|
||||||||
The Wright Stuff Discussion Thread (Part 4) |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#2276 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,064
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2277 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,829
|
Quote:
So what?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2278 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2,294
|
I'm assuming Guido Fawkes is implying that only a fully paid up member of the Liberal Multicultural Intellectual Elites Conspiracy would accuse Farage of racism and us proles wouldn't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2279 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 37,020
|
The point about the journo in the ITV audience last night is this Q&A was supposed to be about members of the public asking Farage and Cameron questions in order to solicit their answers. It was not for vested interests in the form of planted professional journalists to make pre-prepared statements at either of them in order to engineer more headlines for their stance.
I'm shocked that everyone can't see how wrong it was. Audiences for these shows are supposed to be vetted to screen out exactly this sort of thing. When you add that to the bias shown by Etchingham against Farage in the way that half of the show was conducted, you can only be left with the conclusion that the event was somewhat stage-managed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2280 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Ooh look what topic is coming up next.
I bet Yasmin can't wait. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2281 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2,294
|
One of the problems is it's difficult to define what exactly is a journalist these days. So it looks like she's a blogger who, from what I can see, has contributed five articles to Huffington Post in two years, so not exactly a full time job as a journalist there. The other thing to point out, is that the articles were all on the tech industry and not on (and I'm going to use an apparently offensive word here) Diversity.
I don't even know what a Diversity Advocate is, but who's to say that that bars you from being An Ordinary Member of the Public? From what I can tell, this woman is one of those modern day busybodies who are all over the internet giving their opinions on this that and the other, I don't think she's a journalist per se. It's the sort of entrepreneurial spirit that put the Great in Great Britain - to use the kind of cretinous language Farage would understand. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2282 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,829
|
Quote:
The point about the journo in the ITV audience last night is this Q&A was supposed to be about members of the public asking Farage and Cameron questions in order to solicit their answers. It was not for vested interests in the form of planted professional journalists to make pre-prepared statements at either of them in order to engineer more headlines for their stance.
I'm shocked that everyone can't see how wrong it was. Audiences for these shows are supposed to be vetted to screen out exactly this sort of thing. When you add that to the bias shown by Etchingham against Farage in the way that half of the show was conducted, you can only be left with the conclusion that the event was somewhat stage-managed. As long as the question gets asked I don't care who does the asking. As for bias in the debate, just like determining who gave the better account of himself, I think that's very much in the eye of the beholder. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2283 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 37,020
|
Vested interests with pre-prepared speeches engineering themselves some column inches is not what the event was about. She doesn't seem to lack for outlets for her stance as far as I can tell. Pretty quiet when Cameron came on wasn't she? ITV are to blame for this - Pathetically managed.
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/imriel-morgan-2113a427 |
|
|
|
|
|
#2284 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,829
|
Agree with Yasmin. Men need to fight sexism with women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2285 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 37,020
|
Quote:
It really doesn't bother me.
As long as the question gets asked I don't card who does the asking. Quote:
As for bias in the debate, just like determining who gave the better account of himself, I think that's very much in the eye of the beholder.
Farage was constantly interrupted by the audience and Etchingham not only let this happen (a dereliction of her role as moderator) but also interrupted himself and far more than she did subsequently to the Primewaffler, Cameron.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2286 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2,294
|
Quote:
Vested interests with pre-prepared speeches engineering themselves some column inches is not what the event was about. She doesn't seem to lack for outlets for her stance as far as I can tell. Pretty quiet when Cameron came on wasn't she? ITV are to blame for this - Pathetically managed.
As I said, modern day internet busybody, adept at blowing her own trumpet, but obviously full of an energetic enterprising spirit which would make her an ideal Conservative Party candidate at the next election. I'm sure Central Office have been on the blower to her this morning. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2287 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Credit to Yasmin for her views on the Glastonbury thing.
Not that Glastonbury can't do what they want, but it's just stupid. To the male guest, no it won't be happy hippy thing. From what is outlined in the women's only space it's not about having fun. It's more like school. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2288 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Quote:
Question? I saw someone making a statement AT Farage and then interrupting him constantly when he tried to speak. Is that what you think helps illuminate the subject?
Farage was constantly interrupted by the audience and Etchingham not only let this happen (a dereliction of her role as moderator) but also interrupted himself and far more than she did subsequently to the Primewaffler, Cameron. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2289 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Quote:
It really doesn't bother me.
As long as the question gets asked I don't care who does the asking. As for bias in the debate, just like determining who gave the better account of himself, I think that's very much in the eye of the beholder. It would be a very convenient method of shaping what they want you to think as being the important topics. Ones which are chosen for the public rather than by the public. The problem wouldn't be that this is the format, because TV shows do this right now anyway, no the problem would be that it would be presented as being about questions asked by the public when in truth it wouldn't be at all. It would be the deceptive nature of it which would be the problem. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2290 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Les Pays-Bas
Posts: 1,468
|
Quote:
The point about the journo in the ITV audience last night is this Q&A was supposed to be about members of the public asking Farage and Cameron questions in order to solicit their answers. It was not for vested interests in the form of planted professional journalists to make pre-prepared statements at either of them in order to engineer more headlines for their stance.
I'm shocked that everyone can't see how wrong it was. Audiences for these shows are supposed to be vetted to screen out exactly this sort of thing. When you add that to the bias shown by Etchingham against Farage in the way that half of the show was conducted, you can only be left with the conclusion that the event was somewhat stage-managed. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2291 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2,294
|
She's not a professional journalist but, yes, you're right on everything else!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2292 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,752
|
Quote:
Aren't professional journalists also members of the public? Anyway apart from the known faces there are often people with specialist knowledge within audiences who will more or less ask the same questions and also have 'vested interests' or 'opinions'. Sometimes its good to have people who are just as media-savvy and who are able to challenge a politician head-on without crumpling under the glare of lights and camera.
You can't have vested interests from journalists asking the questions without letting the public know, because they are not just working for their own self interests, they would be working on behalf of the vested interest of the media publishers they work for. Who are obviously powerful organisations in their own right. Have people forgotten 'Cash for Questions' and why it was a dangerous affront to democracy? |
|
|
|
|
|
#2293 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 37,020
|
Quote:
Obviously she didn't consider Cameron to have made racist comments? What do you expect her to do? Make something up?
Quote:
As I said, modern day internet busybody, adept at blowing her own trumpet, but obviously full of an energetic enterprising spirit which would make her an ideal Conservative Party candidate at the next election. I'm sure Central Office have been on the blower to her this morning.
She is more than happy to list her journalistic credits:Quote:
I created and established a viable growth funnel for the app through original content, brand development, and content marketing. I have created and marketed 3 infographics, 1 eBook, and over 40 published articles on our blog and other external publications including the Huffington Post. I remained fully immersed in the Tech and Startup community in London; and volunteered to be an editor and contributor to the Tech London Publication on Medium.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2294 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 37,020
|
Quote:
If you aren't bothered then this would lend itself to eventually creating an environment where the questions which are asked are limited to a narrow selective framework provided by the organisers, and questions the public want answering won't even be asked.
It would be a very convenient method of shaping what they want you to think as being the important topics. Ones which are chosen for the public rather than by the public. The problem wouldn't be that this is the format, because TV shows do this right now anyway, no the problem would be that it would be presented as being about questions asked by the public when in truth it wouldn't be at all. It would be the deceptive nature of it which would be the problem. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2295 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 37,020
|
Quote:
Aren't professional journalists also members of the public?
Do you even need to ask? In this venue, positioning itself as a forum for questions from the public, no she isn't. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2296 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,829
|
Quote:
If you aren't bothered then this would lend itself to eventually creating an environment where the questions which are asked are limited to a narrow selective framework provided by the organisers, and questions the public want answering won't even be asked.
It would be a very convenient method of shaping what they want you to think as being the important topics. Ones which are chosen for the public rather than by the public. The problem wouldn't be that this is the format, because TV shows do this right now anyway, no the problem would be that it would be presented as being about questions asked by the public when in truth it wouldn't be at all. It would be the deceptive nature of it which would be the problem. The moderator has less control when they go to the audience for comment, but they can soon move the mic away if they don't like the way the comment is heading. As for the deception of telling the viewers members of the public are posing questions when it is in fact journalists, no, I really can't get too enraged about that. I understand the points you're making, I understand what bothers you about it. During the course of a political campaign I think that would be once of the less bothersome lies we'd be told. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2297 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 37,020
|
Quote:
The reason I aren't bothered by it is precisely because we all already know that questions aren't taken at random. They are preselected with the aim of covering a range of topics.
Quote:
The moderator has less control when they go to the audience for comment, but they can soon move the mic away if they don't like the way the comment is heading.
Small studio so when you have someone ranting on as she was doing it's a little difficult to not hear them.Quote:
As for the deception of telling the viewers members of the public are posing questions when it is in fact journalists, no, I really can't get too enraged about that. So, one more lie is unimportant?
I understand the points you're making, I understand what bothers you about it. During the course of a political campaign I think that would be once of the less bothersome lies we'd be told. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2298 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 4,486
|
Quote:
Do you even need to ask? In this venue, positioning itself as a forum for questions from the public, no she isn't.
She isn't a journalist |
|
|
|
|
|
#2299 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 37,020
|
Quote:
She isn't a journalist
Quote:
I have created and marketed 3 infographics, 1 eBook, and over 40 published articles on our blog and other external publications including the Huffington Post.
Fulfils my criteria for "journalist" quite adequately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2300 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 2,294
|
Quote:
Fulfils my criteria for "journalist" quite adequately.
Anyway, by reasonable objective standards, this woman is not a professional journalist. She claims to have had "over 40 published articles on our blog and other external publications including the Huffington Post", this is on LinkedIn - that's CV speak for having 35 articles published on her organization's blog and five articles published on Huffington Post - if she'd had anything published on anything bigger than her local parish council newsletter you can be sure she'd have mentioned it! Publishing 2.5 articles a year for a professional media outlet will not exactly keep the wolf from the door for yer average professional journalist, and I could set up a blog tomorrow and publish 35 articles on it, it wouldn't make me a journalist. What you could say is that she is someone who has dabbled in journalism and has had some articles published, articles covering a very specific, and rather boring, area of interest and which appear to me, and to ITV researchers I assume, to have no political content whatsoever - so why exactly should she be barred from appearing on a political debate show? Now, she might have ambitions to be a journalist, I don't know, but what she appears to be is a PR person (no wonder she let Cameron off the hook, you might think). Just looking at her CV I could definitely see her going into politics - I imagine the choice of party would be pretty arbitrary. Secondly, this is the one that really gets me, what 'vested interests' is she supposed to be representing? Or could it be that, in this case, talk of vested interests is a load of the usual conspiratorial cobblers dreamed up by some blogger (yes) at Guido Fawkes and lapped up by people who want to believe it? Lastly, I'm assuming that no-one believes an 'unbiased' audience drawn from Members of the General Public is actually possible? |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:19.





