Let's Get Political!

[RedRag]

Interesting further perspectives there.  

I had never heard of the Zinoviev letter (1924 MI6 forgery linking Labour Govt. in Soviet plot to foment unrest in UK) splashed by the Daily Mail 4 days before a GE.   That was as "fake" as "fake news" can be.

Why are people so gullible?  I am a natural sceptic but I can hardly claim to have gone through life without having been duped a number of times myself.

With the print media (and also to some degree, online) I suspect there is a tendency to more readily believe the written word over the spoken word.  

Today we seem to have a 24/7 splurge of stories and claims and so much distraction that we have no time to ascertain the messenger or critically evaluate its veracity.  The opposite almost of subliminal advertising.

PS  Enjoyed your first hand account of the Peterloo massacre 

[pauld]

Jesus, what have we become?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/24/majority-of-voters-think-violence-against-mps-is-price-worth-paying-for-brexit

[Peter Venkman]

Jesus, what have we become?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/24/majority-of-voters-think-violence-against-mps-is-price-worth-paying-for-brexit

I saw this earlier, its utterly shocking.

[pauld]

I saw this earlier, its utterly shocking.

That said, I am hoping the one promise that Johnson keeps is his "dead in a ditch" pledge #ditchMeansDitch

[Flashheart]

Except the poll questions were very much loaded, and the conclusion (deliberately?) misinterpreted.

[pauld]

Except the poll questions were very much loaded, and the conclusion (deliberately?) misinterpreted.

Maybe I'm being dim, but I don't see that as being especially loaded is it? I can see that the conclusions might have been misreported, mind

[Flashheart]

It's a false dichotomy (excluding the more extreme option). Those taking part are only given the option of remaining (which many don't want) - or leaving with violence (which many don't want)

What about also asking: "I want to leave/remain and don't want violence". The results would likely have been rather different then.

*Edit. I should have said the poll overall is loaded rather than the specific questions.

[pauld]

It's a false dichotomy (excluding the more extreme option). Those taking part are only given the option of remaining (which many don't want) - or leaving with violence (which many don't want)

What about also asking: "I want to leave and don't want violence". The results would likely have been rather different then.

*Edit. I should have said the poll overall is loaded rather than the specific questions.

Cheers. I was, as suspected, being dim. Thanks for taking the time to explain. It's been a long week.

[Flashheart]

The left-leaning rags are often just as guilty of deliberate misdirection as the others; they just tend to be more subtle about it. (And less harmful).

[Pax Romana]

This is why I avoid the Guardian as much as the Mail.  It's just as deceitful but with the added irritation of an arrogant delusion that they invariably occupy the moral high ground.

Were these the questions specifically for Leave voters?  I assume Remain voters must have had a different set as otherwise they would overwhelmingly default to Option 3 and could not have produced a score of 53% prepared to risk violence.

On a not exactly humorous aside, I'd be fascinated to know how many people voted for violence against MPs regardless of Brexit.  Jesus, such a question wouldn't even have been dreamt up a few years ago.

[Flashheart]

Were these the questions specifically for Leave voters?  

It looks that way to me.

That second question also looks a tad shifty to me. "I see it as a risk but it's worth it to take back control"

The language in the latter part looks unnecessary. Why not just say "to leave the EU", or similar? The writers would know that 'taking back control' is a popular sentiment and it looks to me as though they've played on that to compel people to choose the 2nd option in the absence of a forth, more reasonable option. It's evocative, yet it seems no attempt has been made to make the 3rd option more appealing.

And these cunts will know exactly what they are doing.

[Pax Romana]

You're right.  It forces a leave voter to chose between the possibility of violence and the certainty (as they would see it) of a powerless country.

[Reg Smeeton]

This is why I avoid the Guardian as much as the Mail. 

Bear in mind relative to Flasher's comment that the Guardian isn't a left wing paper.  It likes to think of itself as centrist and as such provides a platform for writers of different types...eg George Monbiot, and Owen Jones who might be called left wing and Simon Jenkins and Matthew d' Ancona... Tories

Dear old Polly Toynbee was complicit in the SDP horror which helped usher in Thatcherism.

The moral high ground thing comes because it's then up to the reader to decide based on CP Scott's "Comment is free but facts are sacred" dictum.

This means it doesn't need to make shit up, or toe the editorial line of its tax avoiding non dom owners.

[RobertT]

That's more because the idea of left and right seems like it has shifted.
 
I think the Guardian would be described as largely a Progressive, or modern day use of Liberal, leaning newspaper.

[Reg Smeeton]

That's more because the idea of left and right seems like it has shifted.
 
I think the Guardian would be described as largely a Progressive, or modern day use of Liberal, leaning newspaper.

Left/right has a certain usage in general terms, but for example you can get social liberals who are very right wing economically.... like Johnson/Cameron

Then you can get more economic liberals like Farron who are socially illiberal.  If we do get the Dec election the Graun will support the Lib Dems, even though Swinson has supported every Tory austerity measure of the last 9 years, voting that way apart from her 2 years out of Parliament, Similarly there will be those on here who pay lip service to opposing austerity but won't vote for Corbyn's Labour who have always opposed it.