quintana76 wrote: » Why shouldn't I give a damn. PC concerns about other people being offended is very selective. Outside certain favoured groups causing offence is seen as a virtue.Sean reflects this with his tendency to be intolerant of difference to his opinions. FACT!! You are correct, he is a leading light of the PC brigade.
DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: » If only there was a word to describe such a person.
quintana76 wrote: » Yes there is: the word is 'libtard'. By far the most intolerant of species.
kunst nugget wrote: » Libtard is a handy word alright. I know I don't need to bother with someone's opinion when they use it.
ballsymchugh wrote: » when someone uses libtard, it's the same effect as using the phrase 'white privileged male' the argument is suddenly lost.
quintana76 wrote: » I used the term deliberately. I agree it is a giveaway term. Is there an accurate equivalent term from the left that is not bankrupt from overuse..
quintana76 wrote: » Yet, regrettably, he seems to have held on to, intact, views that would have gone down well, in his youth, down the students union.
foxtrot101 wrote: » Regrettably for who? You?
Snake Plisken wrote: » Good interview with the woman engaged to Bronson, fair play to Sean for asking about why she wrote to Ian Brady when she was younger. Why wasn't Henry left on the Drivetime show? Did they bring him back to finally kill Sean's show? Or did Chris and Sarah get fed up of him and realise there is no talent there?
quintana76 wrote: » Regrettably for him. It means he hasn't evolved in all that time. Not a good sign. Otherwise, it could just be a coincidence, but his views match the trendiest 'right on' views common in the media. Could it be that he lives in a media bubble where everyone has to have the same 'approved ' opinions. To not hold these views could have negative career, social consequences. It is strange how everyone thinks the same way (except Hook).
Gebgbegb wrote: » Definitely think Hook is more open to 'considering' listener opinions than moncrieff. If Sean doesn't like someone's text comment ( even if they are a bit ranty) he usually defaults to sarcy comments and nit picks at some literal interpretation and moves on. Hook however will go the general substance of the comment and provide a rationale for his position.
quintana76 wrote: » Regrettably for him. It means he hasn't evolved in all that time. Not a good sign. Otherwise, it could just be a coincidence, but his views match the trendiest 'right on' views common in the media. Could it be that he lives in a media bubble where everyone has to have the same 'approved ' opinions. To not hold these views could have negative career, social consequences. It is strange how everyone thinks the same way tolerance.
foxtrot101 wrote: » Sean never had a go at texts simply because he disagreed with them
A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: » I've actually come to enjoy the Moncrieff show, but.... wtf! Sean Moncrieff has a sarky go at every almost every text that disagrees with him, or even if it is merely critical of one of his guests' ideas. One of the only things that I dislike the show is his incapacity to let a criticism slide. Pat Kenny reads out texts that either favour or disapprove of content, and generally only responds to a comment if it raises a question of balance. Another thing about Moncrieff, on a related matter, is that he often fails to detect irony or humour in texts. He'll sometimes read a text that was obviously intended jocularly, then retract his chin into his sternum, and attempt to disparage the comment with sarcasm. Like I said, I happen to like Moncrieff's show, and he does a good job. But how his inability to take disapproving comments on the chin could have escaped anybody, is beyond me.
Say Your Number wrote: » Sean does overdo the sarcasm, but generally he does a good job at pointing out the flaws in texters arguments.
foxtrot101 wrote: » Sean never had a go at texts simply because he disagreed with them He only ever reacted to the boneheadedly offensive texts or the downright stupid ones. The authors of which are the truly unevolved. You accuse Sean of being intolerant, yet here you are accusing him and the entire media(except Hook) of being unevolved and immature because they have the temerity to not reflect your own mature and evolved world view back at you. Again, the hypocrisy of this seems to be lost on you.
quintana76 wrote: » Boneheadedly offensive and downright stupid in your opinion.
quintana76 wrote: » Is there not an original thinker amongst them who will diverge from the concensus that Sean so explicitly represents
My name is URL wrote: » lol, because George Hook is such an original thinker and true to his own ideals /s I remember a few years ago when Hook was at his height of ranting about immigrants etc, they had a FG TD on the show arguing that Ireland 'needed to do more'. Hook, of course; was all bluster and hot air as is his wont. Anyway, sometime after the interview was done, a texter asked Hook who he'd be voting for in the election and he straight up said that he'd always vote FG regardless of their policies or whether or not they were in line with his own views, because that's how his mammy always voted. Such a stand up guy is Georgie. A real man of integrity. lmao
Harry Angstrom wrote: » I think most Irish people would find themselves somewhere in the middle ground between the ridiculous right-wing nonsense of Hook and the painful political correctness of Moncrieff, but that rarely seems to be represented anymore because it doesn't garner ratings so much.
A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: » Have you asked yourself why not? Maybe the opinions you refer to aren't given much of a voice on the radio, because Ireland is changing, and there is very limited appetite for the opinions you think are mainstream. Surely you don't believe that station managers are witholding some ratings bonanza and impeding (presumably) big profits because of some grand 'PC' agenda?
Harry Angstrom wrote: » Do you think that most of the population can be split between raging right-wingers such as Hook and PC left-wingers such as Moncrieff? Somehow I think not. There's a great swathe of in-betweens who go about their daily business without being too concerned about which "wing" they're on. Of course, hanging around certain echo-chamber social media outlets might lead one to believe that their views are pervasive throughout Irish society but this isn't really borne out by opinion polls, is it?
foxtrot101 wrote: » Which opinion polls? I would maintain Ireland is a fairly socially liberal place but economically the majority would be conservative or center right. This is borne out by our election & referendum results and the media we consume.
Harry Angstrom wrote: » Put it this way: For all the bluster of PBP etc. they still occupy a relatively tiny amount of support according to opinion polls, yet if you look at Twitter you'd think they're the ruling party of this country. Most people don't want to see extremes, be it right or left.
foxtrot101 wrote: » The PBP are an insignificance, there only in the news these days because of that stupid trail. The media is hardly a echo chamber for the views of the PBP. Saying the PBP don't represent the views of the majority doesn't proof anything.
Harry Angstrom wrote: » Strange that, because more often than not, one of their representatives turns up on a political discussion programme - be it Vincent Browne, Sean O'Rourke, Pat Kenny, Marian Finucane et al. For a party with fairly insignificant support they seem to get a fairly disproportionate amount of airtime. Not sure how they relate to people in rural areas outside the Pale, but that doesn't really matter to trendy D4 media types.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e0a528cbc0a6c66fda22b51f3da0d9d1.svg)
