nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Off Topic Thread 5.0

[Deleted User]

Thread continued from here https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057835955&page=250

The usual rules apply. Non-rugby talk here. Consider this a social place, but like a pub, things like religion and politics can be divisive, so don't say things here you wouldn't say to someone's face in the pub. Sober

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Neil3030

Godfather's 1 & 2 are the two best films I've ever seen. 1 Probably edges it.

The third, however, conforms to its stereotypical Irish pronunciation.

Neil3030

Fair play to Coveney, that was a great interview he gave to the BBC. The bias at the beeb is genuinely frightening; national broadcaster behaving like a Murdoch cable news channel. He managed Marr like a boss though.

[Deleted User]

Neil3030 wrote: »

Fair play to Coveney, that was a great interview he gave to the BBC. The bias at the beeb is genuinely frightening; national broadcaster behaving like a Murdoch cable news channel. He managed Marr like a boss though.

There is an almost unbelievable effort to gaslight from the reality of what the current UK Government are seeking to do.

Brexit has reached peak 'head in sand' mentality. Feet stamping and childishness from a Government over a key part of their manifesto that they now disagree with.

That they think people will actually buy this nonsense is bad enough, that many actually will is just sad.

Neil3030

Deleted User wrote: »

There is an almost unbelievable effort to gaslight from the reality of what the current UK Government are seeking to do.

Brexit has reached peak 'head in sand' mentality. Feet stamping and childishness from a Government over a key part of their manifesto that they now disagree with.

That they think people will actually buy this nonsense is bad enough, that many actually will is just sad.

There has been a targeted effort to bias the information streams that modulate public opinion. This much is clear. Whether the UK Government are genuinely feet-stamping, or playing out a longer term strategy, remains to be seen. My guess is they testing the EU's resolve on Ireland - just how much are the EU willing to back us? There's perhaps some projection by this Tory govt, i.e., falsely assuming the EU will throw Ireland under the bus because they'd have no issue doing something similar. However it's not entirely irrational to assume the EU might eventually creak, even if it sends a poor message to other smaller states (e.g., Lithuania) that the EU have their back against a powerful neighbour.

Right now, Ireland's biggest risk is that pressure builds on EU officials from their own states to cast Ireland aside. And that's not entirely implausible either. And would you put it past Bojo/Cummings to start targeting media streams across Europe, highlighting Ireland's tax rules, the Apple decision, etc.?

kuang1

Watched "the social dilemma" on netflix yesterday.
Brilliant watch.

I'm going to watch it again with my 11 year old.

Brilliant insights into the mechanisms of social media from some of the people who engineered it.

stephen_n

Neil3030 wrote: »

Fair play to Coveney, that was a great interview he gave to the BBC. The bias at the beeb is genuinely frightening; national broadcaster behaving like a Murdoch cable news channel. He managed Marr like a boss though.

I’m not sure it’s Bias, they have a policy of trying to always present a balanced debate. Even if there no balance to it. Probably why they piss the left and the right off in equal measure.

bilston

stephen_n wrote: »

I’m not sure it’s Bias, they have a policy of trying to always present a balanced debate. Even if there no balance to it. Probably why they piss the left and the right off in equal measure.

This

The left and the right both accuse the BBC of bias...that tells me they get it about right.

Synode

Neil3030 wrote: »

There has been a targeted effort to bias the information streams that modulate public opinion. This much is clear. Whether the UK Government are genuinely feet-stamping, or playing out a longer term strategy, remains to be seen. My guess is they testing the EU's resolve on Ireland - just how much are the EU willing to back us? There's perhaps some projection by this Tory govt, i.e., falsely assuming the EU will throw Ireland under the bus because they'd have no issue doing something similar. However it's not entirely irrational to assume the EU might eventually creak, even if it sends a poor message to other smaller states (e.g., Lithuania) that the EU have their back against a powerful neighbour.

Right now, Ireland's biggest risk is that pressure builds on EU officials from their own states to cast Ireland aside. And that's not entirely implausible either. And would you put it past Bojo/Cummings to start targeting media streams across Europe, highlighting Ireland's tax rules, the Apple decision, etc.?

Can't see the EU caving to British tactics. Goes against everything it stands for. Hopefully Scotland move away from the Union as the train wreck unfolds

stephen_n

bilston wrote: »

This

The left and the right both accuse the BBC of bias...that tells me they get it about right.

Not entirely sure they get it right, but they get balance. Having Farage or someone like him debating against an economist or a scientist isn’t actually balance.

irishbucsfan

The BBC news division is placing itself in the middle in the context of British media which is largely being pushed to the right because of ownership and investment, they’ll slowly follow the push in that direction just because it’s how they’re designed to operate

Zzippy

bilston wrote: »

This

The left and the right both accuse the BBC of bias...that tells me they get it about right.

The political editor (Kuenssberg) is a literal mouthpiece for Johnson and Cummings. She has sold her integrity for information from "Downing street sources", which she quotes regularly. Most of the time her inside scoops are kites flown by Cummings and she's just the conduit they use to get the idea out so they can gauge public reaction.

Farage has been platformed by the BBC far more than any other politician over the last 10 years, simply because ratings. The BBC has given him all the free publicity he could dream about, without fact checking the propaganda he was allowed to promote. Balanced me hole!

[Deleted User]

mfceiling wrote: »

Never watched Goodfellas, any of the Godfather movies, Casino and only watched a couple of episodes of The Sopranos.

Or any Star Wars or Star Trek.

Gangster films are very overrated IM humble O

Zzippy

Deleted User wrote: »

Gangster films are very overrated IM humble O

Wharrabout "In Bruges"? Bleedin' deadly, wha!

Neil3030

Zzippy wrote: »

The political editor (Kuenssberg) is a literal mouthpiece for Johnson and Cummings. She has sold her integrity for information from "Downing street sources", which she quotes regularly. Most of the time her inside scoops are kites flown by Cummings and she's just the conduit they use to get the idea out so they can gauge public reaction.

Farage has been platformed by the BBC far more than any other politician over the last 10 years, simply because ratings. The BBC has given him all the free publicity he could dream about, without fact checking the propaganda he was allowed to promote. Balanced me hole!

https://twitter.com/zero_4/status/1305061040997240839?s=12

Watch Marr regurgitate #10 rhetoric as if it's fact, in his 'question' to Coveney. Delighted Coveney flat out called him on it immediately.

Also not buying the "beeb just follow the media" argument, since the UK media has never been significantly left leaning, you can't really test this hypothesis.

[Deleted User]

Zzippy wrote: »

Wharrabout "In Bruges"? Bleedin' deadly, wha!

Seen it at least 10 times. How can all those canals and bridges and cobbled streets and those churches, all that beautiful ****ing fairytale stuff, how can that not be somebody's ****ing thing, eh? Love it.

[Deleted User]

Ed Miliband is taking Boris Johnson apart in quite startling fashion in the UK Parliament. It's well worth a watch.

Podge_irl

Deleted User wrote: »

Ed Miliband is taking Boris Johnson apart in quite startling fashion in the UK Parliament. It's well worth a watch.

Love a bit of Chaos with Ed Miliband.

There is a very interesting alternate history where his brother became Labour leader though. I like Ed, but I don't think he engaged with the electorate very well. Also didn't compare that well to Cameron I think. That led to Corbyn, who scraped into the leadership election by the skin of his teeth.

Talk about a perfect storm.

jacothelad

Remember Neville Southall? Here is a little part of an article about him.

" There was a time when, during his long career at Everton from 1981-98, Southall was arguably the best goalkeeper in the world. He still cares about the game and his beloved Everton but Southall is less interested in the impact of James Rodríguez at the start of a new season than in addressing the state of the world. “I’m scared for this country,” he says. “We’ve got two of the most dangerous leaders in the world causing havoc. Johnson and Trump are loose cannons. In the past we used to think the loose cannons belonged to North Korea or fellas like Saddam Hussein. You don’t expect loose cannons to take over your own country.”

Southall shifts from disquiet to ridicule. “Boris Johnson is a chancer. He’s an Arthur Daley,” he says, before comparing him next to the cackling comedy actor who led the chaos of the Carry On films. “He is Sid James – except that’s disrespectful to Sid. At least Sid James was acting. This fella thinks he can say whatever he wants. What does it say about our society to have the leader of the country being a liar, a racist, a sexist and homophobic? Surely people will eventually say: ‘We can’t have this fella in charge because he’s ruining our country.’”

Hear! Hear! Nev.

bilston

Zzippy wrote: »

The political editor (Kuenssberg) is a literal mouthpiece for Johnson and Cummings. She has sold her integrity for information from "Downing street sources", which she quotes regularly. Most of the time her inside scoops are kites flown by Cummings and she's just the conduit they use to get the idea out so they can gauge public reaction.

Farage has been platformed by the BBC far more than any other politician over the last 10 years, simply because ratings. The BBC has given him all the free publicity he could dream about, without fact checking the propaganda he was allowed to promote. Balanced me hole!

And you say that, and yet someone else will say there are too many Liberal, left leaning people on the BBC.

Neil3030

bilston wrote: »

And you say that, and yet someone else will say there are too many Liberal, left leaning people on the BBC.

Are there examples of left wing spin on the BBC that are comparable in bias to the Marr interview, and on topics with as profound implications for the UK as Brexit?

prawnsambo

stephen_n wrote: »

I’m not sure it’s Bias, they have a policy of trying to always present a balanced debate. Even if there no balance to it. Probably why they piss the left and the right off in equal measure.

I think their main problem in trying to provide a balanced debate is that they do so when there's clearly no real balance. Hypothetically (but not ridiculously so) they could have "Are the British Government breaking the law with the Internal Markets Bill". To argue the point, we have Simon Coveney and, eh... Darren Grimes.

They've actually had Darren Grimes on a few times talking about things he has absolutely no qualifications or background in (to be clear, that list is limited to just breaking the law and getting away with it).

But this is because anyone with more than an iota of knowledge on the subject matter is absolutely not going to come on and argue black is white. Which reduces them to wheeling out absolute knuckle dragging personifications of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Or Nigel Farage.

thomond2006

Ireland will never re-open fully and it's because of De Dubs, such as irishbucsfan.

swiwi_

I’ve read a reasonable amount of books by Irish authors. Tendency to be fairly morose. But This is Happiness by Niall Williams is (so far) a good read.

stephen_n

prawnsambo wrote: »

I think their main problem in trying to provide a balanced debate is that they do so when there's clearly no real balance. Hypothetically (but not ridiculously so) they could have "Are the British Government breaking the law with the Internal Markets Bill". To argue the point, we have Simon Coveney and, eh... Darren Grimes.

They've actually had Darren Grimes on a few times talking about things he has absolutely no qualifications or background in (to be clear, that list is limited to just breaking the law and getting away with it).

But this is because anyone with more than an iota of knowledge on the subject matter is absolutely not going to come on and argue black is white. Which reduces them to wheeling out absolute knuckle dragging personifications of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Or Nigel Farage.

Yep that’s exactly why Farage gets so much air time. When there’s no one to stand in and provide an opposing view point (because none exists), they wheel him out. It’s not true balance but both sides will get equal time. That’s why political discourse is so screwed in England.

Dave_The_Sheep

stephen_n wrote: »

Yep that’s exactly why Farage gets so much air time. When there’s no one to stand in and provide an opposing view point (because none exists), they wheel him out. It’s not true balance but both sides will get equal time. That’s why political discourse is so screwed in England.

It happened a lot over here during the Marriage Equality and Repeal the 8th amendment debates too. The discussion would be about, for example, effects on the mother when it comes to their health and on one side would be a licensed medical doctor with however many years education and experience talking about things they actually know about and on the other side, for balance, RTE or Newstalk or whoever would have some religious representative who had no qualifications whatsoever. But they had to have someone - hint, no you don't - because they're terrified of appearing unbalanced. We're just as susceptible to it over here.

b.gud

Thatcher is trending on Twitter, given it's 2020 I'm scarred to see why

Squidgy Black

b.gud wrote: »

Thatcher is trending on Twitter, given it's 2020 I'm scarred to see why

Tories claiming that the current government are worse than Thatcher.

Mostly younger generations who weren't actually alive for Thatcher's reign of terror of course.

Paul Smeenus

Bojo is a bumbling, selfish, venal incompetent where Thatcher was ideologically inhuman.

Things might have been much better had Thatcher been as unable to deliver as Boris.

Neil3030

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

It happened a lot over here during the Marriage Equality and Repeal the 8th amendment debates too. The discussion would be about, for example, effects on the mother when it comes to their health and on one side would be a licensed medical doctor with however many years education and experience talking about things they actually know about and on the other side, for balance, RTE or Newstalk or whoever would have some religious representative who had no qualifications whatsoever. But they had to have someone - hint, no you don't - because they're terrified of appearing unbalanced. We're just as susceptible to it over here.

The most benign interpretation is that it saves money. News stations can either hire a research team to pull up a list of critical questions to ask the expert (say, in your example, review the latest scientific literature and identify the various risks presented to the health of the mother, and put these to the expert to defend).

Or they can just have a "balanced" debate, where they let the doctor speak, then all the host needs to say is... "well, Mary from Roscommon, what do you think about all this?"

[Deleted User]

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

It happened a lot over here during the Marriage Equality and Repeal the 8th amendment debates too. The discussion would be about, for example, effects on the mother when it comes to their health and on one side would be a licensed medical doctor with however many years education and experience talking about things they actually know about and on the other side, for balance, RTE or Newstalk or whoever would have some religious representative who had no qualifications whatsoever. But they had to have someone - hint, no you don't - because they're terrified of appearing unbalanced. We're just as susceptible to it over here.

When it comes to something like a referendum I thought that they did have to give equal time to either side. For Covid related topics they obviously don't.