Lies

[Toodles McGinty]

in the way in which it rejects expertise, elevates this self-knowledge, and it has an enemies list of institutions, so-called experts, those who know data, who are all getting in the way of the true divine,

There's a lot of that about nowadays.

Hasn't Britain 'had enough of experts'?

[bensherman]

Or not enough

[local]

The pulitzer accolades are confirmation of bias

The Washington Post is of course owned by Jeff Bezos.
Who Trump comdemned for not paying enough taxes.

Rather than resort to your standard trite response, perhaps you should actually view the reports that earned Pulitzers. I don't give a damn if it's a liberal or conservative publication. Whether it be at home or abroad, anything that brings attention to a wrong that needs to be righted has my vote. Maybe the Post's Nixon/Watergate investigation and subsequent Pulitzer should have been criticised because of their bias.

Take a look at the 2020 winners in the journalism category.

https://www.pulitzer.org/news/announ...-prize-winners


Grasping at straws there, Local. A 144 year old publication that's been owned by Bezos for 7 years.... and condemned for not paying enough taxes by a man who hasn't paid taxes for how many years?

Must try harder!

Its not my fault you picked a bad example.

Pullitzer prizes are confirmation of bias not good balanced reporting.

The fact that Bezos owns is as relevant as if Trump owned it.

Both have abysmal records for self aggrandisement at others expense.

[said]

Amen to that. Big business lobbies and donates obscene amounts of money to fund politicians/campaigns. Corporate America has the American government in the palm of its hand.

On the same topic, are you aware of how many former lobbyists are employed in the White House Administration?

All Presidents have appointed former lobbyists, but Trump is way outpacing Obama. By 2019 President 'Drain the Swamp' Trump had appointed 281 ex-lobbyists, that's 4 times more than Obama had appointed in 6 years. Yes, Trump drained the swamp, dug it deeper, and filled it again X 4 with fresh swamp creatures. Some of them are cabinet members who are responsible for areas they previously lobbied for. For example: an Environmental Protection Agency head who was previously employed as a lobbyist for the coal industry. Slight conflict of interest methinks.

Link below. ProPublica and Columbia also produce some good investigative reports.

https://www.propublica.org/article/w...administration

Yes, again I agree with you. But in the USA it would require a change in the written constitution to make this practice illegal - Congress should be the only people concerned with running the country. In the UK, the Prime Minister is given the task of running the country in the name of The Queen. It is for the Prime Minister to ensure that Parliament manages the country honestly, without encouraging bribes and conflict of interest. Those Lobbyists in the UK are technically attempting to over ride the Royal Family - again lobbying should be made illegal. Lobbyists in the UK can earn in excess of a £million every year - which is a very good reason to ignore the ethics of the task.

[sandGroundZero]

…There is no such thing as utter objectivity in any media, social or otherwise. As soon as you decide what you are going to report , what about it you will report, what prominence you will give it, you are using judgement and that will be influenced by your views and experience.
In the main the broadcast and MSM are as subject to this as anyone else. But they have editors and producers, not just journalists and presenters, who can and do challenge what is being produced.
That doesn't guarantee authenticity but it helps. And such institutions are also liable to claims of defamation.
In social media, none of that balance exists. …

— post #14; bensherman

Academics Yochai Benkler, Robert Faris, and Hal Roberts describe what they've called an "asymmetric media ecosystem", academic jargon pointing to so-called MSM's sometimes imperfect adherence to professional journalistic standards and an ideal of impartiality versus purveyors of 'news' with no such restraints — US Fox News having had the greatest penetration, followed by Breitbart and others.

It is interesting to note (from the UK) that Benkler, et al cite the BBC's North America Service as an upholder of professional standards and impartiality.

In contrast the domestic BBC is the target of countless complaints for its attempts at impartiality. The BBC's concept of 'balanced ' news coverage is an interesting case in point. In its coverage of Climate science related issues, the BBC is accused of on the one hand not giving 'sceptics ' adequate voice (right) and on the other of failing to inquire or disclose when those climate sceptics are linked to think tanks or whose funding is otherwise obscure, but ultimately linked to fossil fuel donors (left).

[Toodles McGinty]

In the UK, the Prime Minister is given the task of running the country in the name of The Queen. It is for the Prime Minister to ensure that Parliament manages the country honestly, without encouraging bribes and conflict of interest. Those Lobbyists in the UK are technically attempting to over ride the Royal Family - again lobbying should be made illegal.

Hardly the biggest problem when the Prime Minister himself lies to the Queen.

Or when the government hands out contracts to their pals with alacrity.

Lobbyists are quite low on the list when it comes to problems with this government's cronyism and venality.

[local]

Yet its clear the contracts are thoroughly investigated.

[silver fox]

Yet its clear the contracts are thoroughly investigated.

Only after the damage is done.

[Toodles McGinty]

Yet its clear the contracts are thoroughly investigated.

Yes, eventually by a court who found Hancock acted unlawfully.

And Johnson, who has actually built career on lies, still lied to the Queen to prorogue Parliament.

[The PNP]

Yes, eventually by a court who found Hancock acted unlawfully.

And Johnson, who has actually built career on lies, still lied to the Queen to prorogue Parliament.

Who leads a party, where the tail doesn't know where the head is going....E.g., that issues a directive from Westminster, to create Covid-safe cycle routes. Whilst party 'troops' on the ground issue multiple press-releases opposing that same directive!

[local]

Yes, eventually by a court who found Hancock acted unlawfully.

And Johnson, who has actually built career on lies, still lied to the Queen to prorogue Parliament.

I have little doubt he and others cut corners to secure PPE

Whether that translates to dishonesty we shall see.

As to the prorogation of Parliament,
The court stopped short of declaring that the advice given by Johnson to the Queen was improper. It was a question. they said, they did not need to address since they had already found the effect of the prorogation was itself unlawful.

Ultimately it only served to expose Gina Millar as a liar and delay at great expense to us all what the country voted for, a pyrrhic victory indeed.

Johnson " fighting like hell" to use the political vernacular, to support the democratic decision of the country was one of the finest and most heroic acts by a Prime Minister in recent history.

Did he cross the line, yep.

[silver fox]

Johnson " fighting like hell" to use the political vernacular, to support the democratic decision of the country was one of the finest and most heroic acts by a Prime Minister in recent history.

Did he cross the line, yep.

You really have got it bad, there are many words that could be used to describe Johnson’s actions, finest and heroic are not among them.

Sneaky, devious, divisive, dishonest, self serving, liar, all fit much better.

Anyone would think the only election/referendum in the entire world was Brexit and everything is subservient to that, no matter the cost, the difficulties, the unnecessary obstacles, the fact that the entire programme is/was founded on lies and distortions, but that is now over and we all have to live with it.

[local]

You really have got it bad, there are many words that could be used to describe Johnson’s actions, finest and heroic are not among them.

Sneaky, devious, divisive, dishonest, self serving, liar, all fit much better.

Anyone would think the only election/referendum in the entire world was Brexit and everything is subservient to that, no matter the cost, the difficulties, the unnecessary obstacles, the fact that the entire programme is/was founded on lies and distortions, but that is now over and we all have to live with it.

Democracy is our countries greatest asset and you having the right to vote for Keir Starmer and get him should you be in the majority is what we all should support.

I agree with you the lies from project fear remainers were lamentable but common sense won out in the end.

As we have seen the world has carried on turning and The shelves are full.

[The PNP]

As we have seen the world has carried on turning and The shelves are full.

And the only way I could now retire in the South of the EU, would be as an 'illegal'!

[local]

And the only way I could now retire in the South of the EU, would be as an 'illegal'!

That wouldn't be true would it ?