• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

REFERENDUM RESULTS AND DISCUSSION THREAD

thehistorymakers said:
Can you find me some links with Guardian propaganda, please. You are so good at finding research that backs up your $#@! surely you can find some propaganda on the Guardian, for me.
Click to expand...

No problem. I'll do that for you now. Done it. There was no propaganda. Glad to be of service.
 
Stan Hullis said:
THM you wonder why people get wound up about the way you post and call you a WUM or a troll or whatever other adjective that befits the persona.

You boldly claim that you can "put link after link for the rest of your life" to demonstrate the Guardian propaganda, get asked for ONE link and then still 2 hours later you skirt around it.

Here are some helpful hints and tips:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/propaganda

Shouldn't take you too long
Click to expand...


I will put links up, don't worry. Do you honestly think that the Guardian doesn't try to manipulate people politically?
 
Johnny75 said:
You really are an odd little man, you haven't explained anything I've mentioned but you have explained UI again.

It was your rambling I wanted you to explain - 'motivation is work', 'immigrants will fill low paid jobs', 'you can't force people into work' and 'people who rely on others'.
Click to expand...

Ha ! As I said read it again slooooowlllyyy .. You're seeing things. In the context of universal income I didn't mention low paid jobs because there won't be low paid jobs if people receive the figure I would pay !!! Geddit ??? The incentive to work is not entirely based on monetary gain - although you may be different.
 
Jayzuz Christus you're all flapping and chasing after THM and yet all he was saying in a roundabout way is that the Guardian will seek to influence the opinions of people in contrast to other areas of the media which do the same thing but carrying a different message. It's traditionally a left wing paper and espouses such views and it is therefore biased ! There is no objectivity, there is no proven right or wrong way and it is therefore propaganda.
 
Papper said:
Jayzuz Christus you're all flapping and chasing after THM and yet all he was saying in a roundabout way is that the Guardian will seek to influence the opinions of people in contrast to other areas of the media which do the same thing but carrying a different message. It's traditionally a left wing paper and espouses such views and it is therefore biased ! There is no objectivity, there is no proven right or wrong way and it is therefore propaganda.
Click to expand...

Thank God you were here to explain it to us!
 
Papper said:
Jayzuz Christus you're all flapping and chasing after THM and yet all he was saying in a roundabout way is that the Guardian will seek to influence the opinions of people in contrast to other areas of the media which do the same thing but carrying a different message. It's traditionally a left wing paper and espouses such views and it is therefore biased ! There is no objectivity, there is no proven right or wrong way and it is therefore propaganda.
Click to expand...

No objectivity other than their pro-Brexit economics editor.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
No objectivity other than their pro-Brexit economics editor.
Click to expand...

But that's just it. Different opinions from all sides. It's all propaganda and nobody has the definitive answer. Brexit was apolitical with splits in each party.
 
Propaganda is a very strong term with certain connotations and I think it's that definition which people object to and want proof of if someone is going to stick with that line. No-one would deny the Guardian has a pro-Remain stance on the whole. However having an opinion and writing a piece (ideally with evidence and reason to support it) which supports that opinion is not propaganda.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
Propaganda is a very strong term with certain connotations and I think it's that definition which people object to and want proof of if someone is going to stick with that line. No-one would deny the Guardian has a pro-Remain stance on the whole. However having an opinion and writing a piece (ideally with evidence and reason to support it) which supports that opinion is not propaganda.
Click to expand...

Blair bombed Iraq on WMD - he lied. False propaganda that resulted in many unnecessary deaths.

http://markcurtis.info/2016/11/26/deceiving-the-public-the-iraq-propaganda-campaign/
 
Struggling to see what that has to do with the current discussion.

That is a fairly neutral piece from 14 years ago reporting Tony Blair's words and also that many Labour MPs no longer believed him.

How does it relate to the Guardian's coverage of Brexit?
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
Struggling to see what that has to do with the current discussion.

That is a fairly neutral piece from 14 years ago reporting Tony Blair's words and also that many Labour MPs no longer believed him.

How does it relate to the Guardian's coverage of Brexit?
Click to expand...

I was explaining Propaganda and how lies can be peddled through the media - found another article and added it but deleted the other one by mistake. Yes it was neutral and balanced but that's objectivity/subjectivity/propaganda.
 
thehistorymakers said:
I will put links up, don't worry. Do you honestly think that the Guardian doesn't try to manipulate people politically?
Click to expand...

I don't really care, just want you to back up what you say for once, for the sanity of this thread.
 
Papper said:
I was explaining Propaganda and how lies can be peddled through the media - found another article and added it but deleted the other one by mistake. Yes it was neutral and balanced but that's objectivity/propaganda.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone doubts that Blair was at very least, economical with the truth - although the Chilot Enquiry cleared him of lying - and elements of the media are always trigger happy when it comes to military affairs, being as they still think Britain rules the waves. It's not propaganda though.

And we're talking about the Guardian's op-ed pieces primarily in this context; but it can't be propaganda if they're showing both sides of the argument, or if the side they favour is backed up by actual evidence, data, respected peer opinion, reasoned argument etc. Anyone is free to disagree with it, I disagree with Larry Elliott's arguments in the same paper but I read his pieces because I respect him as an economist and a journalist.

Propaganda is not just "what I disagree with". The Mail has put out some reprehensible pieces - "Enemies of the State", anyone - but I wouldn't describe that as propaganda either. Absolute rubbish, definitely, irresponsible, for sure.
 
Deutsch Wolf said:
I don't think anyone doubts that Blair was at very least, economical with the truth - although the Chilot Enquiry cleared him of lying - and elements of the media are always trigger happy when it comes to military affairs, being as they still think Britain rules the waves. It's not propaganda though.

And we're talking about the Guardian's op-ed pieces primarily in this context; but it can't be propaganda if they're showing both sides of the argument, or if the side they favour is backed up by actual evidence, data, respected peer opinion, reasoned argument etc. Anyone is free to disagree with it, I disagree with Larry Elliott's arguments in the same paper but I read his pieces because I respect him as an economist and a journalist.

Propaganda is not just "what I disagree with". The Mail has put out some reprehensible pieces - "Enemies of the State", anyone - but I wouldn't describe that as propaganda either. Absolute rubbish, definitely, irresponsible, for sure.
Click to expand...

Don't disagree with much of that but Blair/Chilcott is OT but if he wasn't lying .. well that's another story for another day. I get what you mean by the connotations of the word 'propaganda' but off the top of my head there isn't a better word - maybe media 'suggestion' but that doesn't feel quite right. There is bias and it is subjective.
 
Visage said:
GuardianWarPropaganda?

That sounds like an excellent objective source.

Im going to give you 24h away from this forum so that you dont get distracted from your search for better evidence. We'll see what you come up with when you get back.
Click to expand...

Ha !

How can the Guardian be objective when it stands for a political ideology that is separate and different to that proposed by other media outlets?
Who decides what is objective and subjective? Don't dictatorships do that ?
 
All media is subjective, except for the PA and Reuters at a push.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

darlowolf64
  • Locked
The Clique and how to join it...
Replies
6
Views
2K
The Bear
The Bear
lemonjelly
The Mental Health thread
49 50 51
Replies
1K
Views
103K
The Bear
The Bear
Back
Top