The Labour Party. All discussion here please

[Padders 2,849]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

When the media is in the hands of a few super powerful media moguls who dictate the political stance of a whole raft of the media, it is exceedingly difficult to get round it, which is why allowing certain individuals to amass total dominance of the media is so wrong. 

(He who controls the media controls the minds of the masses... - Malcolm X)

 

.  

Anna, at the last election Labour were going to bankrupt this country with their outrageous spending plans..

Now they tell me Boris is doing a good job spending billions and billions of pounds propping up the economy .

[ECCOnoob 1,020]

3 hours ago, Anna B said:

When the media is in the hands of a few super powerful media moguls who dictate the political stance of a whole raft of the media, it is exceedingly difficult to get round it, which is why allowing certain individuals to amass total dominance of the media is so wrong. 

(He who controls the media controls the minds of the masses... - Malcolm X)

 

Did you never wonder why Jeremy Corbyn had to resort to Social Media to get his message across? (- It's the reason why he was so popular with young people,) And drag himself round the country putting on public meetings in towns  and cities which attracted thousands, to get his message out? There was an almost total blackout on Corbyn and colleagues.

He was not invited on political TV programmes, instead they asked the Blairite brigade for comments, and even wheeled out old hasbeen Blair too to pontificate, never Corbyn. 

 

Only when an election was declared did the media rules of equal airtime come into play, and even then the verbose Boris managed to hijack the election into a rematch on Brexit, (he was going to 'Get Brexit done' remember? With his 'ovenready' deal - what happened to that?) Boris refused to answer questions on almost anything else and got away with it, including his refusal to be interviewed by forensic political Rottweiler, Andrew Neil, who would undoubtedly have exposed his shortcomings.  

Rubbish.  He was a leader of the opposition and all over the media.  

 

He had plenty of opportunities to get his message across.   He was paraded on TV all the time.  He was a stubborn, tetchy,  and incompetent man who constantly performed badly with no appeal to the wider electorate.  He was controversial from the moment he got the job and became increasingly toxic throughout his tenure.   That is one of the reasons why they failed so spectacularly and why he has inevitably gone.

 

...... On it goes with these excuses after excuses.  Trying to blame others all the time.

 

They failed. Must do better. D minus.

 

Thank god they have a fresh start with some hope this time round. Time to stop beating that old drum Anna.  

[alchresearch 214]

14 hours ago, Anna B said:

There was an almost total blackout on Corbyn and colleagues.

He was not invited on political TV programmes, instead they asked the Blairite brigade for comments, and even wheeled out old hasbeen Blair too to pontificate, never Corbyn.

This is why your posts have no credibility.

 

A google for "Corbyn on Andrew Marr Show" brings up plenty of interviews.  Same if I search for Andrew Neil or Robert Peston or the Tonight show. Even "This Morning".

[Anna B 1,401]

13 hours ago, alchresearch said:

This is why your posts have no credibility.

 

A google for "Corbyn on Andrew Marr Show" brings up plenty of interviews.  Same if I search for Andrew Neil or Robert Peston or the Tonight show. Even "This Morning".

You missed the point in my post.

I know Corbyn was interviewed once the election had been called; the media was obliged to comply with  pre-election rules of equal air time, but prior to that he was rarely called upon, and did not get a fair hearing. Any publicity he did get, was usually personal. negative, and very biased against him. The newspapers in particular were a disgrace.

 

As I recall, in the run up to the election, Andrew Neil interviewed the leaders of all the parties,  (and gave them all a very hard time,) except Boris 'no show' Johnson, who refused to be interviewed by him because he knew he would be unable to do his usual waffle act and would be ripped to shreds by Neil.

Neil made the point Boris Johnson was the first leader to refuse being put under scrutiny, and why, in this brief clip.

  https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2019/dec/05/it-is-not-too-late-andrew-neil-challenges-johnson-to-commit-to-interview-video

Edited July 13, 2020 by Anna B

[ECCOnoob 1,020]

26 minutes ago, Anna B said:

You missed the point in my post.

I know Corbyn was interviewed once the election had been called; the media was obliged to comply with  pre-election rules of equal air time, but prior to that he was rarely called upon, and did not get a fair hearing. Any publicity he did get, was usually personal. negative, and very biased against him. The newspapers in particular were a disgrace.

 

Nonsense.

 

How many times does it have to be said.  He was leader of the opposition.  The job came with multiple interviews on television and radio and in newspapers. 

 

He had access and control over an entire PR department.  He had teams of staff and advisors looking after every aspect of his speeches, his public appearances, his tweets, his publicity, his image.

 

If he didn't manage to get across his 'message' with all that he clearly wasn't up to the job.  What about accepting the likelihood that the majority of the electorate didn't like his message. 

 

Just a load more excuses.  Just admit he was incompetent and failed. 

 

The quicker they stop crying about this unfairness nonsense and actually start putting the efforts into what people want then they might win an election.

 

Successful people learn from their failures, adapt and grow stronger.  Losers sit there crying trying to blame everybody else and give out pathetic excuses. 

Edited July 13, 2020 by ECCOnoob

[Anna B 1,401]

1 minute ago, ECCOnoob said:

Nonsense.

 

How many times does it have to be said.  He was leader of the opposition.  The job came with multiple interviews on television and radio and in newspapers. 

 

He had access and control over an entire PR department.  He had teams of staff and advisors looking after every aspect of his speeches, his public appearances, his tweets, his publicity, his image.

 

If he didn't manage to get across his 'message' with all that he clearly wasn't up to the job.  What about accepting the likelihood that the majority of the electorate didn't like his message. 

 

Just a load more excuses.  Just admit he was incompetent and failed. 

 

The quicker they stop crying about this unfairness nonsense and actually start putting the efforts into what people want then they might win an election.

Rubbish. 

From even before his election as leader in 2015 he was considered persona non grata by the media.

And it's not just me who thinks so.

 

http://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/research/research-projects/representations-of-jeremy-corbyn

 

www.thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/jeremy-corbyn-is-the-most-smeared-politician-in-history/18/07/

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/16/vilification-of-corbyn-in-broadcast-media-fuelled-election-defeat-andy-https://

 

www.thecanary.co/trending/2019/12/03/heres-proof-that-no-matter-what-corbyn-says-or-does-the-establishment-media-will-attack-him/

 

And many, many more........

This is important.

In a democratic society, we do not want media propoganda deciding  our elections or leaders.  We are being manipulated.

 

 

[Pettytom 1]

9 hours ago, Anna B said:

Rubbish. 

From even before his election as leader in 2015 he was considered persona non grata by the media.

And it's not just me who thinks so.

 

http://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/research/research-projects/representations-of-jeremy-corbyn

 

www.thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/jeremy-corbyn-is-the-most-smeared-politician-in-history/18/07/

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/16/vilification-of-corbyn-in-broadcast-media-fuelled-election-defeat-andy-https://

 

www.thecanary.co/trending/2019/12/03/heres-proof-that-no-matter-what-corbyn-says-or-does-the-establishment-media-will-attack-him/

 

And many, many more........

This is important.

In a democratic society, we do not want media propoganda deciding  our elections or leaders.  We are being manipulated.

 

 

I don’t think that the media smears made much difference to Corbyn’s electability.

 

In the end, it came down to the choice between a useless, decisive clown and a useless indecisive one.

 

The decisive clown won.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Pettytom

[sheffbag 227]

11 hours ago, Anna B said:

Rubbish. 

From even before his election as leader in 2015 he was considered persona non grata by the media.

And it's not just me who thinks so.

 

http://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/research/research-projects/representations-of-jeremy-corbyn

 

www.thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/jeremy-corbyn-is-the-most-smeared-politician-in-history/18/07/

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/16/vilification-of-corbyn-in-broadcast-media-fuelled-election-defeat-andy-https://

 

www.thecanary.co/trending/2019/12/03/heres-proof-that-no-matter-what-corbyn-says-or-does-the-establishment-media-will-attack-him/

 

And many, many more........

This is important.

In a democratic society, we do not want media propoganda deciding  our elections or leaders.  We are being manipulated.

 

 

Give it up Anna. You normally make some good points but this obsession with the leader who managed to lose 2 elections and garner the worst defeat in living memory detracts from everything.

 

He lost - Media's fault? If so, then why do you and others proclaim that the Labour party was the biggest membership in Europe at the time? to quote a drunk Delia Smith, when it came to election day was he asking "where are you?" If these people all were swayed by the "media" after joining the party then the party didn't do a good job of getting his message along.

 

Get over it and support the party if you are going to keep with Labour under Starmer. If not then Scargill and his friends are over there but please drop the "Crobyn was hard done by" line. He lost to the 2 most inept leaders in conservative history despite having (according to you and others on here)

The youth vote

The biggest membership of a party in Europe

A tidal wave of popularity (remember Oh Jeremy Corbyn chants at Glastonbury in 2017 which went worldwide in the media)

The reason for the biggest resurgence of interest in British politics.

 

And he still lost

 

Twice

 

And now he's gone. Get behind Starmer

Edited July 14, 2020 by sheffbag

[Anna B 1,401]

Just out of interest, anybody watching   BBC2 -  'The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty?'

[Halibut 12]

4 hours ago, Anna B said:

Just out of interest, anybody watching   BBC2 -  'The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty?'

I did. Shocking.

[casualbystander 0]

6 hours ago, Anna B said:

Just out of interest, anybody watching   BBC2 -  'The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty?'

great programme very interesting, extremely clever and influential man.

[Sammax 0]

On 09/07/2020 at 13:06, Anna B said:

It's not the number of 'anti-Labour' newspapers that's important, but the size of their circulation. I would hazard a guess that the 'reporting' and opinions of the Daily Mail reaches far more people than the Guardian. 

 

Nor does a retraction or apology, squirreled away at the bottom of an inside page, equal the half page innacurate Headline emblazened on the front page of the Daily Mail, readable from the far side of the garage forecourt. 

 

When it comes to the media, it is not an even playing field. 

The Guardian is dead and discredited.