Fox News UK?

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
Ben@Forest
Posts: 2452
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 5:58pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby Ben@Forest » 1 Sep 2020, 9:42pm

PDQ Mobile wrote:Oxford (is in England?) voted Remain. So at least one more.
Brighton maybe?

And Vladivostok voted leave.


There were 12 official regions or countries in the referendum. They were: London, South East, South West, East, East Midlands, West Midlands, North West, North East, Yorkshire and Humber, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Gibraltar was part of the South West region.

The only regions /countries to vote Remain were London, Scotland and NI.

Oxford isn't a region. Nor is Brighton.

PDQ Mobile
Posts: 3604
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby PDQ Mobile » 1 Sep 2020, 9:48pm

Ben@Forest wrote:
PDQ Mobile wrote:Oxford (is in England?) voted Remain. So at least one more.
Brighton maybe?

And Vladivostok voted leave.


There were 12 official regions or countries in the referendum. They were: London, South East, South West, East, East Midlands, West Midlands, North West, North East, Yorkshire and Humber, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Gibraltar was part of the South West region.

The only regions /countries to vote Remain were London, Scotland and NI.

Oxford isn't a region. Nor is Brighton.

I knew you'd know.
They all must have tuned to Fox News.
Last edited by PDQ Mobile on 1 Sep 2020, 10:00pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ben@Forest
Posts: 2452
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 5:58pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby Ben@Forest » 1 Sep 2020, 9:51pm

PDQ Mobile wrote:
Ben@Forest wrote:
PDQ Mobile wrote:Oxford (is in England?) voted Remain. So at least one more.
Brighton maybe?

And Vladivostok voted leave.


There were 12 official regions or countries in the referendum. They were: London, South East, South West, East, East Midlands, West Midlands, North West, North East, Yorkshire and Humber, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Gibraltar was part of the South West region.

The only regions /countries to vote Remain were London, Scotland and NI.

Oxford isn't a region. Nor is Brighton.

I knew you'd know.


And Remain voters are supposed to be better educated.... :wink:

landsurfer
Posts: 5184
Joined: 27 Oct 2012, 9:13pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby landsurfer » 1 Sep 2020, 9:54pm

Anyway .. non left wing news channel ..... got to be a good idea ... just like a non right wing news channel is a good idea ...
"There will come a day, when all the lies will collapse under their own weight, and truth will again triumph." Guess Who ...
The Road Goes On Forever

PDQ Mobile
Posts: 3604
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby PDQ Mobile » 1 Sep 2020, 10:56pm

Ben@Forest wrote:
PDQ Mobile wrote:
Ben@Forest wrote:
There were 12 official regions or countries in the referendum. They were: London, South East, South West, East, East Midlands, West Midlands, North West, North East, Yorkshire and Humber, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Gibraltar was part of the South West region.

The only regions /countries to vote Remain were London, Scotland and NI.

Oxford isn't a region. Nor is Brighton.

I knew you'd know.


And Remain voters are supposed to be better educated.... :wink:

Which just goes to show you can't believe everything you read on Fox News!

pete75
Posts: 13182
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby pete75 » 1 Sep 2020, 11:03pm

windmiller wrote:
pete75 wrote:
windmiller wrote:
:lol:


Windy, why did you cut the reference to your heroes being 'the people who thought it was OK to hack Milly Dowler's phone.' when you quoted Simon?


Well Pete75, because that part of the post was not amusing.
The only hero I have is my dearly departed dad.


The whole lot wasn't amusing but that bit showed up your heroes for what they really are.

windmiller
Posts: 619
Joined: 9 Feb 2009, 5:10pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby windmiller » 1 Sep 2020, 11:16pm

Fox news on a bad day is still a paragon of virtue compared to the BBC.

User avatar
simonineaston
Posts: 3427
Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
Location: Live & work in Briz'l

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby simonineaston » 2 Sep 2020, 8:14am

windmiller wrote:Fox news on a bad day is still a paragon of virtue compared to the BBC.
I guess there’s two reasons why folks read the news. One is to find out as much as you can about the stories of the day, so you can make up your own mind and another is for someone to tell you what to think. One's harder work than the other. Your choice. :-)
ttfn, Simon in Easton
(currently enjoying a Moulton TSR & a nano Brompton...)

Oldjohnw
Posts: 4917
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby Oldjohnw » 2 Sep 2020, 8:34am

simonineaston wrote:
windmiller wrote:Fox news on a bad day is still a paragon of virtue compared to the BBC.
I guess there’s two reasons why folks read the news. One is to find out as much as you can about the stories of the day, so you can make up your own mind and another is for someone to tell you what to think. One's harder work than the other. Your choice. :-)


Another option is to listen to Fox News then assume that the opposite is correct.
John

Ben@Forest
Posts: 2452
Joined: 28 Jan 2013, 5:58pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby Ben@Forest » 2 Sep 2020, 8:56am

simonineaston wrote:l guess there’s two reasons why folks read the news. One is to find out as much as you can about the stories of the day, so you can make up your own mind and another is for someone to tell you what to think. One's harder work than the other. Your choice. :-)


If someone reads the news that suggests they are already using a partisan source, most traditionally like the Telegraph or Guardian, but today it could be one of thousands of other websites, blogs or even social media where fact checking and probity is at best, patchy.

Many people today read a raft of news sources to get a fuller picture, including foreign publications whether English language or not. That's getting a rounded view, not depending on the BBC. Like any other news channel the BBC is influenced by its world-view, opinions and prejudices.

The BBC is not bad at impartiality but it is not uniquely good either - you still have to think about the way it reports something, or the nature of the political satire it commissions, or why it decides not to have vocal performances of Rule Britannia or LoHaG - and the decision made seems to have been a political act, not for Covid related reasons.

User avatar
simonineaston
Posts: 3427
Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
Location: Live & work in Briz'l

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby simonineaston » 2 Sep 2020, 10:39am

There's an old saying (well, not that old, obs... ;-)) that goes "If the app.s free, it's cos you're the product." That idea is applicable to so-called news content these days. Anything that's freely available must have a question mark against it. However, we live in a post-internet world and we've got very used, very quickly, to a ton of stuff being available without an obvious cost. I'll set aside for the purposes of this discussion, costs like monthly broadband fees and more hidden costs like the collossal energy demands made by all those servers out there in "the cloud" - who do we think is paying for all that??
Instead I will simply remind interested parties that the internet is a readily accessible scratch-pad for anyone and everyone to make their views known to anyone who is unsophisticated or addicted enough to lap it all up. I say 'addicted' - why is it that we see people walking, driving - and yes even cycling! everywhere with a smartphone stuck in front of their noses? We, many of us, are addicted to the novel and the notion that we can comment on the novel and that others can take notice of what we say...
Oh, wonder! How many goodly creatures are there here! How beauteous mankind is! O brave new world, that has such people in ‘t!
ttfn, Simon in Easton
(currently enjoying a Moulton TSR & a nano Brompton...)

PDQ Mobile
Posts: 3604
Joined: 2 Aug 2015, 4:40pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby PDQ Mobile » 2 Sep 2020, 10:49am

Ben@Forest wrote:
If someone reads the news that suggests they are already using a partisan source, most traditionally like the Telegraph or Guardian, but today it could be one of thousands of other websites, blogs or even social media where fact checking and probity is at best, patchy.

Many people today read a raft of news sources to get a fuller picture, including foreign publications whether English language or not. That's getting a rounded view, not depending on the BBC. Like any other news channel the BBC is influenced by its world-view, opinions and prejudices.

The BBC is not bad at impartiality but it is not uniquely good either - you still have to think about the way it reports something, or the nature of the political satire it commissions, or why it decides not to have vocal performances of Rule Britannia or LoHaG - and the decision made seems to have been a political act, not for Covid related reasons.

I would counter argue that the main political influence nationally comes not from reading either the Telegraph or the Guardian, but rather from the news-rack tabloids (and today their websites).
They have a far greater circulation for a start.
And right wing and vested interest rank very highly amongst them and their proprietors.

IMV political (and social) influence comes mostly from sources that are not overt and obvious.
The nuance and portrayed societal norms of the soap operas, and similar, ranks very highly in the influence stakes.

To read and digest news from a number of sources takes an amount of time most people simply do not have.
Unless they are in the news profession, or just have a cushy number.
Relatively few have the inclination to read foreign news coverage, but would rather bathe in the rousing strident tones of Rule Britannia.

I always thought the BBC made a reasonable fist of attempting broad and even coverage.
It's long established tentacles into the old Empire often provided something rather unique.

The remit to please all is almost impossible.
The London centric base is actually somewhat diluted by regional centers I think.

One of the biggest disappointments in the BBC, for me personally was, as I already alluded, the coverage of the Referendum.
The advantages of belonging to tolerant and secular Europe and the EU were often underplayed.

Contrasting starkly with dishonest and expenses cheating Farage's ever present rantings about fishing rights.
Which were found at almost every twist of the knob, with little counter argument. Even I knew more about the history of fishing around the UK than most BBC presenters.

((Ps.
I just looked at the cost of Ferries to the Continent. They have risen over 30% since the same time and journey last year.
Inflation's only 2%!!))

User avatar
simonineaston
Posts: 3427
Joined: 9 May 2007, 1:06pm
Location: Live & work in Briz'l

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby simonineaston » 2 Sep 2020, 11:29am

I just looked at the cost of Ferries to the Continent. They have risen over 30% since the same time and journey last year.
Inflation's only 2%!!
Now that is not Good News... :shock:
ttfn, Simon in Easton
(currently enjoying a Moulton TSR & a nano Brompton...)

pete75
Posts: 13182
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby pete75 » 2 Sep 2020, 3:19pm

Ben@Forest wrote:
simonineaston wrote:l guess there’s two reasons why folks read the news. One is to find out as much as you can about the stories of the day, so you can make up your own mind and another is for someone to tell you what to think. One's harder work than the other. Your choice. :-)


If someone reads the news that suggests they are already using a partisan source, most traditionally like the Telegraph or Guardian, but today it could be one of thousands of other websites, blogs or even social media where fact checking and probity is at best, patchy.

Many people today read a raft of news sources to get a fuller picture, including foreign publications whether English language or not. That's getting a rounded view, not depending on the BBC. Like any other news channel the BBC is influenced by its world-view, opinions and prejudices.

The BBC is not bad at impartiality but it is not uniquely good either - you still have to think about the way it reports something, or the nature of the political satire it commissions, or why it decides not to have vocal performances of Rule Britannia or LoHaG - and the decision made seems to have been a political act, not for Covid related reasons.

It can't win either way. Having triumphalist right wing singalongs annoys one section of the population, not having them annoys another. Personally I care little whether they have them or not. I suspect most people feel the same about it.

User avatar
Cunobelin
Posts: 10767
Joined: 6 Feb 2007, 7:22pm

Re: Fox News UK?

Postby Cunobelin » 6 Sep 2020, 7:10pm

Ben@Forest wrote:
PDQ Mobile wrote:
Ben@Forest wrote:
There were 12 official regions or countries in the referendum. They were: London, South East, South West, East, East Midlands, West Midlands, North West, North East, Yorkshire and Humber, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Gibraltar was part of the South West region.

The only regions /countries to vote Remain were London, Scotland and NI.

Oxford isn't a region. Nor is Brighton.

I knew you'd know.


And Remain voters are supposed to be better educated.... :wink:


Given that all the intelligent predictions about trade deals, backlogs and lorry stacking at Dover, and so many other realities dismissed as "remainers" and "Project Fear" are now proving to be true.....it is unequivocal that Remain voters WERE more intelligent