The Positive Brexit Thread

[Fen Canary 799]

3 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

The quality papers such as the Guardian often run articles by those with contrary views. 

Perhaps you should hold a mirror to some of your own views as well..

However - I suspect the reason why the Guardian oft gets quoted is that it tries to be factually correct, has detail and depth beyond simple yes/no and more so is free to read. No pay wall.

 

The Guardian is a one sided rag no better than the Express, they’re simply different sides of the same coin. 

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

1 hour ago, Fen Canary said:

My readership levels were domestically, from a few searches on Google which all turned up similar results for a mixture of print and online. I didn’t look for worldwide numbers as I didn’t think it was really relevant to domestic politics. 

It does make sense though as the bulk of those newspapers that I recognise target audience is the middle class left, which is most prevalent on social media and as such much more likely to pick up clicks numbers through those sites

Well you specifically said 'online readership' which I would suggest is by definition worldwide, although in many cases it will be unknown whether they are domestic readers or overseas, or indeed both - plenty of people nowadays live in the UK but work on the continent, and vice versa.

At least for now, although I imagine the numbers are dropping rapidly but I don't think that even Brexit is quite going to take us back to the state you seem to envisage where our 'domestic readers' and our 'domestic politics' are entirely cocooned from the rest of the world.

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

1 hour ago, Fen Canary said:

The Guardian is a one sided rag no better than the Express, they’re simply different sides of the same coin. 

I'm afraid if that is what you genuinely believe, then it explains a great deal about why you have such trouble differentiating between facts, opinions and outright lies, and why you get so upset at having your ..................s (insert noun of your choice) challenged.

[Herman 9,732]

1 hour ago, Fen Canary said:

The Guardian is a one sided rag no better than the Express, they’re simply different sides of the same coin. 

That is just a silly statement. You may not like the Guardian's politics but it is no way near the low level of the Express.

[Yellow Fever 3,750]

2 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

The Guardian is a one sided rag no better than the Express, they’re simply different sides of the same coin. 

I see others have commented on this. Yes a laughable comment.

If you had read the Guardian or frankly any quality newspaper left or right you would have understood the ECHR is nothing to do with EU. Obviously you don't.

Edited April 11, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[Rock The Boat 1,326]

11 hours ago, sonyc said:

Just about not becoming fixed RTB. The more fixed you are the more you feel certain, the greater chance you have of suffering and being unhappy. Because you spend all your time defending your own corner.

As I hinted it has taken me now perhaps 15 years and it's hard work. But at times you get to the point where nothing really upsets you (another person for example). It's not an easy fix. It's not about not trying to understand things. I get your point. Just about being humble, light, happy, at peace. 

Having spent a lot of time in the Far East, I found Buddhism to have a great set of tenets for living a life, in particular the concept of release and not holding on to something. I may be wrong but I think I detect you alluding to something similar. I picked up on your comment not because I thought it right or wrong but I found it interesting as it seemed to be counter-intuitive and I wanted to hear more about why you thought that way. I just feel that I feel more certain about things as I get older but I am also able to not hold onto stuff at the same time. So that although I feel quite certain about many things I would not have a problem releasing those ideas if they proved to be incorrect in some way.

[Rock The Boat 1,326]

8 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Amused at all of this. 

I think you'll find people tend to get fixed in their ways - 'You can't teach an old dog new tricks etc'

It was better in my days ....

As most people age they tend to get more conservative with small c - don't want to learn new things etc. and so on that challenges them

That and they tend to reminisce.

It takes a real effort to to truly to be open to new eperiences at 70! Far easier to dismiss and claim 'wisdom' even where there is none.  

It's great to be experiencing new things later in life, but to be fair to older people, once they have retired then the lack of income or health issues can often restrict the things they can do and the opportunities to do new things are fewer, so they fall back on what they know. But good luck to the silver foxes out there making the most of their retirement pensions to travel the world and living life to the full.

[Yellow Fever 3,750]

1 minute ago, Rock The Boat said:

It's great to be experiencing new things later in life, but to be fair to older people, once they have retired then the lack of income or health issues can often restrict the things they can do and the opportunities to do new things are fewer, so they fall back on what they know. But good luck to the silver foxes out there making the most of their retirement pensions to travel the world and living life to the full.

For once we agree !

[sonyc 5,493]

@ RTB....I guess we could get into a very philosophical exchange RTB and I'm not sure I'm qualified enough to assert (uncertain!). I suppose there are parallels with Buddhism or being non-attached. And we all have to find our own ways through life. It's an approach that's taken years of thinking and reading about (Krishnamurti is one). Secondly, my thinking  is very influenced to a second career/vocation. I'm not suggesting folk shouldn't look for certainty ...after all it's comforting and quite natural. Perhaps it's more that we might not take ourselves too seriously and even enjoy it when we get things wrong (or doubt ourselves). At such times we learn such a lot after all. Life sometimes provides that lemon for us and we just have to adapt. Anyway, I'm getting into deeper realms!

I suppose there's an interesting 'art versus science' dimension here (in my opinion) or perhaps call it intuition versus logic. At times we want to know something for sure and we need evidence / data / figures but we lose a little of the meaning, the purpose. And as I get older I want to enjoy everything and everyone as much as possible. So on here, I tend just to take any criticism for what it is and even any positive vibes. I don't wish to become unhappy and others can think what the hell they like. It's all fine. I suppose this pandemic brings me certainly to the conclusion even more that we are one world. 

I'm really sorry for waffling on.🙂

Bring back the football quick...

[Fen Canary 799]

1 hour ago, Creative Midfielder said:

I'm afraid if that is what you genuinely believe, then it explains a great deal about why you have such trouble differentiating between facts, opinions and outright lies, and why you get so upset at having your ..................s (insert noun of your choice) challenged.

Let me guess, The Guardian, Independent and Observer are all reliable news sources, and the Sun, Mail and Express are all full of lies?

[Fen Canary 799]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

I see others have commented on this. Yes a laughable comment.

If you had read the Guardian or frankly any quality newspaper left or right you would have understood the ECHR is nothing to do with EU. Obviously you don't.

Fair enough, I’ll happily admit I mixed up the European Human Rights Court and the European Court of Justice. 

Now if somebody could explain why we need a 700 strong parliament or free movement of people for a trading bloc I’ll be happy. 

 

 

[Herman 9,732]

6 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Let me guess, The Guardian, Independent and Observer are all reliable news sources, and the Sun, Mail and Express are all full of lies?

The first three are mostly reliable but can be anti-government for the sake of it. They have their own view of things and can be partisan so you have to keep an open mind whether it is just their opinion or fact.

The last three are mostly unreliable. They are extremely partisan, completely attached to the government and mostly rely on opinion pieces than factual. As was pointed out very early on, ii is better to pay attention to these paper when they write pieces critical of the government as it will be nearer to the truth.

Now, as I believe you are an intelligent poster, I think you knew all this already.

[SHRIMPER 328]

I do not even believe the date at the top of the page on the Sun, Express, and Daily Liar, let alone anything inside them.

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

9 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Let me guess, The Guardian, Independent and Observer are all reliable news sources, and the Sun, Mail and Express are all full of lies?

This is your idea of reasoned discussion is it??? 🙄

You quite recently started posting on this thread saying that you wanted a reasoned discussion - whether or not that was ever true I've no idea and it hardly matters anyway as your recent posts make it quite clear you are not at all interested in reasoned discussion.

Seems to me you are only interested in an approving echo chamber, although why on earth you would hope to get that on this thread I've no idea.

[Fen Canary 799]

On 12/04/2020 at 20:22, Creative Midfielder said:

This is your idea of reasoned discussion is it??? 🙄

You quite recently started posting on this thread saying that you wanted a reasoned discussion - whether or not that was ever true I've no idea and it hardly matters anyway as your recent posts make it quite clear you are not at all interested in reasoned discussion.

Seems to me you are only interested in an approving echo chamber, although why on earth you would hope to get that on this thread I've no idea.

I was merely pointing out that all the newspapers you deem to be competent and trustworthy just so happen to coincide with your worldview, and all those you think are full of lies and false information sit on the other side of the divide. Call me cynical but I’d say you’re reading those papers simply to reaffirm you pre existing opinions rather than because you believe they’re the best papers

[BigFish 1,986]

9 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I was merely pointing out that all the newspapers you deem to be competent and trustworthy just so happen to coincide with your worldview, and all those you think are full of lies and false information sit on the other side of the divide. Call me cynical but I’d say you’re reading those papers simply to reaffirm you pre existing opinions rather than because you believe they’re the best papers

Perhaps it is just you @Fen Canary?

[BigFish 1,986]

On 12/04/2020 at 00:06, Fen Canary said:

Let me guess, The Guardian, Independent and Observer are all reliable news sources, and the Sun, Mail and Express are all full of lies?

Yep, looking like it is just you.......

[Yellow Fever 3,750]

3 hours ago, BigFish said:

Yep, looking like it is just you.......

Sad to see the demise of the Telegraph down the 'Quality' list. Some of it's unbalanced front pages after the referendum 'did for it' I expect attacking the judges. 30 to 40 years ago I always used to think of the Guardian and Telegraph as centre left/right but both basically honest warts and all. I expect the Telegraph dropping down the list now reflects its ageing, rural readership.  

Edited April 14, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[Rock The Boat 1,326]

3 hours ago, BigFish said:

Yep, looking like it is just you.......

The Reuters Institute is a left-wing think-tank chaired by Alan Rushbridger, former editor of the Guardian, and includes board members such as Marty Baron, executive editor of Washington Post. So any publication from this organisation needs to be treated with suspicion. 

[Yellow Fever 3,750]

32 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

The Reuters Institute is a left-wing think-tank chaired by Alan Rushbridger, former editor of the Guardian, and includes board members such as Marty Baron, executive editor of Washington Post. So any publication from this organisation needs to be treated with suspicion. 

Does that apply to the University of Oxford too ?

All I see here is your bias RTB. Nothing else.

[BigFish 1,986]

Lol, a "left wing think tank" chaired by the Principal of Lady Margaret Hall and with a Conservative working peer on the advisory board. You've lost it @Rock The Boat

[A Load of Squit 5,142]

 

On 21/12/2019 at 14:56, Rock The Boat said:

and if you can't believe the Telegraph then who can you believe).

😀

[Hoola Han Solo 448]

4 minutes ago, BigFish said:

Lol, a "left wing think tank" chaired by the Principal of Lady Margaret Hall and with a Conservative working peer on the advisory board. You've lost it @Rock The Boat

I think the poor lamb has been brainwashed by the right wing propaganda machine. It’s a shame he doesn’t look at things with a balanced viewpoint and his own mind, rather than spouting the gibberish fed to him by his heroes. Still, at least he’s following his orders like a good little boy.

[Herman 9,732]

I notice Guido isn't on that list. Was it so bad that it garnered no points? 

[Surfer 1,547]

4 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Sad to see the demise of the Telegraph down the 'Quality' list. Some of it's unbalanced front pages after the referendum 'did for it' I expect attacking the judges. 30 to 40 years ago I always used to think of the Guardian and Telegraph as centre left/right but both basically honest warts and all. I expect the Telegraph dropping down the list now reflects its ageing, rural readership.  

Yes, what has happened to the Torygraph is very sad. As it’s nickname suggests it was always a pro Conservative newspaper but now like many on the right it has gone completely off the rails and the news part of newspaper has virtually disappeared. (p.s. yes, I am a former reader) 

[Yellow Fever 3,750]

20 minutes ago, Surfer said:

Yes, what has happened to the Torygraph is very sad. As it’s nickname suggests it was always a pro Conservative newspaper but now like many on the right it has gone completely off the rails and the news part of newspaper has virtually disappeared. (p.s. yes, I am a former reader) 

Yes there was a time when I regularly read it too. I might not of agreed with it all of it's opinions but it was pretty straight on the facts as per the Guardian which i then viewed as its opposite 'twin'. The front page attacks on the judges led me to consider it as having sunk to the level of red-tops. It was playing to its faltering, ageing demographic only.

Edited April 14, 2020 by Yellow Fever

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

17 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I was merely pointing out that all the newspapers you deem to be competent and trustworthy just so happen to coincide with your worldview, and all those you think are full of lies and false information sit on the other side of the divide. Call me cynical but I’d say you’re reading those papers simply to reaffirm you pre existing opinions rather than because you believe they’re the best papers

That is exactly what you are not doing - I didn't 'deem' anything other than that the Guardian and the Express are not directly comparable or equivalent newspapers except for their differing political outlook.

The two lists of newspapers were your lists which you produced to construct a strawman argument which you thought you could demolish with some mostly false assumptions about what papers I read.

Which rather brings me back to my original point, despite what you said originally you don't seem interested in reasoned discussion. For the record I wouldn't call you cynical, but I would call you very poorly informed which is why I presume you jumped in so enthusiastically in the first place to support RTB's nonsense - nonsense which you could have very easily fact checked and discovered to be nonsense if you really wanted to have a genuine discussion.

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

2 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes there was a time when I regularly read it too. I might not of agreed with it all of it's opinions but it was pretty straight on the facts as per the Guardian which i then viewed as its opposite 'twin'. The front page attacks on the judges led me to consider it as having sunk to the level of red-tops. It was playing to its faltering, ageing demographic only.

Yep - used to read it regularly too, albeit a long time ago now but I think it was still fairly straight with the news until more recently.

I also think you are bang on with the demographics - the Express, Mail and the Telegraph are all competing for broadly the same ageing demographic. They are all struggling to some extent but the Express the most, the Mail is obviously doing better and the Telegraph seems to think that it's best strategy is to go downmarket to compete with the Mail - doesn't look like a succesful long term strategy to me but probably their only option now, don't see them being able to get back to being a quality paper even if they wanted to.

[Fen Canary 799]

13 hours ago, BigFish said:

Yep, looking like it is just you.......

As has been mentioned, it’s almost impossible to draw conclusions from any survey unless you know how it was conducted. Was it a poll carried out amongst their fellow students, was it exclusively online through social media, was it through landlines, random phone numbers, asking people on the street etc? Any online poll is going to be skewed towards left leaning middle class professionals for instance, whereas anything conducted via landline will be a much older, small c conservative demographic. If it’s a mixture of all of them then you’d likely get a much more accurate picture. I’m not saying that their findings are wrong, I can’t say either way, but I don’t deny being suspicious that all the major newspapers on that list that score high are predominantly read by one demographic of people. 

[BigFish 1,986]

1 minute ago, Fen Canary said:

 I can’t say either way, but I don’t deny being suspicious that all the major newspapers on that list that score high are predominantly read by one demographic of people. 

Intelligent people?