Off Topic Thread 5.0

irishbucsfan · 19-10-2020 12:23pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Almost her first line is 'you have been peddling misinformation'. It may be true but it's still an opinion. Had she asked about some of the misinformation and refuted it with facts fair enough but she left the statement stand on it's own merit.

It’s an absolute fact they were peddling misinformation, and using public electoral funding to help them do it. They had to withdraw adverts where they had doctored parliamentary footage to mislead the public.

sydthebeat · 19-10-2020 12:29pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Almost her first line is 'you have been peddling misinformation'. It may be true but it's still an opinion. .

ah but it is not though...and thats the whole point of why im arguing against you.

It is a variable fact that advanceNZ party spread lies about the covid 19 pandemic. and here
and about 5G

if you present those lies as an actual debating point, you legitimize them... and under no circumstances should that be allowed to happen.

19-10-2020 12:30pm

Synode wrote: »

If it's a factual statement Venjur, it's not an opinion.

The interviewer is not the arbiter of truth and cited no examples, it was entirely an opinion.

I don't think journalists should dispense with standards no matter how barkers the interviewee is, it's why I could never take Vincent Brown seriously.

sydthebeat · 19-10-2020 12:34pm

Deleted User wrote: »

The interviewer is not the arbiter of truth and cited no examples, it was entirely an opinion.
.

you are veering very very close to conspiracy theory and the dissolution of 'truth' here.....

The lies that were peddled was already substantiated and proven. The interviewer absolutely does not have to reference widely accepted truth

19-10-2020 12:37pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

ah but it is not though...and thats the whole point of why im arguing against you.

It is a variable fact that advanceNZ party spread lies about the covid 19 pandemic. and here
and about 5G

if you present those lies as an actual debating point, you legitimize them... and under no circumstances should that be allowed to happen.

The modern political landscape is littered with lies, misinformation and campaign journalism.

If journalists on all parts of the political spectrum left their opinions aside and focused on hard evidence we'd be in much better shape.

The interviewer in this instance failed to detach her opinion and feelings towards the interviewee which detracted from the overall discussion.

19-10-2020 12:42pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

you are veering very very close to conspiracy theory and the dissolution of 'truth' here.....

????

No I'm not at all.

I'm saying if you want to call yourself a journalist then you need to park your dislike for someone and use facts and evidence to challenge them and not descend into a mud slinging contest.

Otherwise don't invite crazy people on your show. No one is interviewing Gemma O'Doherty on prime time TV for good reason, but if they did I'd rather they took her apart professionally and not personally as the former is stronger and more persuasive and much harder to challenge.

sydthebeat · 19-10-2020 12:42pm

she has been widely praised for doing an excellent job in that interview.... so its seems your opinion is very much in the minority.

19-10-2020 12:45pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

she has been widely praised for doing an excellent job in that interview.... so its seems your opinion is very much in the minority.

That's a pretty weak argument to be honest.

Yeah_Right · 19-10-2020 12:46pm

Interesting election result back home. The first time since the mid 80s that a party has a majority and doesn't need to form a coalition. While I would generally vote National I believe this is a good thing because this way Labour doesn't need the Green Party who are a bunch of hippies and activists. The best part is NZ First with Winnie the **** are gone. Not one single seat. He has gone from Deputy PM to unemployed. So happy that charlatan is out. National took hammering, losing a bunch of seats but interestingly ACT (who are more economically conservative) picked up seats and now have as many as the Greens. It was the most they have ever won.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out over the next few months as I suspect that NZ's economy could be in trouble. I know a few of my mates that own small to medium businesses there are worried.

sydthebeat · 19-10-2020 12:48pm

Deleted User wrote: »

????

No I'm not at all.

I'm saying if you want to call yourself a journalist then you need to park your dislike for someone and use facts and evidence to challenge them and not descend into a mud slinging contest.

Otherwise don't invite crazy people on your show. No one is interviewing Gemma O'Doherty on prime time TV for good reason, but if they did I'd rather they took her apart professionally and not personally as the former is strong and more persuasive.

you seem to have lost, or never understood, all the context for that interview??
You seem to think it was a debate... which it observantly was not.

heres a newly formed far right party who platformed on lies, fear and scaremongering... who were completely dismissed by the electorate and returned less that 1% of the political vote.

The interviewer gave Ross every opportunity to apologise for spreading lies and fear, which he refused to do. She was dead right to keep turning the screw and the way she started with "you call yourself a loser" was perfect.

This is an award winning Political journalist so its a bit presumptuous to call her professionalism into context.

sydthebeat · 19-10-2020 12:50pm

Deleted User wrote: »

That's a pretty weak argument to be honest.

ah here

:D:D

you are in "black is white" territory now.

19-10-2020 1:09pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

ah here :D:D

you are in "black is white" territory now.

'Everybody thinks' is a weak argument, hence why it's commonly used by the likes of Trump.

19-10-2020 1:13pm

Everyone has been saying it

sydthebeat · 19-10-2020 1:16pm

Deleted User wrote: »

'Everybody thinks' is a weak argument, hence why it's commonly used by the likes of Trump.

:rolleyes: ah lets leave it there then as youre not at all arguing the initial point.

... we'll agree to disagree on whether it was good interview or not

Podge_irl · 19-10-2020 1:30pm

Deleted User wrote: »

The interviewer is not the arbiter of truth and cited no examples, it was entirely an opinion.

An lack of citation does not turn something from a fact to an opinion.

prawnsambo · 19-10-2020 2:05pm

Deleted User wrote: »

The interviewer is not the arbiter of truth and cited no examples, it was entirely an opinion.

It was an interview on NZ TV for NZ viewers. The audience would have known what she referred to. Granted if you didn't know that somebody was a flat earther, that opening would have sounded like an opinion too. Wouldn't make it one though.

19-10-2020 2:12pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

:rolleyes: ah lets leave it there then as youre not at all arguing the initial point.

... we'll agree to disagree on whether it was good interview or not

I've fully engaged with the initial point and despite agreeing with the interviewer 100% I'm still prepared to be objective and critical where the circumstances warrant it.

I think asking loaded questions like "is there anyone you want to apologise to" is poor journalism. I think saying things like "you sold your soul for political purposes" is poor journalism. She is right, but it's not her job as a journalist to be 'right' and just because I'm glad to see another right wing spoofer get a beating on live TV doesn't mean I'm glad to see an 'award winning' journalist turn an interview into a one sided slagging match. You either always have standards or you open yourself open to criticism.

Podge_irl wrote: »

An lack of citation does not turn something from a fact to an opinion.

Part of the problem with modern political discourse is the lack of citation to support 'opinions'. If a neutral observer watches that show they are none the wiser as no actual facts are shared or arguments supported. It was a "no sorry you are wrong" discussion and whilst that is factually correct, it serves no educational or informative service to viewers.

As soon as Ross started talking about this just being 'another flu' the interviewer had a prime opportunity to cite any of the widely available evidence to refute this - but she just put her hand up and said "no you're not saying that".

I dunno - if you want to invite crazy onto your show and then shout them down that's fine, but it seems to me like a waste of everyone's time and it isn't journalism despite the catharsis.

Yeah_Right · 19-10-2020 2:16pm

She made me proud to be a kiwi with that performance.

Zzippy · 19-10-2020 2:30pm

Yeah_Right wrote: »

She made me proud to be a kiwi with that performance.

Wait, what? You're a kiwi! I never would have guessed!

:P

prawnsambo · 19-10-2020 2:34pm

Deleted User wrote: »

As soon as Ross started talking about this just being 'another flu' the interviewer had a prime opportunity to cite any of the widely available evidence to refute this - but she just put her hand up and said "no you're not saying that".

You don't 'both sides' bullsh1t. That's a mistake the BBC has made in the interests of 'balance' and all it does is give a semblance of equality and credibility to completely batsh1t nonsense. You're suggesting that the interviewer (even for a moment) entertains the notion that Covid-19 is the same as the flu. We're almost a year into the pandemic and this stuff was shot down in flames a long time ago.

19-10-2020 2:48pm

prawnsambo wrote: »

You don't 'both sides' bullsh1t. That's a mistake the BBC has made in the interests of 'balance' and all it does is give a semblance of equality and credibility to completely batsh1t nonsense. You're suggesting that the interviewer (even for a moment) entertains the notion that Covid-19 is the same as the flu. We're almost a year into the pandemic and this stuff was shot down in flames a long time ago.

I'm not sure how you took that from my post. He is in the interview - so they are already 'entertaining' his views. I'm saying that rather than just shouting him down, a journalist has a responsibility to disprove what they are saying and it was an open goal for her as there is a staggering amount of evidence available (as you acknowledged).

I'm also not saying she shouldn't have challenged him - I'm saying she should have taken it apart with something more than her held up hand.

The problem with this style of interview is that someone who is equally as misleading but better able to muddy the waters is given free reign in a fact free exchange. People getting wound up by the likes of Farage has allowed him to get away with awful lies over the years - again, here is a good example by Claire Byrne as to how you actually challenge someone in an interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlKX70oRLws&ab_channel=RT%C3%89-IRELAND%E2%80%99SNATIONALPUBLICSERVICEMEDIA

prawnsambo · 19-10-2020 2:57pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not sure how you took that from my post. He is in the interview - so they are already 'entertaining' his views. I'm saying that rather than just shouting him down, a journalist has a responsibility to disprove what they are saying and it was an open goal for her as there is a staggering amount of evidence available (as you acknowledged).

I took it from you saying she should have allowed him spout is Covid-denier nonsense in order that she refute it. Having him in the interview is not in any way 'entertaining' his views. She had specific questions for him, starting with asking for an apology for said peddling of disinformation. And obviously (and this is the important bit) an acknowledgment that it was disinformation and lies. That was the point of the interview and is indeed how you deal with people like him. Not (as you seem to be saying) an opportunity for him to double down on his disinfo and start a debate on it to further muddy the waters.

19-10-2020 3:03pm

I didn't who that Kiwi guy was. Without context, it's a shocking enough interview. She's just berating him. I'd expect better on fox news.

prawnsambo · 19-10-2020 3:14pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I didn't who that Kiwi guy was. Without context, it's a shocking enough interview. She's just berating him. I'd expect better on fox news.

Yes, but for NZ viewers it has context. Here's an example from Wikipedia:

In late August, Ross and his Advance NZ/NZ Public Party coalition drew controversy after they published a Facebook video alleging that the New Zealand Government had passed legislation forcing citizens to get a COVID-19 vaccine. According to Agence France-Presse's Fact Check, key parts of speeches made by other MPs were cut out and edited to distort what they were saying. The video drew controversy since it violated Parliamentary rules prohibiting the use of parliamentary debate videos for political campaigning

And then there's this:

The parliamentary service investigation substantiated a number of complaints about his behaviour towards staff, including the existence of a "toxic environment", sexualised comments towards female staff members and "lies and mind games". Further investigation also revealed the married MP entered into at least two sexual relationships with his staffers, and that Ross would target a staffer with repeated pressure, controlling behaviour, "incoherent rages" and "brutal sex"

And of course (because birds of a feather) had the 'Bad boys of Brexit' (Wigmore and Banks) on his party's election team.

For context.

19-10-2020 3:16pm

prawnsambo wrote: »

I took it from you saying she should have allowed him spout is Covid-denier nonsense in order that she refute it. Having him in the interview is not in any way 'entertaining' his views. She had specific questions for him, starting with asking for an apology for said peddling of disinformation. And obviously (and this is the important bit) an acknowledgment that it was disinformation and lies. That was the point of the interview and is indeed how you deal with people like him. Not (as you seem to be saying) an opportunity for him to double down on his disinfo and start a debate on it to further muddy the waters.

I fully agreed with her stopping him on the spot, in the example I provided Claire Byrne did the same, but she also then cited a relevant fact because she's a journalist and that's her job.

The role of a journalist is to report the news, not create the news nor to amplify public opinion. It's certainly not their job to get personal and call people delusional (even if that is the case).

Journalism becoming opinionated, biased and less substantive is a major catalyst for the decline in standards in politics and why it's become a distrusted medium. This type of interview whilst entertaining and agreeable is not a good reflection of journalism and is more a reflection of the interviewers frustration and anger at the interviewee. You could say it's fine because we all disagree with the guy, but I don't see it as a good reflection of journalism at all.

errlloyd · 19-10-2020 3:22pm

I am with Venjur in principle - but Syd in practice.

I don't love it when our media give niche views unchallenged airtime in the interest of fairness. (I love it even less when private media actively seek out niche views and give them a platform, ah la Joe Rogan). So I appreciate how this host doesn't really give him airtime. 1% of the vote, bat**** crazy views. He doesn't deserve to be there.

On the other hand, when Tucker Carlson uses pretty much the same tactics to strong-arm scientists on his show we have a problem. The host has to be held to the same burden of proof, even when the points are supposedly self evident.

prawnsambo · 19-10-2020 3:30pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I fully agreed with her stopping him on the spot, in the example I provided Claire Byrne did the same, but she also then cited a relevant fact because she's a journalist and that's her job.

But this isn't a valid analogy here. There is some nuance and complexity with regard to brexit, law and trade and this often must be explained for context. You don't require context or explanation when talking to somebody who says the earth is flat.

Deleted User wrote: »

The role of a journalist is to report the news, not create the news nor to amplify public opinion. It's certainly not their job to get personal and call people delusional (even if that is the case).

If somebody is delusional, that's a fact. But this guy isn't delusional, he's a liar. You can see an example of one of those lies above. You're taking this out of context because you first saw it out of context. NZ viewers would know exactly what she's doing; getting him to admit he lied and to apologise for it.

Deleted User wrote: »

Journalism becoming opinionated, biased and less substantive is a major catalyst for the decline in standards in politics and why it's become a distrusted medium. This type of interview whilst entertaining and agreeable is not a good reflection of journalism and is more a reflection of the interviewers frustration and anger at the interviewee. You could say it's fine because we all disagree with the guy, but I don't see it as a good reflection of journalism at all.

Again. You're calling a fact an opinion. This is where you are actually distorting the conversation. It is a proven fact that Ross and his party lied and spread disinfo. He was asked to apologise for it and acknowledge it.

Edit: When you have somebody on air who has been proven to have lied publicly in pursuit of public office, the very first thing you do is get them to admit that. You absolutely do not move on to other things or allow them to double down on the lies. You bemoan the loss of journalistic standards, yet this is exactly what got Trump elected and brexit passed. The lies were passed over in pursuit of the next 'dead cat'. Only now are people waking up to the fact that when you allow the lies go unchallenged and continue to give airtime to the liars unchallenged, all credibility is lost.

pickarooney · 19-10-2020 3:37pm

The thing is in this situation the time for entertaining his ideas is past. He has been proven to have lied, misinformed and bull****ted and the viewers know this. I'm not sure what either party could have expected from this exchange. The guy has already been annihilated politically and can't expect to get back into the game straight away. He wasn't going to show up just to apologise... Bit of a pointless exercise other than to reiterate the point that NZ is not going to entertain these ****e-peddlers any more.

Yeah_Right · 19-10-2020 4:04pm

Zzippy wrote: »

Wait, what? You're a kiwi! I never would have guessed!

:P

Shut up Buer Zzippy

swiwi_ · 19-10-2020 4:56pm

Zzippy wrote: »

Wait, what? You're a kiwi! I never would have guessed!

:P

No matter how he writes his posts, people always hear an Aussie accent

Yeah_Right · 19-10-2020 5:17pm

swiwi_ wrote: »

No matter how he writes his posts, people always hear an Aussie accent

Et tu swiwi :eek:

Neil3030 · 19-10-2020 5:38pm

Right wing populism has found a way to thrive and disseminate in a context of civil discourse. So as long as people can't be trusted to act independently as the final filter on information integrity, I'm OK with people taking this presenter's approach. Venjur indeed highlights the risk that they could use (selective edits) of exchanges such as this as evidence to fuel a narrative that the left "shout down anything they don't want to hear". However I think we have enough evidence that it's a risk worth taking.

Bazzo · 19-10-2020 7:19pm

If swiwi was an Australian living in Austria he'd really struggle to come up with as good a forum alias.

Yeah_Right · 19-10-2020 7:23pm

Bazzo wrote: »

If swiwi was an Australian living in Austria he'd really struggle to come up with as good a forum alias.

KangaReich maybe??

mfceiling · 19-10-2020 7:37pm

I'm currently in the middle of a twitter spat with a "journalist" who lived here once but moved abroad. Turns out he's a genius and should have been a political leader here years ago!!

Stheno · 19-10-2020 7:51pm

mfceiling wrote: »

I'm currently in the middle of a twitter spat with a "journalist" who lived here once but moved abroad. Turns out he's a genius and should have been a political leader here years ago!!

Have you no chores to be doing?

mfceiling · 19-10-2020 7:59pm

Stheno wrote: »

Have you no chores to be doing?

Done long ago Stheno... early start early finish.

aloooof · 19-10-2020 8:09pm

Neil3030 wrote: »

Right wing populism has found a way to thrive and disseminate in a context of civil discourse. So as long as people can't be trusted to act independently as the final filter on information integrity, I'm OK with people taking this presenter's approach. Venjur indeed highlights the risk that they could use (selective edits) of exchanges such as this as evidence to fuel a narrative that the left "shout down anything they don't want to hear". However I think we have enough evidence that it's a risk worth taking.

I agree with the sentiment of this, but my impression is that abuses of social media are as much (or more) to blame for the proliferation of right win populism.

(I say this as I'm in the middle of a book called Mindf*ck about Cambridge Analytica. It's great so far, and pretty frightening).

swiwi_ · 19-10-2020 8:20pm

Bazzo wrote: »

If swiwi was an Australian living in Austria he'd really struggle to come up with as good a forum alias.

Says our resident poster from Bahamas whose dad is from Zanzibar and his mum from Oman.

CatFromHue · 19-10-2020 8:44pm

Neil3030 wrote: »

Right wing populism has found a way to thrive and disseminate in a context of civil discourse.

Outside Ireland that seems to be the case but not so much here.

Dave_The_Sheep · 19-10-2020 9:10pm

CatFromHue wrote: »

Outside Ireland that seems to be the case but not so much here.

Amongst other things, we haven't been targeted as much as other places, I suspect. We're just not important enough. We're just as susceptible as elsewhere though.

Jump_In_Jack · 19-10-2020 10:15pm

Yeah_Right wrote: »

KangaReich maybe??

Austeroo maybe
Or Australlaby

Zzippy · 19-10-2020 11:28pm

mfceiling wrote: »

I'm currently in the middle of a twitter spat with a "journalist" who lived here once but moved abroad. Turns out he's a genius and should have been a political leader here years ago!!

Sigh. We've all been that soldier. Luckily he blocks long before you realise how much more valuable your own time is, saving you minutes of your life and never have to see his sh1te again.

Zzippy · 19-10-2020 11:38pm

So Level 5 it is. But they've gone nuclear with the 5km restriction. It wasn't so bad in spring when we had great weather. 5km is fine if you live in town, with access to parks, playgrounds etc. A lot tougher for families who don't live near any of those facilities. Do they not remember how much happier people were when they could go 20km after being cooped up so long? I support the increased restrictions but they need to take more heed of people's mental health, people need a physical outlet and 5km removes the ability for many to get out for walks in a safe environment.

aloooof · 20-10-2020 12:04am

Zzippy wrote: »

Sigh. We've all been that soldier. Luckily he blocks long before you realise how much more valuable your own time is, saving you minutes of your life and never have to see his sh1te again.

Spot on. He doesn’t argue in good faith. His instinct is to go for the ad hominem.

Neil3030 · 20-10-2020 2:09am

aloooof wrote: »

I agree with the sentiment of this, but my impression is that abuses of social media are as much (or more) to blame for the proliferation of right win populism.

(I say this as I'm in the middle of a book called Mindf*ck about Cambridge Analytica. It's great so far, and pretty frightening).

Tricky to tell for sure. I've no doubt woke/cancel culture has irritated a few people, possibly even pushing them to the right. But I can't imagine it's had near the same effect of the tidal wave of right wing astro-turfing we've seen in the last few years.

CatFromHue wrote: »

Outside Ireland that seems to be the case but not so much here.

Yeah, combination of us being largely irrelevant but also the fact that we have an outlet for populism here in Sinn Fein.

OldRio · 20-10-2020 8:33am

Well when the media are all ready controlled by the right wing parties that have controlled the state for over 100 years why bother?

awec · 20-10-2020 10:38am

mfceiling wrote: »

I'm currently in the middle of a twitter spat with a "journalist" who lived here once but moved abroad. Turns out he's a genius and should have been a political leader here years ago!!

See you started off badly by engaging with the Lovin Dublin guy, and things went downhill from there.

Avoid the crazies mfceiling.

irishbucsfan · 20-10-2020 1:22pm

I have yer man in Brazil blocked and I’ve actually forgotten his name now (bliss) so I can’t even search for him! Kildares greatest shame.

Incredible feature

awec · 20-10-2020 1:32pm

Oh, he's from Kildare?

That explains a few things...

Off Topic Thread 5.0

Comments