they will forgive virtually any wrongdoing in the people promising them this thing.

[patiirc]

5 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

Yeah, such conspiracy theorists. It's almost as if they were presenting it as the single latest example in a long-observed pattern of behaviour. 

Would that be a long pattern of behaviour pointed out by left leaning or left bias news sources and social media accounts, repeatedly telling those on left that the msm is biased against the left. 

I mean, if only there was a word for that type of thing...

 

 

[BomberPat]

The Director General has pledged to tackle "left-wing bias" and "woke comedy", while providing no real evidence that such a bias exists at the BBC to any greater extent than in the general public. 

When the right talk about bias at the BBC, they mean comedians laughing at Boris Johnson but not Jeremy Corbyn (missing the point, apparently, that the sitting government are always going to be more prone to satire than the opposition), ethnic minorities on panel shows, or Rule Britannia not being played at The Proms (even though it was). When the left talk about bias, they mean the well-publicised political leanings of the upper echelons of their news output, their publicly stated intent to remove "left-wing" content, the content of their news programming, and the make-up of their management class. It's not just "they didn't show this newspaper for as long". 

[Dead Mike]

There are no 'wrongdoings' in the traditional sense. What's a resignable offence now? Not provably lying. Not taking cash from foreign influences. Not gifting public cash to donors. 

As soon as the water even starts to get close to the Tories door and private polling suggests displeasure they can just revert to 'culture war' topics to bring back support. Flags, asylum seekers, protecting statues etc. A couple of headlines to rile everyone up & the majority are reminded why they don't like lefties again.

[Chris B]

As another example of the BBC going down some weird approaches, they've been repeatedly getting quotes from the LGB Alliance and legitimising them, despite so many LGBT+ groups saying they don't speak for them.

[Carbomb]

32 minutes ago, patiirc said:

Would that be a long pattern of behaviour pointed out by left leaning or left bias news sources and social media accounts, repeatedly telling those on left that the msm is biased against the left. 

I mean, if only there was a word for that type of thing...

Well, the right-wing sources aren't going to do it, are they? And it's a pattern of behaviour that's verifiable. 

And, again: even without the left/right divide, the simple fact is that the mainstream media are not doing their bit to hold the government to account.

[patiirc]

1 hour ago, Carbomb said:

Well, the right-wing sources aren't going to do it, are they? And it's a pattern of behaviour that's verifiable. 

And, again: even without the left/right divide, the simple fact is that the mainstream media are not doing their bit to hold the government to account.

So, starting from a position of bias, claiming bias of another thing because it doesn't do the 'thing' that the original thing wants is a-ok then? 

It's not. It is the exact same baws that Trumpists claimed with fake news, and so forth. 

However if the left media and supporters are keen to do the rights job for them by destroying the BBC, as its always the BBC, then carry on listening and regurgitating.

Dont moan when everything is partisanal,  and the population cant trust 'any' news source. Et voila, Cummings et al job is done. 

Mainstream Media are holding things to account, its just not being done in the way you want, because it doesnt agree with your news sources view of what is and what should be news according to them. 

Pretty piss poor state we find ourself in when opinions floated on the net count more than anything else, because some tweeter or some severly biased sources say it must be so. 

It's the very definition of being brainwashed and radicalised via social media.  In older times it'd be akin to getting all of your information ftom the village gossip and taking that as truth opposed to making a sound rational judgement about evidence presented and weigh up the pros and cons of the source. 

That we're even having this discussion shows how utterly ridiculous society has become if it is getting het up and bent out of shape by the way news paper headlines are shown on one programme that doesnt have the reach that those people moaning about it think it does. 

I suspect the tweet and retweets and embedding reached more than the number of people who a), actually watched the programme and b) thought, 'oh gosh! the BBC have not put the mirror front and centre, they must be biased towards the government for doing that' 

Rabid frenzies on social media are fast becoming my most unfavourite things on this planet. They present rumour or misinformation as truth and pump it out to the masses via measures that do not have stringent editorial or impartiality standards and 'everyone' who agrees with position xyz laps it up, regigitates it and furthers that position. 

Piss poor state of affairs and not one that is absolved by, doubling down on the same bollocks as if it makes it any more important. 

Boris Johnson had an affair, the Mirror brought this to a 'World Exclusive' and the BBC programme has debated it

If you want more from it than that and are 'that' incensed by it, then write to your MP, complain to the police, parliamentary standards do the things someone who really gave a shit about it would rather than getting bent out of shape on Social Media.

and dont vote Tory, obvs. 

 

 

 

[Keith Houchen]

It’s not the affair that’s the issue, it’s him giving over a hundred grand of public money to one of his mistresses that’s the issue. The fact that only one national newspaper even mentioned it, let alone had it front page, shows the depth of client journalism in place. Even the state broadcaster didn’t have a mention of something that was usually considered a political career ender until recently on its news website says so much. 
 

it isn’t about left v right, it’s about accountability and I don’t think the fourth estate are holding the government to account. You do though, so examples would be appreciated as I tend to not read them these days so would have missed this.