LeMaquis Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Today's update: Monday 22/2/16 (lunchtime): "EU exit is a 'security risk'" Monday 22/2/16 (evening): "EU exit is a 'leap in the dark'" Tuesday 23/2/16 (lunchtime): "EU exit would 'risk jobs'" Wednesday 24/2/16 (lunchtime): Gove says EU deal 'not legally binding' Wednesday 24/2/16 (evening): Tusk: EU reforms cannot be reversed Thursday 25/2/16 (lunchtime): EU in crisis talks over migrant limits That's Pro 4-2 Anti. Selective counting means you can ignore pro-withdrawal statements by Michael Howard, Michael Gove and Boris Johnson who have been all over the BBC in the last week. Not to mention George Galloway too. I find it strange that the outers haven't been pushing his name much. Maybe if they did someone would trawl through their previous posts in which they've called him an mad left-wing nutcase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 Selective counting means you can ignore pro-withdrawal statements by Michael Howard, Michael Gove and Boris Johnson who have been all over the BBC in the last week. Not to mention George Galloway too. I find it strange that the outers haven't been pushing his name much. Maybe if they did someone would trawl through their previous posts in which they've called him an mad left-wing nutcase. Making decisions based on appeals to authority is madness in my view. The fact that George Galloway is on my side in this matter is a perfect illustration of that. As he's uniformly wrong about pretty much everything. Stopped clocks and all that. I think there's a reason for this: The EU consistently tows a moderate political line as is inevitable when it has to build a consensus across the spectrum in Europe. Those who's thinking is largely consistent with the EU line are naturally supportive or apathetic. George Galloway is not such a person. Neither are Howard nor Gove, but for quite different reasons. I don't know exactly what Boris is up to, but he's jolly entertaining. One can do far worse that to look at the great amount that John Redwood has to say on this matter. The case which he makes is what convinces me. It's based on sovereignty, democratic accountability, economics and the lessons of history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 I think that FIFA has overtaken both the inners and the outers to take the lead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted February 26, 2016 Author Share Posted February 26, 2016 (edited) Selective counting means you can ignore pro-withdrawal statements by Michael Howard, Michael Gove and Boris Johnson who have been all over the BBC in the last week. Not to mention George Galloway too. I find it strange that the outers haven't been pushing his name much. Maybe if they did someone would trawl through their previous posts in which they've called him an mad left-wing nutcase. There's no selective counting, I'm presenting facts. Once again someone has pulled me up on not mentioning an article, based on a post I made the day before the article existed. It's almost as if some people are desperate for the BBC not to be biased and won't accept any possibility that they are. In the mean time, I will continue to present the facts, by posting the lunchtime (12pm) and evening (6pm) headlines each day from the main BBC News home page relating to the EU, if applicable. I will judge on the statistics come the end of the campaign rather than pre-empt the outcome. ---------- Post added 26-02-2016 at 21:38 ---------- Today's update (with new format to categorise clearly and introduce the "neutral" headline which is neither pro nor anti): Pro: Monday 22/2/16 (lunchtime): "EU exit is a 'security risk'" Monday 22/2/16 (evening): "EU exit is a 'leap in the dark'" Tuesday 23/2/16 (lunchtime): "EU exit would 'risk jobs'" Wednesday 24/2/16 (evening): Tusk: EU reforms cannot be reversed Friday 26/2/16 (evening): David Cameron: No prospect of EU vote re-run Total: 5 Anti: Wednesday 24/2/16 (lunchtime): Gove says EU deal 'not legally binding' Thursday 25/2/16 (lunchtime): EU in crisis talks over migrant limits Total: 2 Neutral: Friday 26/2/16 (lunchtime): Osborne and Howard at odds over EU exit Total: 1 Edited February 26, 2016 by WiseOwl182 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 There's no selective counting, I'm presenting facts. Once again someone has pulled me up on not mentioning an article, based on a post I made the day before the article existed. It's almost as if some people are desperate for the BBC not to be biased and won't accept any possibility that they are. In the mean time, I will continue to present the facts, by posting the lunchtime (12pm) and evening (6pm) headlines each day from the main BBC News home page relating to the EU, if applicable. I will judge on the statistics come the end of the campaign rather than pre-empt the outcome. ---------- Post added 26-02-2016 at 21:38 ---------- Today's update (with new format to categorise clearly and introduce the "neutral" headline which is neither pro nor anti): Pro: Monday 22/2/16 (lunchtime): "EU exit is a 'security risk'" Monday 22/2/16 (evening): "EU exit is a 'leap in the dark'" Tuesday 23/2/16 (lunchtime): "EU exit would 'risk jobs'" Wednesday 24/2/16 (evening): Tusk: EU reforms cannot be reversed Friday 26/2/16 (evening): David Cameron: No prospect of EU vote re-run Total: 5 Anti: Wednesday 24/2/16 (lunchtime): Gove says EU deal 'not legally binding' Thursday 25/2/16 (lunchtime): EU in crisis talks over migrant limits Total: 2 Neutral: Friday 26/2/16 (lunchtime): Osborne and Howard at odds over EU exit Total: 1 Thursday - BBC not reporting on the EU parliament voting to boycott Saudi, at all. That makes Thursday anti 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiseOwl182 Posted February 26, 2016 Author Share Posted February 26, 2016 Thursday - BBC not reporting on the EU parliament voting to boycott Saudi, at all. That makes Thursday anti 3. No it doesn't. The measurement is for the number of EU headlines at peak times. Counting stories that the BBC does not report on is out of scope, but feel free to try and start your own study, though it may prove quite difficult to keep track of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 There's no selective counting, I'm presenting facts. No. You're presenting selective facts to satiate your right-wing paranoia. No mention of Boris Johnson whose decision to join the out campaign was headline news all last weekend. ---------- Post added 26-02-2016 at 23:28 ---------- One can do far worse that to look at the great amount that John Redwood has to say on this matter. I can't think of anything much worse than listening to Redwood. He has the charisma of a teabag and a mind as open as a polling station in North Korea. His speeches are the political equivalent of a Coldplay album. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted February 26, 2016 Share Posted February 26, 2016 No it doesn't. The measurement is for the number of EU headlines at peak times. Counting stories that the BBC does not report on is out of scope, but feel free to try and start your own study, though it may prove quite difficult to keep track of that. How is NOT reporting on the decisions made by a body elected by UK voters nothing to do with your scope? Are you saying you think it isn't anti-EU bias when the BBC does not report on the EU? Because you will have to read up on your definition of scientific bias if you think that is the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 I can't think of anything much worse than listening to Redwood. He has the charisma of a teabag and a mind as open as a polling station in North Korea. His speeches are the political equivalent of a Coldplay album. What has charisma or entertainment value got to do with anything. I'm not nominating him for PM. He has a long history prescience on the big European issues, and in my view of something of an expert on these matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted February 27, 2016 Share Posted February 27, 2016 ....something of an expert on these matters. Which means nothing if all you can say is that he spends a lot of time obsessed with the issue. There are people obsessed with their own websites claiming that September 11th was an inside job, Diana was murdered by MI6, man didn't really land on the moon, etc, etc. The flat Earth Society still exists. It doesn't make them experts. It just means they're unhealthily obsessed about their own fantasies. Actually people who work for the EU must be experts on the matter but you don't quote them as reliable sources, do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now