“Three people check into a hotel room. The clerk says the bill is $30, so each guest pays $10. Later the clerk realizes the bill should only be $25. To rectify this, he gives the bellhop $5 to return to the guests. On the way to the room, the bellhop realises that he cannot divide the money equally. As the guests didn’t know the total of the revised bill, the bellhop decides to just give each guest $1 and keep $2 as a tip for himself. Each guest got $1 back: so now each guest only paid $9; bringing the total paid to $27. The bellhop has $2. And $27 + $2 = $29 so, if the guests originally handed over $30, what happened to the remaining $1?”
The answer to that riddle lies in the fact that you are being misled…you are being asked to solve a riddle based upon a fallacy, information given to you that is intended to fool you into thinking something else is going on. This is the tactic being used by the Left now as they seek to make us believe that Trump only triumphed because of supposed lies he told and the misinformation from non MSM sources that fooled stupid and uneducated people. Get you to believe that, get that narrative going so powerfully, and they will create an atmosphere that enables, gives licence to, politicians to close down or restrict certain news sites and control social media…we’ve already seen Facebook crumble under massive attack…not least from the BBC….an irony perhaps after the likes of Google and Facebook were attacked by these self-same liberal defenders of democracy when they submitted to the Chinese government’s demands.
Here’s the ‘liberal’ riddlers in operation as they try to create that message of a democratic system broken by the monsters on the internet and in the right-wing Press…..how right Apple was all those years ago…the computer and the internet is the nemesis of those who wish to impose 1984 upon us….and the BBC hates it…..
Trump triumphed and three men walked into a bar to drink themselves into oblivion. A priest, a BBC journo and a gay, bitter, ex Tory-wet politician drank until they were senseless. Then they went to work and bashed out their stream of conscious thought about Trump, Brexit and all that, pouring out their bile and venom toward a world that just doesn’t seem to care about them and their left-wing preachings anymore . And it felt good.
The BBC’s David Sillito:
Donald Trump: How the media created the president
Donald J Trump was not popular with America’s newspapers. Of the 100 top circulation print newspapers, two endorsed him.
More than 200 newspapers supported Clinton, while Trump received the backing of fewer than 20.
And even some of this support was half-hearted, to say the least.
rump’s victory, then, was a brutal kick in the teeth for those loathed pundits, insiders and “righteous mongers”. But it was also a humiliation for the thousands of journalists who had spent months trying to warn the public about Donald J Trump.
This was one almighty, two-fingered salute to much of the “mainstream media”.
After painting that picture of a Trump under massive orchestrated Media attack Sillito comes up with this:
‘The failure of journalism’
Prof Jeff Jarvis – of the Tow-Knight Centre for entrepreneurial journalism, City University New York, and an enthusiastic and active supporter of Hillary Clinton – stated it simply.
“The mere fact of Donald Trump’s candidacy is evidence of the failure of journalism,” he believes.
He, like many other members of the liberal media class, feels Trump’s success is a sign that the media failed to communicate the truth with enough force…..In essence, it’s felt that print journalism failed to tell the real story – and that TV gave Trump a free pass.
Err…the BBC spent months doing nothing but call Trump a liar, a racist, a sexist, an Islamophobe who’d destroy the world economy and allow Russian tanks to roll across Europe….the New York Times took a deliberate policy decision to be biased against Trump because he ‘represented such a danger’ to the world which meant that journalistic principles should be put aside in order to stop him being elected…and clearly hundreds of other media outlets took the same view. And yet we hear the media ‘failed to communicate with enough force’ their views…yep, their views, not necessarily the truth…which is where the BBC analysis falls down…here for example…..Sillito tells us….
What’s strange about Trump’s speeches is how much of what he says refers to issues and topics that are not part of the mainstream news agenda.
Sorry what? Immigration, Islam, the economy? Not mainstream news agenda? Well..actually, I suppose not….or not the truth about those issues.
Sillito seems to lose track of what he is saying…claiming TV is still the most powerful media force…
TV is still the most powerful medium….[this] seems to be truer than many of the digital evangelists would have you believe.
He then goes onto say how CNN broadcast a powerful critique of Trump…and yet oddly he still triumphed despite the all powerful TV…and then Sillito says it was in fact the new digital media that enabled Trump’s election….before then claiming Trump is nothing but a showman, a charlatan who beguiled the Public into voting for him just as the websites get people to click on their ‘clickbait’ news stories.
Trump was giving people more to talk about and saying it in a way that resonated. When it came to “share of voice” online, he was winning.
The need for headlines that bring clicks and stories that get shared has changed everything. Dull, balanced articles (like this one) don’t provoke fury, laughter or much in the way of emotion.
Trump was simply more entertaining and generating more passion. In a news environment moving from a world of subscriptions and long-term appointments-to-view to the vagaries of clicks, friends’ recommendations and Facebook news streams, that makes him a winner.
[Ironically this is of course exactly how the BBC operates…it gets you from a young age…grooming you to love ‘Auntie’ with entertaining children’s programmes and ever onwards as you progress to Uncle Attenborough and all those lovely animal programmes, Bake Offs and Strictly…entertaining you, forming a ‘warm’ relationship with you, before slipping in the political messages that it hopes you won’t notice the nature of or if you do, that you will shrug your shoulders as you lap up the ‘fun’ that the BBC spoon feeds you to keep you quietly content with the world.]
So….Trump’s a fraud, a showman fooling the voters with online fantasy and illusion. Curiously the exact same conclusion by our priest…the good Rowan Williams…who has the grace to admit the Elites have failed us but insists that Trump is the Devilish pied-piper leading us to Hell…
Mass democracy has failed – it’s time to seek a humane alternative
Trump’s real aim was not to do anything as president but simply to be president, to be the most important man in the Western world. This election represents a divorce between the electoral process and the business of political decision-making. It is the ersatz politics of mass theatre, in which what matters most is the declaration of victory.
As such, it is the most cynical betrayal of those who are disenfranchised. It confirms that they have no part in real political processes; they can only choose their monarch.
The politics of mass democracy has failed. It has been narrowed down to a mechanism for managing large-scale interests in response to explicit and implicit lobbying by fabulously well-resourced commercial and financial concerns. The effect has been a growing assumption that what goes on in public political debate does not represent any voices other than the privileged and self-interested. And so, for significant parts of a population, “theatrical” politics comes to look like the only option: a dramatic articulation of the problems of powerlessness, for which the exact details of economic or social reality are irrelevant. This delivers people into the hands of another kind of dishonest politics: the fact-free manipulation of emotion by populist adventurers.
Hmmm…about what was Trump not telling the truth exactly? Williams fails to mention precisely his concerns on that. Kind of important as the whole of his theory of a ‘theatrical Trump’ intent only on taking the ‘throne’ rests solely upon that claim.
Ahh…it matters not that Trump lied, or spelling out those ‘lies’…because the people can’t tell whether he did or not…they’re too uneducated and ignorant….
There is an issue here about education. Yet this can become another hostage to fortune if all it is saying is that a benighted populace should be educated out of false consciousness by those who know better.
William’s conclusion? Power to the People…but only the people who have been properly educated to seek the right answers by er….the Elite…
How politics can be set free from the deadly polarity between empty theatrics and corrupt, complacent plutocracy. What will it take to reacquaint people with control over their communities, shared and realistic values, patience with difference and confidence in their capacity for intelligent negotiation?
The leviathans of the party system will sooner or later have to look at their structures and accountability – not as a step to plebiscite populism, but in terms of what they can do to nurture discussion and decision in the actual communities to which people (not The People) belong.
Ahh yes…those who voted for Trump had no idea what they were voing for or why….they had somehow failed to discuss the issues with the right people….all those online forums and debates that the BBC is so concerned may have misled voters clearly aren’t the way ahead though for imparting the correct message. Yes people are talking but about the wrong things and coming to the wrong conclusions….perhaps the answer is a man, perhaps we can call him a ‘commissar’, in every village, town and community, who is there to ensure people have the correct information and appropriate mental attitude. Yes. I’m sure that’d work.
Our final tipsy typist is the Grand Dame of the political panto…Matthew Parris…who thinks the problem is too much communication, too much information, too much thought and too much freedom to decide for ourselves how to vote…..there’s just too damned much democracy at the moment….or as he prefers to call it…mob rule…
After Trump, I’m losing faith in democracy
The reason I am beginning to question democracy is that it is producing results I profoundly dislike.
I believed in the wisdom of crowds but not mobs. Democracy was of course about inviting the considered view of the crowd but it was just as much about keeping the mob from the gates.
The crowd — ‘true democracy’ — could be wise where a mob might be foolish, because we weren’t governed by the mob, real or virtual. There was no internet, no Facebook, no Twitter, no social media. The closest you got to the mob was radio phone-ins. Opinion polling was in its infancy, and the remark that election day offered ‘the only vote that counts’ dignified the act of voting and distinguished it from a pollster’s clipboard. The phrase ‘the privacy of the polling booth’ meant more than plywood and curtain: it meant quiet reflection, away from the noise of others’ opinions. ‘The crowd’ was a collective noun for millions of individuals, often conferring but finally thinking alone. That was what elections — general, presidential — were for.
Yes…the voter ‘alone’ with his thoughts…thoughts then of course guided and shaped by the all powerful Media and the gifted elite…now shaped by a ‘free Press’ on the internet, mass information and the ability to readily communicate with so many others with their own thoughts, ideas and reasonings…how very undemocratic and inconvenient for those who wish to keep their stranglehold on information and power….we musn’t let ‘ignorant hooligans’ have their say…
Now we can so easily discover what a ‘majority’ think they want at any one moment, and — worse — ignorant hooligans can discover with a click on a keyboard that there are millions like them out there — our faith in democracy, our faith in the ‘government by the people’ part of the trio, is being tested to its logical limit.
As with Sillito and Williams Parris has decided that the unwashed, ignorant plebs on social media must not be allowed to vote without restraint by those who know better…we must apparently find a way of limiting the damage such uneducated, misinformed and less considered manifestations of public thought can wrought once inside the voting booth….
Unless we find a way to fold the popular will into many other and sometimes opposing considerations that make for good government, and unless we find procedures for distinguishing between the evanescent and the more considered manifestations of public opinion, the Trumps and Farages of our age will kill our faith in democracy.
The answer for the Left is to close down those internet sites, newspapers and broadcasters [such as Fox] it finds don’t peddle the approved messages. The BBC and its ilk will become the arbiters of truth, deciding what is news, what is true and what is ‘morally and ethically’ right to reveal to the public…and then they will decide, after having assessed you character, mental capacity, moral uprightness and your politics, whether you will be allowed the right to vote.
1984 is fast approaching.
The bellhop has $2. And $27 + $2 = $29 so, if the guests originally handed over $30, what happened to the remaining $1?
The bellhop has $2. And $27 – $2 = $25 so, that’s corrected the narrative set by BBC seminars.
I find that’s why calculations in hundreds of pages in a scientific paper on Climate Change, regarding input and output of heat, turn out to be rubbish.
I remember going through East Park, Hull, in the sixties with my Granddad, we always returned with the Daily Express, I’ve still got Rupert Bear annuals to prove it. Now I also have ended up only buying the Daily Express.
To get around BBC and Mainstream Media Censorship, Scientists are now finding that they have to do their own journalism, you can find the scientific papers on Google Scholar, but apart from the Internet, the amateur Journalism has only small circulation articles in specialist newsletters that are not blocked by professional editors, also there are some DVD’s of television documentary standard now available.
I think the problem is also reflected in science. Those in Authority are more powerful than the best scientists, but this power gives those in Authority the illusion that they are of superior intelligence to the best scientists.
I could also see this in Yorkshire society where those low IQ middle-class people in Tory areas who voted Labour, were rather bitter people, yet due to Blairism, have ended up as gangs in positions of Authority, down south. Therefore they think of themselves as superior people. I think the gang is called “Common Purpose“, and they are most numerous in NHS Management, more so than the BBC, Guardian, Labour Party, University management etc, put together.
Excellent thinking Richard.
Feeling gnomic today, sometimes we waste minutes on the BBC instead of living lives.
So-I`ll content myself with this.
As a kid, I collected stamps, and loved those Winston Churchill ones from places around the old empire like Penang and Guyana.
And although I lived near Old Traffords Cricket Ground I gave not a hoot for the game, I`m afraid.
But I knew of Clive Lloyd, a true great from Guyana.
If people like him and Farouk Engineer did NOT stop 1000 race riots in those tough 60s/70s in my region, then I don`t know who did.
So-WE the People see Clive Lloyd as Guyanas Ambassador to Britain, a giant of a man in all ways.
Ah but-he`s hardly Baroness Valerie Amos.
Wrong gender, not as svelte, Blairish, EU/UN ish…and Clive has NOT got his picture hung up by Malia Bouattias office at Birmingham Unis “Gilded Students” redoubt no has he?
So we get Andrew Marr talking the Mary Seacole shit with Dame Baroness lady-Amos Scotland of the World this morning-as opposed to asking Clive Lloyd about Marxist takeovers of Guyana.
Wrong answers I`d expect.
Clive Lloyd – ah yes ! Eleven overs an hour if you were lucky, and constant intimidatory bowling, plus poor sportsmanship (with some honourable exceptions, such as Malcolm Marshall).
And Richard, both East Riding Council and Hull Council, I would add, are full of them. Certainly in ERYC the employees see the Conservative Councillors as nuisances who they work round to avoid doing their will. But to bring it round to the topic of this site, they all watch the BBC (as far as I am aware), believe and agree with everything on it. They are, in the main, too thick to question. Look at Beverley, for example, where they have considerably reduced the number of parking places in the Market Place, to allow a cafe culture to develop which was going to have people sitting outside most evenings, due to Climate Change. Not last night!
Ah “Common Purpose”; read that phrased recently in an HG Wells book; “The Earth Set Free”; chilling reminder that we are not fighting a new enemy, just one that has mastered the art of shape shifting.
Richard
Clear analysis. Excellent.
The narrative writing and word & phrase creation goes on apace. BBC R4 Thought for the Day this morning (21 November) cast aspersions on ‘populism’ two or three times and may have managed to mention globalisation as well.
More Brexitscepticism and Businesscepticism (thought I would join in, too) followed hard on the heels of TftD.
Beware BBC! The off switch is nearby and I know how to use it.
Up To Snuff, how true
Andrew Marr and Start the Week
Mau Mau and Abort.
Chris, funny thing but then that’s when the switch clicked – 9.02am! I had Start the Week in mind when posting above because Andrew Marr was about to do his trail at 8.30am on TODAY.
To be fair, I had to go out anyway at 9.40am. But in days past, I would have left the radio on until the last minute. In fact, Heat the Wok was something of a favourite programme – among many others – on Radio 4, until a few years ago.
Now, I tend to check the trail, the guests & theme. If I’m going to be subjected to heavy advertising, especially around virtue signalling subjects with Marr politicking on top, then I may absent myself without apology. Same with Libby Purves Mid-Week although the problem there, for me, is her constant talking & interrupting. What’s the point of guests on a programme when the presenter can waffle away for over half the show.
A change has come over BBC Radio 4 and, perhaps, also over me. As Annie Lennox might put it “The language is leaving me.”
David Sillito overlooks the fact that the USA does not really have national newspapers, perhaps better expressed as newspapers with national coverage. I haven’t read his piece and am going on what Alan posted above, did Sillito make the observation that TV made Donald Trump? If not, he should have done.
Trump is the ultimate reality TV creation. A franchised (licenced copy) show creating a national and international name out of a mostly successful businessman who has now diversified. A bit like the KKK (that’s Kim and Kourtney and Khloe, not the other KKK!) taking their glossy faces & race-circuit curves from pin-up to make-up to cook-up (recipes) to lash-up (accessories and fashions) in the space of a few years.
The internet feeds off TV. TV feeds off the Internet. In reality they are now both competing for things they have lost.
People.
Matthew Parris has written that article blithely insulting everyone who doesn’t agree with him and saying the answer is less democracy, without a shred of irony, in the same publication as Brendan O’Neil’s excellent article describing the way sneering anti-democratic elitists blithely insult everyone who doesn’t agree with them and say the answer is less democracy.
To me, Matthew Parris is one of those people I feel I can always safely disagree with. He seems to have a peculiar talent for missing the point on just about everything.
Not as bright as he thinks he is.
It seems he has attributes elsewhere that assure him a platform
As I’ve commented before, the choice for the US electorate was between 2 fairly unpalatable alternatives. Simply put, the US electorate chose the (to the electorate) less unpalatable candidate. Actually, contra the BBC and the rest of the bien pensant establishment, this shows the strength of the system. The whole electorate chose one person/one set of policies but in this election – unprecedently – avoided the “middlemen” of (one of) the party organisations and the political class to opt for (or opt against) its favourite. This was more or less unique since Trump became the candidate of one of the establishment parties against the whole weight of that party’s establishment.
In the UK, it was only the beneficial accident of circumstance by which the electorate as a whole was granted a say on the EU unmediated by the political parties (or anyone else). Left to the normal workings of UK politics there was little chance that Brexit would see the light of day. Even now you can see the political class desperately seeking something/anything to frustrate Brexit. It ignores the appearance of bias (a staple of the UK judicial system which requires not just the absence of bias but the absence of the appearance of bias) of one or more members of the Supreme Court. Imagine the whining and moaning if members of the senior judiciary ruling on this case had been founder members of UKIP or had wives who were tweeting in favour of Brexit: there wouldn’t be enough room in the BBC studios for Remoaners weeping and wailing about corruption in the judiciary.
Good post, Umbongo, and you sort of answer NCBBC’s question: “Hmmm…about what was Trump not telling the truth exactly?”, the answer being “Himself.”. I think Trump carefully manipulated his image and made himself obnoxious or more obnoxious, perhaps deliberately or perhaps just by sheer animal & political instinct. Maybe he realised that he couldn’t beat a quality field for the Republican nomination by being ‘just like them’ so he made himself different and distinctive.
It worked. And up against obnoxious Clinton, the deplorable Trump was probably actually helped by the media campaigning for Clinton by bad-mouthing him. That worked, too, it seems.
Already, with only ten days passed we now seem to be seeing a slightly different person emerge.
Will the BBC and the rest of the UK media learn? There’s no evidence of it post-8 November.
Hmmm…about what was Trump not telling the truth exactly? Williams fails to mention precisely his concerns on that. Kind of important as the whole of his theory of a ‘theatrical Trump’ intent only on taking the ‘throne’ rests solely upon that claim.
Trump was certainly telling the truth about Islamic murder gangs in Brussels.
Was Williams aware of the Islamic rape gangs in Britain, who were gang raping their way through the Midlands, Yorkshire and beyond. I did in 2000, so I find it difficult to believe that privy councilors, Chief constables, PMs and Home secretaries, were not aware of the most horrendous war crime committed by politicians on their own kind. There is no incidence in history of such a grotesque crime.
And yes, it is a war crime, as Muslims are waging Jihad to bring the entire world under Sharia. In that atleast, they cannot be blamed, as the Islamic canons explicitly guides them to do so. It is our fault for not paying attention.
Now, it is the task of Archbishops, particularly the one in Canterbury, to defend and safeguard the spiritual, and therefore the political safety of the Protestant realm of Her Majesty. If an ABC failed in this, his primary duty, due to ignorance, or more likely, PCness, then I see no reason for an established church.
Donald Trump, unlike Ronan Williams, realizes the danger the West is in, even though he really should have the very simplest idea on religious and spiritual doctrine. Ronan Williams now presumes he can advice Trump, on matters he has no idea, while having failed on issues that he should have had some competence.
Its little too early for retrospection, but given the fact that virtually everyone – from big banks, Goldman Sachs, Wall street, politicians all over the world, the entire MSM, virtually all TV in America, as well as the Republican party, opposed Donald Trump, and the Trump wins, tells me, that what was offered in the election was not two unpalatable choices, but 19 unpalatable choices. Two by the Democrats, and seventeen by the Republicans.
So the question is, what were the people of America looking for? Well, it was clear from the beginning.
They were looking for someone to root out the endemic corruption in the Federal government in DC.
As this is a Herculean task, they were looking for
1. Someone outside the government.
2. Someone who would not accept campaign contributions from the Establishment.
3. Someone who would not knuckle under when attacked, in all manner of ways, by the media, the politicians, and the Establishment.
4. Someone who would not give up and lie down, but give all the attackers a bloody nose, from the little ones to the major attackers.
This is virtually an impossible ask. But amazingly, cometh the hour, cometh the man.
Donald Trump was far from an unpalatable choice, but miraculously, the only one who ticked all the requirements. The Earps and Doc Masterton, are in town now, and the Clantons (Clintons), are going to be run out of town. Exactly what the people wanted.
The PC mobs are on the run. Even some of the attackers are going to Trump towers, with their tails wagging, hoping for a crumb or biscuit from the table.
Being pedantic it is Doc Holliday and Bat Masterson.
Oh thank you Dave S.
I was penning this in a hurry, as I had a lunch appointment, and didn’t have the time to Google. Yes. Doc Holliday and Bat Masterson, along with the Earps. The Clintoons run out of town, or facing a federal marshal.
I never knew that watching old Westerns would come in handy some day.
PS: Wonderful lunch, cooked by a Frenchman, who also is a French trained chef.
NCBBC: “So the question is, what were the people of America looking for? Well, it was clear from the beginning.
They were looking for someone to root out the endemic corruption in the Federal government in DC. ”
You make good points in 1. & 2. For 3. & 4., I think “Its little too early for retrospection”, at least, of that order.
There’s no guarantee that the self-made Trump, whether prior to or for and during the campaign, will succeed. I hope for America’s sake that he does.
I remember, however, a peanut farmer who went to Washington forty years ago to do exactly the same as Trump. Yes, his administration made some big mistakes immediately on entering The Beltway and put Establishment backs up and attracted media attention for the wrong reasons, eg. ‘cowboy boots on desks’. Carter’s Presidency is now looked upon as a failure, in large measure because of the failed hostage rescue attempt that was beyond his immediate control. It could be said that Jimmy Carter was the greatest American President that the Americans never knew they had.
In only ten days, Trump has shown that the ‘President-elect Trump’ is different to ‘campaign and Election Trump’. I think the ‘Reality* TV’ star created one reality for the campaign. We may be now seeing a completely different Trump. The media made man has in turn led the whole American media and large sections of the worlds’ media completely by the nose through the whole Presidential Election process.
Clever. Very clever.
In contrast to Trump, Hillary Clinton was Clinton. ‘See Clinton, get Clinton’. That may have caused swing voters and some Democrats to choose Trump.
(* a misnomer if there ever was one!)
Good points. But with Trump atleast we have hope for a better future. With the Clantons, the future in Europe was definitely Islamic. There is still huge danger, as long as Hillary Merkel or Angela Clinton, is around. But with Trump’s election, she certainly looks not so certain of herself.
Yes, NCBBC, agree about Trump although I’d have preferred some of the other Republican candidates. Possibly, even probably, they would have been incapable of beating Clinton? Am coming to the view that keeping Clinton out of the White House may have been essential.
Agree on Muttillary Mekon, too, to an extent. Am still trying to figure her out!
Have you noticed how, on BBC R4 at least, there seems to be many less unfavourable references to Russia & Putin and less talking up of conflict between ‘the West’ and Russia? It could the BBC are distracted by other things, eg: bad-mouthing Trump, the Cox murder trial, etc..
Or it could be that the world is just a little bit safer with Trump heading towards inauguration & the White House and the BBC see Trump as less likely to get into a conflict with Putin & Russia?
Funny thing, I was only thinking a few moments ago about Obama’s Presidency: that early Nobel Prize award hasn’t really translated into much world peacemaking over the last eight years, has it?
Here is hoping for better for the world for 2017 and onwards.
Up2Snuff wrote: Funny thing, I was only thinking a few moments ago about Obama’s Presidency: that early Nobel Prize award hasn’t really translated into much world peacemaking over the last eight years, has it?
It hasn’t, far from it. In the USA, he has been a divisive figure, even to the extent that Black police officers dislike him. Remember the beer summit or whatever.
Abroad, he has pissed off allies in the Muslim world, and the rest. He has been a comfort to the Muslim Brotherhood. Along with Clinton, he has created a disaster in Libya and Syria, and destabilised Europe to boot. All in line with Wahhabbi Islam – destabilise Muslim nations not under Wahhabbi Islam, amd set in motion the Islamic conquest of Europe.
Security agencies like the FBI, Homeland Security are not allowed to even mention Jihad, leave alone studying the underlying doctrine of Islamic fanaticism.
The man is an unmitigated disaster. The only thing he does relatively well, is to read from a teleprompter. Though it is fun to see his head nodding side to side, as of he was watching a tennis match.
Rowan Williams and Parris are full of sh**.
Why waste time on them now?
What is really important is that what the Clinton gang would have done to the US and to the West is not going to happen. The same with Brexit. We go and what was going to be imposed on us by the elite does not happen. This is what Williams and Parris cannot stand. It might be over for them for good. I salute the wisdom of the voters and all that crap from Parris is just that. Sour grapes that his disdain for us is now not going to be of any use.
Same with the BBC. It lost we won.
Well said, Dave S – like us, the Americans hopefully have rescued their country just in time.
Yes we won. The BBC and the Left lost Big. No Labour in no 10, then Brexit, and now Trump. Woohoo.
Can we ask the BBC for the license money to be refunded, as they were wrong, WRONG, WRONG, on all major issues.
Then to complete the humiliation, Justin Webb got Pollacked. Webb had a laid an ambush for a pleasant Joel Pollack. But despite the ambush, Webb was taken out and well… Pollacked.
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/11/17/bannon-listen-breitbart-editor-pollak-shuts-bbc-libel/
Complete and utter FAIL. Not even a Pass degree. Send them down.
PS: The BBC is so pro- Palestinian and pro-Islam, they make al Jazeera look fair and balanced.
The tragedy is they dont care what the viewers think, as they are state funded, for all practical purposes.
Good spot, NCBBC.
Is Justin Webb chucking his career down the toilet?
This must be about the third or fourth Trump-related on-air disaster for Webb this month alone.
Up2snuff: This must be about the third or fourth Trump-related on-air disaster for Webb this month alone.
Not third or fourth time? In any media organisation, such a failure would lead to dismissal. But not in the BBC. They are state funded, so they don’t have a care.
Just a stylistic point Alan mate.
Excellent content in your piece, but it is rather long, so difficult to absorb all the information, especially when many readers are at work.
Personally I’d use headings for each section.
And then after finished writing go back and write an introductory paragraph introducing the salient points.
+ If you had a cartoonist like the excellent Josh, that would help.
In this case a 1984-esque cartoon of 3 speaking heads pointing their fingers
..saying “Look over there at those evil voices, that contradict ‘Big Mother our BBC’ ”
Here Essentially here what we are talking about is
#1 the BBC’s habit of constructing propaganda instead of reporting news. And its clever GROOMING techniques like how it twists narrative with riddle like tricks to make them seem not only plausible but correct when they really aren’t.
#2 The irony of our “BBC Church-of-SJW-missionary-journalists” calling for censorship cos some news can be labelled BY THEM as “fake”, when they wouldn’t countenance such interference when the Chinese govt does it.
#3, #4, #5 Deconstructions of pices by David Sillito,Bishop Rowan Williams and their vast contradictions.
Concluding that
“The answer for the Left is to close down those who don’t peddle the approved messages, leaving the BBC/MSM etc uncontested
…very 1984
… a situation highlighted by the video from 1984 of An Apple Mac Advertisement saying computers will give us the freedom to ensure the real 1984 is not like Orwell’s 1984
oops typo
“#3, #4, #5 Deconstructions of pices by David Sillito,Bishop Rowan Williams and Matthew Parris and their vast contradictions.”
(I can’t edit posts, cos I have to use a proxy server due to the government wi-fi banning Biased-bbc…. how 1984 is that itself ?)
All hail Big Mother BBC
…for her and her sisters in MSM are are the only TRUE voices
..all others are evil and need to be suppressed.
What a shame for Mathew Parrish and the Rowan Williams that the Chartists were formed to obtain the vote for the working man , and the suffragettes for votes for women .
What a shame for the two above that the Apartheid system was taken down in South Africa and it became one man ,one vote . They must hate Nelsn Mandela .
In addition, Nibor, those writers and the BBC and other Left-ist/Left-ish media have completely missed that in his acceptance speech, President-Elect Trump came out with a programme for his Presidency that was pure FD Roosevelt. I think Eleanor would have been cooing all around and over Donald!
Now, which Party was President Roosevelt in?
Democracy & democrats! Disgraceful! Aren’t they, just?
🙂
Thunderingly good article above Alan, loads of good comments.
1. We can save an awful lot of legword and typing if we keep it simple.
2. The likes of Parris and Rowan serve our purposes-yes, it`s easy to rage at their perennial access to media platforms and cherry pickers at will, and funded by us.
But this lot serve to me as kryptonite on the clock hand pointing at 9.
This means its 3 for the rest of us.
3. As for Trump-need only look at Ann Coulter who simply says that as all these blowhards massaged,manipulated and mashed up truth into lies,Trump was actually out there doing deals, untutored and somehow hearing people. Immigration and trade deals were only two of the $100 dollar bills they left on his floor and begged him to pick up and use. Everybody else scorned the money(tainted, tasteless , racist etc)-but he simply took them at their words.
And won.
Sorry Rowan-when the Pope and you know even less about God than does Trump, maybe you need to hop over to Islam where brains don`t need to be engaged. Just like liberals in fact.
Apropos monetary puzzles, even Radio 3 a sometime beacon of erudition had a moment today when Rob Cowan reminisced buying an LP by Karl Ancerl in days of yore for seventeen and six – that’s 75p ! he declared. Time for Mr Cowan to become BBC Economics editor.
Trump, Breitbart and Milo are NOT part of the Alt-Right
There is a trick used these today is reporting Trump and the right
– A false equivalence or poisoning of the wells trick.
Milo did an article about “The alt-Right” he made it clear that they genuinely are the far-right who are more than nationalist they are racist.
There became an error when reporters said cos Milo reported on the Alt-Right therefore he and Breitbart are part of the Alt-Right
And then reporters lazily sling language around saying that Trump, Breitbart and Milo are part of the Alt-Right “they are all racists”
Of course this fine-ness for is great for Leftmob, cos explaining all this gets messy.
ie that “Alt-Right should not be banned, cos people should be free to say anything including
#1 things that are racist.
(cos then they are can be challenged which wouldn’t happen if they were driven underground.)
#2 things that are offensive
(otherwise poor debaters could hide behind challenge by shouting “I am offended”
It is important to say that the right to free speech is not 100% absolute and the law already allows for some fringe policing eg incitement to violence etc.
Talking about physical censorship
The BBC doesn’t allow freedom of filming around the outside of Salford Media City complex.
R4 Y&Y just did an item about private spaces which seem public.
– And it turns out private housing estates and Salford Media City are examples.
– A lecturer whose part of the media school at Media City took his students outside to start practicing, but security told him ‘no filming is allowed without a permit and a permit must be applied for 48 hours in advance.’
..So could someone like Sports Direct also tell the BBC that they can’t film around the outside of their warehouses without a similar permit obtained 48 hours in advance ?
Would the BBC accept that ?
I’m guessing the rules make it illegal to stage a protest anywhere near Media City..Yet the BBC stages it’s own Green Propaganda stunts in that area.
Add that to the list to too many ‘uniques’.
You could always submit an FOI for the irony value and share the reply here.
“but security told him ‘no filming is allowed without a permit and a permit must be applied for 48 hours in advance.’”
Of course, SG, they asked Cliff Richard first, didn’t they!
Oh yes, helicopters at dawn, before he wakes up!
It never occurs to the leftist mainstream media that perhaps the people who voted for Trump and Brexit had already made their minds up without any outside help whatsoever and that, in fact, they voted from bitter experience of being told what to do and think by the fascistic Left and being on the receiving end of insult and disdain if they didn’t comply with their groupthink.
I do not know if the BBC have covered it, but joyous news for them that Sarkozy, with his new found populist policies has been defeated in the Republican elections for Presidential candidate, BUT
According to the DT many socialists (£2 to have your say – sound familiar?) voted for Juppe to stop Sarkozy, yet defying the pollsters again one Monsieur Fillon came out top. The DT describes him as a “Thatcherite with a Welsh wife”. Seems the French are also not enamoured with the old guard that Juppe (complete with record for malpractice in office) represents.
Now that really could cause problems for the BBC if the run off was between a Thatcherite and Madame le Pen
So who DID get the $1. Was the bell hop actually searched?
Misty, not clear, full colour complex : that is the real situation of complex arguments
So you can look for simple magic door solutions like LeftMob “oh yeh I know people who don’t agree with everything we say are all racist, misogynist rightwingers”
Or you can do careful step by step analysis to pick your way thru the mist.
Just like Jeff Holiday did in the BRILIANT video @Thoughtful posted yesterday
Jeff Holiday carefully takes down MSM with attention to
“John Oliver and Journalistic Integrity”
pointing out that last year John Oliver *pleaded* for Republicans to nominate Trump cos that would mean a free pass for Hillary.
And now uses his platform on HBO to ask the public to trust CNN when in fact Time Warner who are a top-ten Hillary donor , actually own CNN and HBO.
And that we used to trust MSM more than the backstreet guy cos they had integrity and were better, so it’s no use asking us to JUST TRUST them, now they’ve lost their integrity.
BBC Tedch tent is a propaganda show run by Rory caitlin Jones which is always doing free ads for his mates like Tesla
This last weeks edition was about fake-news and Hatespeak all in one
As I said the item about Hatespeak dealt with Twitter banning Alt-Right people from Twitter
But didn’t do enought to differentiate between normal right as in non left and Alt-Right which do often say genuinely racist things (and look like idiots for doing so , so no reason to censor them anyway)
The bit about Fake-News opened the show :
“Google was suddenly in the spotlight after a fake news story that Donald Trump was leading in the POPULAR VOTE in the election came top of a Google search”
That is of course strictly true it’s FALSE-news
but there is a “pea beneath the cup trick” in talking about “the popular vote”.
It too is False-news..Why ?
cos of the definition of “popular vote”, in the election its a “constructed popular vote” rather than a ‘genuine popular vote’, cos that wasn’t the system the US election is conducted under.
If the vote had been conducted under genuine vote conditions the whole election campaign would have been conducted in a differentway.
– No one should be giving weight to stories that talk about “Popular vote”
cos it counts for nothing compared to the genuine state by state vote.
StewGreen
Let us give an example for the educated elite.
Consider the UNITED NATIONS. A vote is carried if a majority of UN members vote for it. On the other hand, a genuine popular vote would mean that when India and China combined, they would always win the UN vote.
USA – UNITED S.T.A.T.E.S OF AMERICA.
Got that, lefties & media study graduates?
My basic interpretation of their pompous, pseudo-intellectual outpourings is that Democracy should only be allowed if it gives them the result they demand. If it doesn’t then it should either be abolished or the rules manipulated to create a One Party State enforcing the version of the world conforming to out own fanatical narrow idealism.