jabba the hutt to be replaced as shadow home sec

Surprised the Daily Mail line is not off the graph.
Never ever known of such anti- Labour hysteria.

Today's front page shows Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott with
the caption underneath " The Mail accuses this troika of befriending Britain's
enemies and scorning the institutions that keep us safe."?

In my view the only way to bring people round to your point of view is to speak
to them in an effort to get them to understand your way of thinking or if you can't do that
to establish some form of common ground so each party can co-exist in some form of peaceful harmony at least.

Confiscation of passports , internment, electronic tagging, longer prison sentences are all
being put forward as some of the things that can be done to sort out acts of terrorism.

Quite how any of those remedies will stop suicidal jihadists intent on killing innocent people
is something no one seems to understand.

 

Tbf as a Guardian and Independent reader I would argue the former, as a left wing paper has done as much damage to Labour's cause as anyone. Until the last couple of weeks when they've revised their opinion on Corbyn (long after public opinion) they've used him and people with progressive views as a punching bag

 

So to conclude, right wing papers are right wing, and left wing papers are left wing.

If you pick up a right or left wing paper expecting an independent view free of bias, then you'll always be disappointed.

 

Up to press anything other than a Blairite/soft Cameron view has been rubbished by the PLP, media and TV. Until Corbyn started to resonate once he managed to get to talk to people, and then the slippery ******* turned. With the honourable exception of Murdoch's empire and the mail who see him as a proper threat to their status quo.

 

Edit: Confused over post. Must be post lunch slump.

Yeah, most of it is trash

 

Relevant and very important.

 

Well you're right, but what you're missing is that unless you read the Mirror you'd be hard pressed to find any fair and balanced reporting of Labour in any of the papers. Even the Guardian (seen as left wing) actually ran more negative stories than positive ones.

 

Cooper. Lol

 

So you think the BBC are neutral, what about The BBC censoring and banning the song "Liar Liar" it's reached No1 in the iTunes charts and still refuse to play it," will someone tell them it's a song FFS".

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...ain-skaplay-button-ofcom-charts-a7770586.html

 

I've never considered the Mirror to be fair and balanced. I don't think there is a paper that is neutral. And i'm sure there are some who are unaware of the bias as its just what they are used to "reading"

 

Diane Abbott isnt my cup of tea, but people should read this.

 

The point is that if you wanted to 'balance out' your views from elsewhere you'd have to go read The Mirror, because during this election its the only paper to have supported Labour in a largely positive fashion Note: Even the Mirror before the election spent 2 years rubbishing Corbyn. The British press is overwhelmingly right-wing. Thankfully we aren't reliant on just these news sources. If we were then we'd be stuck with another New Labour facsimile.

 

None of them wanted Corbyn as leader, Cooper especially. And lets be clear here, Corbyn appointed some of those who were opposed to him in his cabinet because he wanted to try and have a united party. But then you'll remember that in a hissy fit, 20 of them resigned on the same day in a co-ordinated attempt to remove him.

 

That's the point though. It's left wing. So its not a balanced paper (well never when I've picked up a stray copy on the tube). and absolutely agree, the vast majority of the media are right wing, many with very rich non domicile owners. Can't help feel the irony of those so thoroughly outraged on our behalf living in the lap of luxury thousands of miles away avoiding paying any tax at all.

 

I have generally supported the BBC but their coverage of the election has been very one sided and biased. Though not generally in favour of privatisation of they aren't fit for purpose as a public service broadcaster. The recent resurfacing of tbe doctored interview with Corbyn is a case in.point.

I acknowledge the argument that we see bias to suit our own beliefs but tbe same bias hasn't been visible on C4 news or Sky and even Piers bloody Morgan has actually asked the difficult questions the tory lovers at tbe beeb have avoided.

The print media is pretty much a joke that lies and smears and demeans us all. Run by non British patriots who avoid tax and live abroad.

 

The BBC have stated that they will not play it precisely because of their editorial impartiality. It might be 'just a song' but the content contravenes their editorial guidelines and therefore they made the decision not to play it on their radio stations. These guidelines must be enforced, more so because of us being in a General Election campaign.

It's not an anti-left conspiracy, no matter how much you want to think it is because they would be equally bound by their own guidelines to take the same action if somebody bothered to release a track called 'Corbyn loves the IRA'.

iTunes is not subject to the same editorial guidelines.

 

I can't understand why the print media is not bound by the same reporting rules as the broadcast media. We need objective journalists more than ever now with the lies coming out of the politicians.