That is what we are here to discuss. Particularly in the Politics forum.
So..... just discuss it....and let's see how you get on.
It is that simple.

The Right in the USA believe that poor people who have treatable terminal medical conditions should simply curl up and die. Just like they always did in the past.
That is not just intellectually inferior. It is absolutely shameful.
But like I say......we can chat about that if you wish.

Ferarris mates at the Sun have been reported to the IPCC by Buck House for today's piece of trashy journalism regarding the Brexit Queen story.

I hope Shelagh will discuss Mike Ashley during the current topic (Zero Hours Contracts).
He is currently under fire from a Parliamentary Committee. This seems puzzling. I would have thought that this was a photograph of a wonderful caring human being.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/...ps-mike-ashley

In what way? Can you explain what you mean? I don't think the Guardian has the same notoriety as the Mail for OTT headlines/reporting, lacking in nuance.


Er... no it doesn't.

Of course, Ferrari was all over this story like a rash this morning.
He regales us practically every day with the fact that he used to be a tabloid newspaper man, as if this is something to be proud of.
In the early hours of the weekend, I heard Cristo call himself a journalist.
I laughed so hard I nearly made my own breakfast.
I like that Darren bloke, though, and think he shows promise.

To me the Guardian does have the same notoriety. The Daily Mail is a crutch for those with right-wing views, the same as the Guardian is for those on the left. Ian Collins does a show to pander to the right and JOB does a show to pander to the left. Just because something/someone espouses left wing views does not make them correct or morally superior.

The Guardian was pro New Labour. In other words 'Tory Lite'.
Their new editorial stance does Corbyn (and co.) no favours.
They do, however, carefully vet and check their sources before publishing.
JOB is a (rather confused) Liberal.

Is that not a wee bit simplistic? For example was the JOB show today pandering to the left or was it highlighting a serious situation which looks like it can only get worse? IMO too many people get caught up in this left v right nonsense instead of working out what is right and what is wrong.
This is why politicians from all sides get away with breathtaking incompetence and stupidity.

It is simplistic, but for the most part it holds true. How many Conservative policies have been given the thumbs up by the Guardian or JOB. The same as how many Labour proposals get positive responses from The Mail or Ian Collins?

They might criticise "their side" occasionally, but how how often would they praise the "other side"? It's the nature of the business they are in unfortunately.

Lucky they didn't get a vital fact about the Millie Dowler phone hacking wrong 37 times then isn't it ?

I take your point, Supersoul, but I think Charlie's given the answer I would have. I don't feel the Guardian (or other broadsheets) has the same reputation as the Mail or the tabloids, but instead tend to be more nuanced and show detail in their reporting. I am not sure how the 'morally superior' clause crept in, as I don't see how it relates to the topic in hand, to be fair.

LBC has gone down the route of tabloid sensationalism, I feel, although ID and SF are making some headway in the opposite direction. As Danny Baker says, the mantra of the modern media seems to be 'If you're not scared, we're not doing our job properly'... and LBC all too often seem to follow that mantra. Facts and nuance go out of the window in favour of attracting outraged callers and fear-mongering.

Because the media follow a certain line does not mean that the public should follow. What I am trying to say is that as long as the public suck up and spew out the rubbish the media feeds them then nothing much will change.
Why on earth should anyone take what JOB or Ferrari or Collins says as the absolute bottom line of truth, everyone has the chance to check what they are saying but so many are too lazy to do that and are happy to regurgitate whatever they are fed.
Everyone should be a lot more discerning and challenge what they are being told more often.

Agreed. The Mail is more "in your face" for want of a better expression.

As for LBC, it will be interesting to see what effect the arrival of the noisy neighbours on DAB will do. Will they lighten up or will they go more rabid. Incidentally, Nick Ferrari was on a programme on Channel 5 last night. They didn't describe him as a radio presenter, but as a shock jock. That seemed a bit cheap to me. Then again it was Channel 5 I suppose.

The Guardian apologised for stating that the News of the World had deleted the phone calls which (at the time) had allegedly been hacked by said newspaper. It turned out, as a result of the investigation, that voice mail messages, once hacked, would be deleted automatically.
I'm not sure where you get the '37 times' from.
Suffice it to say that The Guardian is still publishing, while NotW was wound up in 2011.

'Intellectually' is one thing. Morally is another. Trump vs. Sanders?

People should be more discerning (myself included), but most people aren't unfortunately. Also, almost every source of media has an angle.

In addition:
"Beyond that, there is significantly more doubt about the facts of the deletions than was acknowledged in the storm of reporting about which the Dowler family's lawyer complained. The final account of police inquiries into the subject was written by a Scotland Yard detective, DCI John MacDonald, and is available in abridged form under his name on the Leveson inquiry website. The report said: "It is not possible to state with any certainty whether Milly's voicemails were or were not deleted."
With apologies for veering off-topic. I just wanted to clear up some misconceptions in the debate about tabloid vs. broadsheet reporting, and how this relates to the output of LBC Radio.

It's not easy I admit to get to the facts because spin and misinformation makes some folk very rich. Suppose we all need to upgrade our BS detector and tell ourselves that we won't be mugged off quite as easily as we have been.
Gawd sorry for going on so much but it grinds my gears when everything has to be left or right wing. Too many labels.

Don't worry about that. Anyway I'm off to watch Russia Today for the proper news.

I agree with what James Whale used to say about newspapers when he was on LBC. All of them are biased, and present information in ways that aims to influence the reader. Som of what they publish is inaccurate or exaggerated. The reader should take this into consideration when reading stories from any newspaper and shouldn't depend entirely on sources from one perspective.

Ian Collins has also pointed out on several occasions that newspapers have both left-wing and right-wing columnists despite their editorial positions.

It's important to have a free Press, but I reckon newspapers should have to publish the business interests of their owners every week. Perhaps that wouldn't go amiss with commercial radio 'news' stations like LBC either, but at least they are restricted to some extent by law.

Just listening to Iain Dale interviewing Paul Gambaccini regarding Sir George Martin.
I was privileged to work with Sir George and travel with him and his wife Judy.
A sad day, although he certainly had a remarkable life. Happy memories, and his legacy will undoubtedly live on.

Well it can't be as bad as the interview that Shelagh Fogarty did with a guy that used to "work" with Sir George. I believe he was a technician in the studio. They wee 'singing' opening lines from songs, then wondering whether Sir George produced some other songs (other than The Beatles). At one point Shelagh looked one up while the guy was talking, and came back with "yes he did", and sang the first line of the song! Then the guy mentioned that he produced Slade at one time - Shelagh sings "Merry Christmas, Everybody" to which he replied that track was recorded in America !

I would hope it is more a case of scrutinising those in power. It doesn't really matter what policies Labour have right now (in fact, I don't think even they know!). Why should any media channel dedicate an time/space to what the opposition are saying, when the government is actually doing things worth discussing?

For the record, JOB and The Guardian are not singing Corbyn's praises. Both seem very disappointed that Labour elected such an ineffective leader and seem to imply there isn't any real opposition at the moment.

Were you in the music business Charlie?
BTW Just thought of something. Is tin pan alley in London or AMERICA?