A right wing Journal.ie

Annasopra · 03-08-2014 07:24PM

Vandango wrote: »

Crap, I think I should have been wearing my tin foil hat while reading that.

Why? Its completely true.

Shakespeare's Sister · 03-08-2014 07:25PM

Awkward Badger wrote: »

Boards in general yes. AH by itself, not really.

In my opinion AH would be a cut above those. And I know there is some utter troglodytery here, but there is so much to balance it out in fairness.

Awkward Badger · 03-08-2014 07:26PM

Sully wrote: »

It's well known in political circles that Sinn Fein are great at getting their supporters online pretending to be general run of the mill folk with no political ties but they feel Sinn Fein would do wonders for the world. The rest of the parties are useless at it.

That's something that comes up on Reddit a lot when anything anti SF gets downvoted. But I don't know if these "shinnerbots" exist or the SF appeal to the left and their somewhat anti establishment vibe and populist policies just have a lot of support among those who would be on these sites anyway.

comongethappy · 03-08-2014 07:28PM

Awkward Badger wrote: »

That's something that comes up on Reddit a lot when anything anti SF gets downvoted. But I don't know if these "shinnerbots" exist or the SF appeal to the left and their somewhat anti establishment vibe and populist policies just have a lot of support among those who would be on these sites anyway.

Both are probably true.

RayM · 03-08-2014 07:30PM

I don't think the comments on the Journal are any worse than on any other news website. Comments sections tend to attract a certain type of poster - total cranks and monotonous pub-bores who just want to 'transmit', and have no interest in listening to or conversing with each other. It's all very impersonal. I don't think After Hours is anything like that, really. Most people here seem to have a bit more self-awareness and don't want to get banned or come across as complete dicks.

Awkward Badger · 03-08-2014 07:31PM

Magaggie wrote: »

In my opinion AH would be a cut above those. And I know there is some utter troglodytery here, but there is so much to balance it out in fairness.

There's probably more chance for discussion on here than the likes of the journal. And politics is probably a tad nastier. But as with the others the so called signal to noise ratio is pretty high in AH. Compared with other forums.

Karl Stein · 03-08-2014 07:32PM

Robroy36 wrote: »

This week they were extolling the virtues of social welfare.

Social Welfare is/was developed from capitalistic societies. You'll note there was no social welfare in East Germany and Russia when they were command economies.

The most stable and prosperous societies the Earth has ever produced have the social welfare of their people as their guiding principle of how they organise themselves. See: Norway, Sweden, Finland, The Netherlands, Switzerland etc.

Hotfail.com · 03-08-2014 07:41PM

Looks like the SW bashing will commence in 5... 4... 3... 2...

*unfollows thread*

Shakespeare's Sister · 03-08-2014 07:57PM

Awkward Badger wrote: »

That's something that comes up on Reddit a lot when anything anti SF gets downvoted. But I don't know if these "shinnerbots" exist or the SF appeal to the left and their somewhat anti establishment vibe and populist policies just have a lot of support among those who would be on these sites anyway.

I'd say much of the time the SF "recruitment drive" is in people's imaginations and that it's moreso a case of what the last part of your post says. How come the same doesn't get said about any other party? And I'm not a SF voter btw, but "shinnerbot" is one annoying and stupid expression. I don't support hardline republicanism, but that term gets thrown at anyone who's any bit nationalist in relation to the north at all. Sad.

Shakespeare's Sister · 03-08-2014 07:59PM

Sully wrote: »

If you think the comments section is right wing than you're either completely blind or pretending. The comments is vastly left-based, mostly Sinn Fein, but not exclusive.

Guess it depends on what angle a person is coming from too. People can see what they want to see.

Same faces, same names constantly re-appearing and they all appear to know each other and call each other out or claim its user X is now under name user Y.

Oh, like what happens here?

It's well known in political circles that Sinn Fein are great at getting their supporters online pretending to be general run of the mill folk with no political ties but they feel Sinn Fein would do wonders for the world. The rest of the parties are useless at it.

It's... "well known"? Or assumed?

GoldFour4 · 03-08-2014 08:08PM

Magaggie wrote: »

Guess it depends on what angle a person is coming from too. People can see what they want to see.

Oh, like what happens here?

It's... "well known"? Or assumed?

It's completely different in fairness. Boards is a community where people bond.

Thejournal know that their prime market is the left wing who's favorite part of the day is letting everyone else know how much they hate Fine Gael. They publish articles and give them headlines which they know will attract large audiences and commentators from this side - providing them with good visitor stats which they can show potential advertisers. They ran an article today with the title "What would you ask Enda?".

Sample comment (and the second highest rated!) :

Enda, why are you such a spineless g!mp?

Delirium · 03-08-2014 08:10PM

Hotfail.com wrote: »

Looks like the SW bashing will commence in 5... 4... 3... 2...

*unfollows thread*

catallus · 03-08-2014 08:11PM

Goddamn you SW

Shakespeare's Sister · 03-08-2014 08:12PM

It's a shame they have to resort to such Irish Independent/red-top/Mail rabble-rousing type tactics... probably for ad revenue. I don't think that was the original intention for TheJournal.ie.
I see the Irish Examiner is heading in that direction too. Goes mad for a story that has something to do with the public sector/semi-states and completely misrepresenting it.

Awkward Badger · 03-08-2014 08:15PM

SW wrote: »

First thing I thought of when I seen it. Poor guy, gets a hell of a time.

tritium · 03-08-2014 08:23PM

Karl Stein wrote: »

Social Welfare is/was developed from capitalistic societies. You'll note there was no social welfare in East Germany and Russia when they were command economies.

The most stable and prosperous societies the Earth has ever produced have the social welfare of their people as their guiding principle of how they organise themselves. See: Norway, Sweden, Finland, The Netherlands, Switzerland etc.

Most stable and prosperous?

Riiiggghhhtt!!!!

Big old can of hyperbole over here folks, come and see it

Just ignore the stuff about correlation and causation all around it too

Shakespeare's Sister · 03-08-2014 08:27PM

How is that not a fair assessment of the countries mentioned?

They seem to be great societies.

Richard Hillman · 03-08-2014 08:27PM

The comments section restores my faith in the Irish people

Sully · 03-08-2014 08:31PM

Awkward Badger wrote: »

I didn't think thejournal had a tone as its not a real news site as such. Its just a decently formatted news twitter feed. The only thing I see made by staff is daily edge crap about 5 ways you know you're Irish.

That's widely accepted. They do the odd bits and bobs, but in general, it's a decent RSS feed. But we don't have any similar sites to get such a pull of data and even theJournal wouldn't be the more accurate or up to date.

The funny thing is that the comment section is no worse than AH. Its looked down on from here and Reddit looks down on boards but all online commentary is pretty much on the same level. Mostly horseshít spouted by idiots.

I don't think AH is at the same level as the commentary on theJournal. theJournal appears more revenue generation 'clickbait' for statistics for advertisers. It works. If you can get a large volume of people on the site reading your sponsored articles or clicking adverts - bingo.

Their live coverage of events is decent enough though.

Vandango wrote: »

Crap, I think I should have been wearing my tin foil hat while reading that.

It's widely known and very obvious. If you were to believe online polls, Sinn Fein would have had a majority in government already. If you were to believe commentary after a radio interview, it's always pro-SF and anti the other person. The term 'shinnerbot' didn't appear out of nowhere and you don't see similar terms for Labour, Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, left-based Independents (who get a fair share of bashing too) and so on.

Awkward Badger wrote: »

That's something that comes up on Reddit a lot when anything anti SF gets downvoted. But I don't know if these "shinnerbots" exist or the SF appeal to the left and their somewhat anti establishment vibe and populist policies just have a lot of support among those who would be on these sites anyway.

I'd say it's definitely both.

Shakespeare's Sister · 03-08-2014 08:34PM

Sully wrote: »

It's widely known and very obvious. If you were to believe online polls, Sinn Fein would have had a majority in government already. If you were to believe commentary after a radio interview, it's always pro-SF and anti the other person. The term 'shinnerbot' didn't appear out of nowhere

Widely known based on what though? I'm not saying it's untrue (nor am I saying it's true - I don't know) but something like that requires back-up. It's people who are really anti SF that say it too, so that in itself is a bit of a snag. I'd say the term "shinnerbot" comes from an inexplicably (to the point of sneering at Bloody Sunday) anti republican (not just anti republican, anti NI nationalist) lobby down here.

Karl Stein · 03-08-2014 08:40PM

tritium wrote: »

Most stable and prosperous?

Riiiggghhhtt!!!!

Big old can of hyperbole over here folks, come and see it

Just ignore the stuff about correlation and causation all around it too

Social democratic, welfare capitalist economies consistently top quality of life leagues in all manner of publications. To deny that their stability and prosperity has nothing to do with how they organise themselves, provide public services and have social safety nets would be dumb.

Herb Powell · 03-08-2014 08:45PM

Robroy36 wrote: »

Does Ireland need a right wing Journal.ie?

I scan the Journal pretty much every day, usually 2-3 times a day for the latest Irish news, it is pretty good for that type of thing. The round up stories at 9, 1 and 6 are usually worth a look if I haven't been listening to radio etc during the day.

Unfortunately "pretty good" is not how I would describe the editorials or the overall tone of the site, which is jaringly leftist.This week they were extolling the virtues of social welfare. They are constantly pumping out the cultural Marxism and seem to have some sort of link with the Labour party, often getting "exclusives" with their pathetic politicians.

I have found myself wondering is there a section of Irish society that would like to see a more right wing view of things. A Peter Hitchens or John Waters type of view point, more Telegraph than Guardian?

The less of this, and other right-wing nonsense, we have, the better. Quite happy that we don't strong right-wing media. It's fuccking poison, imo.

Sully · 03-08-2014 08:58PM

Magaggie wrote: »

Widely known based on what though? I'm not saying it's untrue (nor am I saying it's true - I don't know) but something like that requires back-up. It's people who are really anti SF that say it too, so that in itself is a bit of a snag. I'd say the term "shinnerbot" comes from an inexplicably (to the point of sneering at Bloody Sunday) anti republican (not just anti republican, anti NI nationalist) lobby down here.

Widely known in political circles (that includes those with a decent interest in it and not elected officials) and I would definitely say journalism.

Shinnerbot just stuck but online it's more directed at the any chance they get there out in droves posting. Sometimes you will see people comment that there not online today, because there isn't much being said that's pro-SF.

whirlpool · 03-08-2014 09:03PM

Their journalists at least need to re-sit primary school English language and grammar and then be put through journalism school. Some of the articles border on distressing due to the god-awful journalism, misspellings and poor grammar.

It's as if they type them really really fast and then don't even read over them before hitting PUBLISH.

Ostrom · 03-08-2014 09:19PM

Robroy36 wrote: »

Unfortunately "pretty good" is not how I would describe the editorials or the overall tone of the site, which is jaringly leftist.This week they were extolling the virtues of social welfare.

Nothing 'left' about it. The report came from Fitzgerald at the ESRI, and makes the point that the drop in inequality was merely due to a falloff in top incomes whilst core welfare rates propped up the bottom end of the income distribution.

crockholm · 03-08-2014 09:21PM

Magaggie wrote: »

How is that not a fair assessment of the countries mentioned?

They seem to be great societies.

Any experience of living or working in any of the countries mentioned yourself?

I Think that if I were down on my luck,I would choose Ireland to live in. (currently living in one of the countries mentioned and have lived in a second one previously)

As for more RW news outlets,Magill was run for a while by Eamonn Delaney and that had a decidedly rw slant,but it Went under.

tritium · 03-08-2014 09:42PM

Karl Stein wrote: »

Social democratic, welfare capitalist economies consistently top quality of life leagues in all manner of publications. To deny that their stability and prosperity has nothing to do with how they organise themselves, provide public services and have social safety nets would be dumb.

Let's make this simple. Take prosperity, one not unreasonable metric might be GDP per capita (since you mentioned prosperity rather than quality of life in your post it seems pretty fair). Based on 2013 IMF statistics only Norway in that list of yours is above the US for example, a country no one would hold out as a social welfare haven. Even Norway is behind Singapore and indeed Qatar in the rankings.

Stability is trickier to define. Bit you mean political stability, the unlikelihoid of say civil strife and unrest, then the political structures of say the European union are a far better indicator than local social welfare policies

So basically their prosperity and stability has little or nothing to do with their social safety nets. Whether they apply their prosperity fairly is an entirely different question and completely independent of your grandiose assertion.

Karl Stein · 03-08-2014 10:33PM

tritium wrote: »

Take prosperity, one not unreasonable metric might be GDP per capita.

I was talking about prosperity in a general sense rather than average income or GDP which can be reductive and give skewed results.

Prosperity is the state of flourishing, thriving, good fortune and / or successful social status. Prosperity often encompasses wealth but also includes others factors which can be independent of wealth to varying degrees, such as happiness and health.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperity

the US for example, a country no one would hold out as a social welfare haven.

Which underscores the point that GDP and average income can be reductive.

Stability is trickier to define. Bit you mean political stability, the unlikelihoid of say civil strife and unrest, then the political structures of say the European union are a far better indicator than local social welfare policies

Again I was speaking about stability in the social sense. It is self-evident that in countries where there is poverty relief there is less of a need for the poor to supplement their living expenses by engaging in crimes against property and persons.

So basically their prosperity and stability has little or nothing to do with their social safety nets.

And you accuse me of making grandiose statements? The above is grandiose and ignorant. Their prosperity has plenty to do with their social welfare model which includes social safety nets. Here it is being suggested as a model to develop other regions:

“The Scandinavian model is not replicable in all countries, and certainly not in developing countries,” cautioned Dewan. “But we can take from it important lessons. Social welfare and insurance schemes are critical for raising living standards toward the creation of a global middle class that will help generate aggregate demand at a time when the global economy is still fragile.”

americanprogress.org

DeadHand · 03-08-2014 10:40PM

This thread is derailed worse than a Russian train.

Hotfail.com · 03-08-2014 10:40PM

SW wrote: »

Sorry!