McMullens wearing a spade load more make up compared to earlier in the week
I gues to make him look less bond villain like. All that cunt needed to be told was "are you listening to your self?" desperate and pathetic. He doesn't believe for one second what he's saying, he's watching his arse and eyeing the position above him on the pay roll.
As for press freedom, before I studied it I had a bee in my bonnet about Murdoch and press plurality and politics ( I still have a big issue with press plurality dont get me wrong). The Sun didn't win it, when Murdoch took over the sun, he shifted a left wing paper to suport Thatcher against the vast majority of its readership, his readerships voting pattern did not alter (this doesnt negate any long term drip effect), in short there is no hyperdermic needle effect when it comes to peoples opinions etc and the media (proved by the recent election, vastly Tory press could not elect an outright Tory government). When it comes to the general working ethos of the redtops, Murdoch inparticular there is a real issue however, this has been long standing, (say what you like about mickymouse Media students but this is the kind of thing we look at, turns out its a bit important than just smoking dope and watching films eh!,though we do mainly do that!) The IPCC has been known to be toothless and essentially working as a officially recognised kartell in gossip and lies for as long as its been set up. One good thing thats come out of this debacle is that things have to change, this has put to the fore of public knowledge the real problems we have in our democracy in that, it doesnt matter who the papers say who you should vote for, theyre too clever for that, they shift the debate to the right, the area which suits them the most, they distract from the real issues by telling you how fucked up Amy Winehouse is, or who George Clooney may or may not be fucking.
Things are looking up though, the internet is changing things (it aint just a cliche, it is, 'new media' is as powerful as the leaflets around the time of the first printing presses were). To be honest I'd say the work of Manic on here is a quality example of that, blogs arse allready "old news" to some, but I think they will continue to provide the indepth detail and free expression thats needed to sort this shit out. And yup I'de say Manic up there as one (Ive even mentioned him to one of my lecturers.....*gushes* ;) )
PS. Drunk again on b3ta ;)
(
Jorvic, Sat 9 Jul 2011, 1:45,
Reply)
Is anyone ever sober on B3ta?
I like to think not. You mention the early leaflets; they were usually totally inacurate and often influenced public opinion, including juries. The New Media is the same. People post allsorts on blogs, and some 'play' with Wikki for fun. I don't see it as a new age of truth.
(
TheSundaeLunch I'm a fucking shrub, alright?, Sat 9 Jul 2011, 2:02,
Reply)
public opinion
i'm the public. you're the public. are we so easily swayed? *sigh*
(
artifus is doing it all wrong, Sat 9 Jul 2011, 2:33,
Reply)
Oh yeah, no ones saying that we should return to that
But still a revolutiuonary move from peoples opinions being presented from the Pulpit or the town crier.
I agree, its a new age as in a new opportunity. As a Labour guy, I see my party aknowledging that fact but not quite grasping it.
The free movement of information is critical (filtered by how arsed a person can be to click on a link from a site like this or a friend on FB), at the moment we're on the wane of it I think, like all thing commercial interest will bring it back down to earth. The point is that news organisations and political parties really need to understand and engage with it in a much more sophisticated manner than they are.
Lets take the last election as an example. The press were 100% behind the Tories, it dint work out as planned, why?. The Labour party went to the brink of bankruptcy putting out political pamphlets door knocking, phone pooling, putting the message out there (with less than half the funds of the tories), it worked, not well enough but it worked.
For all the talk of 'the age of spin' they really didn't use FB etc as much as they could. They still don't, take a recent Ed Milliband FB message for instance "I am disgusted by the latest allegations about the hacking of the families of fallen soldiers."... No shit Sherlock. There is an opportunity to really engage with the public through such services without churning out crappy soundbites.
Ofcourse theres the main issue of the direction of the party, as a Socialist I could wax lyrical about the problems with the party (as I have on here)
basicly theres a world of opportunity out there, we dont (and never did) need to cosy up to tin-pot media barrens. Theres a good story about an old school press baron who used to have a tank of fish with a board in the middle, he's release a pike by lifting the board to watch the other fish die. He'd then request "Get me a murder a day!". Murdoch has being doing the same on a larger scale with our country for the last 30 odd years, because know one thought that his tank and board were fake. As soon as our politicians begin to work for us rather than the press the better. THe internet gives them the perfect "out" for that...but only for a limited time
(
Jorvic, Sat 9 Jul 2011, 2:40,
Reply)
way too much cider, I cant spell for shit! ha, or punctuate! Sorry :)
Sorry, and as for truth. Well truth is transient. Ive learnt that much. Truth depends on who you talk to, accuracy in that version of truth is what matters though. One thing I'd like to see out of this is the press publish retractions on the same page and within the same page space as the initial 'mistruth'. People can say what they want on blogs, true enough. But people like Ben Goldacre allready support a process of linking and referencing. Learn to trust ethical press, broadcasters, and indeed bloggers :)
(
Jorvic, Sat 9 Jul 2011, 2:44,
Reply)
Facts, mate.
"Truth" is often pretty subjective.
(
Sea Tramp the thinking woman's 8 Ace, Sat 9 Jul 2011, 3:15,
Reply)
as 'a labour guy'
could you please explain to me, an 'individual', exactly what it is that the labour party stand for? and then the conservatives. and then the lib dems, etc...
in simplistic terms using words of as few syllables as possible. short sentences preferred. an idiots guide to politics, if you will. ta muchly.
(
artifus is doing it all wrong, Sat 9 Jul 2011, 2:51,
Reply)
Ha!
Well. As a 'Labour Guy' I can only talk for my self. So I have certain political beliefs, Social Democrat in nature mostly, I joined because I was looking for a party that broadly conforms to that, Under Blair Labour didnt work for me though I should have joined for the reasons I will state shortly. 97-07 fullfilled alot of Neil Kinnock's, and mostly John Smith's Social Democratic ideals, minimum wage etc. Unfortunatly under Blair Labour became enthrawled with Free Marketism, cosied up to the city, fleet street etc. All very distastful. I joined the seconed (the very seconed I timed it right) that Blair resigned to the Queen. I joined Labour because they are the only party which has fulfilled the aims of socialism (whilst never being exclusevly socialist, which I agree with, Im not an ideological socialist), NHS, etc. So thats that
Lib Dems, well yes they encompas the SDP whicjh split, so the Dem part of the Lib Dems are Labour people throwing a strop. Unfortunately they tend to only make a noise when it suits. Generally the Lib Dems are (spineless has always been our assesment of them in Council seats) Economic Tories, but moral liberals. I believe strongly that if the election had given the Lib Dems more of a choice, Clegg being more 'Liberal' than 'SDP' would have still gone into bed with the Tories.
Conservatives. Ok well they are a strange beast. Things may change with the next generation of them, god knows Ive had enough arguments (and heard enough borderline bigtoed racist shit from them). They may move away from Thatcherism (Cameron is Thatcher writ large, basicly people think the bogey man is in a wheelchair so theres nothing to worry about. The Condems are skillfuly doing what Maggie never could). So in 10 years expect the Conservatives to return to their moral conservatism, rather concentrating so much on Laissez-faire economices.
Or in short. Labour = Spiv with a heart of gold who you need to keep an eye on and guide in the right direction
Lib Dems = Two faced cunt that will screw you if it saves his arse while your back is turned
Conservatives= the cunt who looks down his nose at you and wants to keep it that way.
(
Jorvic, Sat 9 Jul 2011, 3:08,
Reply)
30 years of politics
not much in the grand scheme of things. i was looking for something a little deeper, on the birth, life, death, relationships, nature of existence, being a human, being, within a vaguely stable and sustainable society and not destroying ourselves in the process kind of things. ho hum.
(
artifus is doing it all wrong, Sat 9 Jul 2011, 3:17,
Reply)
...and eyeing the position above him on the pay roll.
difficult he's self-employed...
(, Sat 9 Jul 2011, 22:06, Reply)