Given the audience for the BBC Election debate was especially selected in favour of a 'supposedly' balanced representation, as an outcome the response in total was nevertheless rather biased.
0700 and I am already sick of hearing Aziz literally spitting out the words FAT, BURGER and PIZZA every time she reads out the headline (about every three minutes) about the Brie and bacon sandwich having more fat than a McDonalds.
Is she trying to tell us she personally disapproves of these foodstuffs? If so I'm surprised, because from the size of her these days she's no stranger to a hefty lunch herself.
Lisa's delivery of the news is absolutely dire and getting more OTT and cartoonish by the week. This morning she closed an interview with a chummy "great to talk to you, talk again next week". Totally inappropriate and unprofessional. Just read the news dear.
LBC try to position themselves as a serious news station, and then they have Kelly (Frank) Maloney on the breakfast show to give his in dept analysis of last nights debate. He couldnt even name Nicola Sturgeon, refering to her as the Scottish lady.
Given the audience for the BBC Election debate was especially selected in favour of a 'supposedly' balanced representation, as an outcome the response in total was nevertheless rather biased.
The point is the audience was balanced and not biased. Normally, the media is dominated by right wing opinion so when faced with a balanced group, it is by definition less right wing than what one is used to but that doesn't make it biased, just more reflective of the Great British public.
LBC try to position themselves as a serious news station, and then they have Kelly (Frank) Maloney on the breakfast show to give his in dept analysis of last nights debate. He couldnt even name Nicola Sturgeon, refering to her as the Scottish lady.
Giving Katie Hopkins a show demonstrates that LBC no longer even pretend to be a serious news show. Was Frank Maloney there as a UKIP spokesman?
The point is the audience was balanced and not biased. Normally, the media is dominated by right wing opinion so when faced with a balanced group, it is by definition less right wing than what one is used to but that doesn't make it biased, just more reflective of the Great British public.
You miss my point entirely. It is not unknown when it comes to audience selection that it can be rigged. This point is being discussed on-air.
You miss my point entirely. It is not unknown when it comes to audience selection that it can be rigged. This point is being discussed on-air.
ICM, who selected the audience, are a very reputable and respected opinion survey company and I can't imagine they would risk their reputation to rig the audience. Nick Ferrari giving credence to this allegation is just more part of his on-going anti-BBC rhetoric than any evidence that the audience wasn't balanced.
Given the audience for the BBC Election debate was especially selected in favour of a 'supposedly' balanced representation, as an outcome the response in total was nevertheless rather biased.
No. The audience was a balance if all the parties and people who hadn't made up their mind.
The reason why they were mostly left wing was because was 4/5 of the parties were.
ICM, who selected the audience, are a very reputable and respected opinion survey company and I can't imagine they would risk their reputation to rig the audience. Nick Ferrari giving credence to this allegation is just more part of his on-going anti-BBC rhetoric than any evidence that the audience wasn't balanced.
Nick is remaining pretty neutral as he can't give an opinion without making allegations which would have him in deep water. He's letting callers make their own appraisals. He also said the Sunday papers would be taking up this story. I remain sceptical.
Nick is remaining pretty neutral as he can't give an opinion without making allegations which would have him in deep water. He's letting callers make their own appraisals. He also said the Sunday papers would be taking up this story. I remain sceptical.
I remain sceptical that the Sunday papers will be taking up this story because it has no foundation other than trying to create a stick to beat the BBC with. However, as ICM and not the BBC, selected the audience, it's not even a very effective stick.
LBC try to position themselves as a serious news station, and then they have Kelly (Frank) Maloney on the breakfast show to give his in dept analysis of last nights debate. He couldnt even name Nicola Sturgeon, refering to her as the Scottish lady.
I thought that was quite surreal, although I did enjoy 'the Scottish lady' bit.
Nick is remaining pretty neutral as he can't give an opinion without making allegations which would have him in deep water. He's letting callers make their own appraisals. He also said the Sunday papers would be taking up this story. I remain sceptical.
I think he is being rather neutral about it too.
I am enjoying his impression of a cat on a hot tin roof whenever someone rings in about Lord Janner.
I remain sceptical that the Sunday papers will be taking up this story because it has no foundation other than trying to create a stick to beat the BBC with. However, as ICM and not the BBC, selected the audience, it's not even a very effective stick.
People can and do lie about their political persuasion to be part of an audience however reputable the ICM happens to be. I know you're so left-wing you'll find the notion impossible. However, some folk remain open-minded and NONE of the current politicos impress me or my friends very much. As for the one-upmanship that exists in these debates it is pitiful to behold. It seems more about politicians paying homage to the media circus, than appealing to voters.
People can and do lie about their political persuasion to be part of an audience however reputable the ICM happens to be.
I know you're so left-wing you find the notion totally impossible. However, some remain open-minded and NONE of the current politicos impress me or my friends very much. As for the one-upmanship that exists in these debates it is pitiful to behold. It seems more about politicians paying homage to the media circus, than appealing to voters.
If people were to lie on the ICM audience selection questionnaire, how is that evidence of BBC bias that Nick Ferrari thinks the Sunday papers are going to run with?
Heard less than 5 minutes of Ian Collins last night at about 11-05pm and quite by accident, where he pronounced Plaid Cymru as 'Played Kimree'. Such ignorance from someone who is supposedly news worldly and a veteran presenter.
If people were to lie on the ICM audience selection questionnaire, how is that evidence of BBC bias that Nick Ferrari thinks the Sunday papers are going to run with?
I simply reported Nick's comments, perhaps a story won't run this Sunday after all which he said. Presumably we'll have to wait and see.
LBC try to position themselves as a serious news station, and then they have Kelly (Frank) Maloney on the breakfast show to give his in dept analysis of last nights debate. He couldnt even name Nicola Sturgeon, refering to her as the Scottish lady.
I found it odd that he was a contributor on the flagship show, I still think I imagined that, weird 😧
This morning she closed an interview with a chummy "great to talk to you, talk again next week". Totally inappropriate and unprofessional. Just read the news dear.
Ken and David often say they will have someone on the programme again next week. NF and JO'B (although probably as a polite response) say, "look forward to speaking to you again soon".
Ian Collins is a disaster on that slot.
He failed at Talk sport.
He tried some local ITV tv. Failed there.
He is just not up to it.
He thinks he is amazing when really he shld be at best on hospital radio dagenham.
awful!!
What is so awful about him?
When you say he failed, how do you quantify that?
He never failed at TalkSport, he was just the victim of the station's move to 24 hour a day sport, something that affected all the current affairs presenters (Mike Graham excepted, who switched to become a sports broadcaster when he knew nothing about sport)) at the time
There is no secret: the pollsters Ipsos Mori selected the audience. All potential audience members have to complete a questionnaire covering a range of political issues and the audience is selected based on their responses and to be representative of the wider public.
Cor! There a bunch of lefties. iinit? Evrywunn noes dat Hole awdience were a loAD OF lefties chosen by the commy BBC. I shoud noe. I suport UKIP......Nigel Farrage tells de troof. Like 80% of our laws made by EU.
On the contrary, The Colonel was a huge popular success and much loved presenter on TalkSport.
Certainly was. 'Creatures of the Night was fabulous radio at times. Ian, Miff and Mike were a perfect combination; the latter two kept Ian's ego in check, but after they left Pete was just a 'yes man'.
Comments
Is she trying to tell us she personally disapproves of these foodstuffs? If so I'm surprised, because from the size of her these days she's no stranger to a hefty lunch herself.
Lisa's delivery of the news is absolutely dire and getting more OTT and cartoonish by the week. This morning she closed an interview with a chummy "great to talk to you, talk again next week". Totally inappropriate and unprofessional. Just read the news dear.
The point is the audience was balanced and not biased. Normally, the media is dominated by right wing opinion so when faced with a balanced group, it is by definition less right wing than what one is used to but that doesn't make it biased, just more reflective of the Great British public.
Giving Katie Hopkins a show demonstrates that LBC no longer even pretend to be a serious news show. Was Frank Maloney there as a UKIP spokesman?
You miss my point entirely. It is not unknown when it comes to audience selection that it can be rigged. This point is being discussed on-air.
ICM, who selected the audience, are a very reputable and respected opinion survey company and I can't imagine they would risk their reputation to rig the audience. Nick Ferrari giving credence to this allegation is just more part of his on-going anti-BBC rhetoric than any evidence that the audience wasn't balanced.
The reason why they were mostly left wing was because was 4/5 of the parties were.
Nick is remaining pretty neutral as he can't give an opinion without making allegations which would have him in deep water. He's letting callers make their own appraisals. He also said the Sunday papers would be taking up this story. I remain sceptical.
I remain sceptical that the Sunday papers will be taking up this story because it has no foundation other than trying to create a stick to beat the BBC with. However, as ICM and not the BBC, selected the audience, it's not even a very effective stick.
I thought that was quite surreal, although I did enjoy 'the Scottish lady' bit.
I think he is being rather neutral about it too.
I am enjoying his impression of a cat on a hot tin roof whenever someone rings in about Lord Janner.
I can't make my mind up whether she is trying to do a Lily Allen impression.
People can and do lie about their political persuasion to be part of an audience however reputable the ICM happens to be. I know you're so left-wing you'll find the notion impossible. However, some folk remain open-minded and NONE of the current politicos impress me or my friends very much. As for the one-upmanship that exists in these debates it is pitiful to behold. It seems more about politicians paying homage to the media circus, than appealing to voters.
If people were to lie on the ICM audience selection questionnaire, how is that evidence of BBC bias that Nick Ferrari thinks the Sunday papers are going to run with?
I simply reported Nick's comments, perhaps a story won't run this Sunday after all which he said. Presumably we'll have to wait and see.
Morning all.
He failed at Talk sport.
He tried some local ITV tv. Failed there.
He is just not up to it.
He thinks he is amazing when really he shld be at best on hospital radio dagenham.
awful!!
Ken and David often say they will have someone on the programme again next week. NF and JO'B (although probably as a polite response) say, "look forward to speaking to you again soon".
What is so awful about him?
When you say he failed, how do you quantify that?
He never failed at TalkSport, he was just the victim of the station's move to 24 hour a day sport, something that affected all the current affairs presenters (Mike Graham excepted, who switched to become a sports broadcaster when he knew nothing about sport)) at the time
On the contrary, The Colonel was a huge popular success and much loved presenter on TalkSport.
Certainly was. 'Creatures of the Night was fabulous radio at times. Ian, Miff and Mike were a perfect combination; the latter two kept Ian's ego in check, but after they left Pete was just a 'yes man'.