Emergency legislation - information and commentary
Discussion
CobolMan said:
Have you read the Ofcom rules about reporting on Covid? No conspiracy theory needed for that, it's been published.
I won’t read it all, just point me to the bit where it says that the BBC must not report on anything other than what the government wants and that all other news outlets irrespective of nationality must be absolutely silent at all times about protests. unident said:
I won’t read it all, just point me to the bit where it says that the BBC must not report on anything other than what the government wants and that all other news outlets irrespective of nationality must be absolutely silent at all times about protests.
OK, so you can't be bothered to do your own research and try to derail things by totally irrelevant references to other countries. Maybe when you've grown up a bit you might realise why your posting style alienates so many people. Have a nice evening. 
unident said:
A lot of you defend each other to the hilt no matter how bizarre the claims.
You're lumping everybody who disagrees with you into the same pot again. Why should anyone engage with you when you broad-brush people, accept only evidence reaching your arbitrary and unknown standard and approach every facet of conversation as if it's 'you versus them'?On the subject, you don't have to be a conspiracy nut to see across all the mainstream press that editorial tone and content is being carefully managed. We've just 'unlocked' a little more and the government are seriously concerned that we're all going to go nuts and ignore the remaining measures. The Indian variant is worrying the government. Large protests by people against the restrictions would in their eyes encourage non-compliance. The press and social media are purposely trying to avoid subverting the restrictions and the covid effort.
Having seen the links posted from videos, have I any basis to disbelieve there was a protest? Do I believe it wasn't reported by the BBC (self evident). Why that is I don't know. Maybe it didn't cross the threshold of being newsworthy? Perhaps there was a lack of desire to stoke the anti-restriction narrative at a pivotal moment? Maybe a combination of factors.
At all times there's a load of information known by government and the press that's purposely not shared with the public. It's not nuts or conspiratorial to accept we don't get the full picture.
unident said:
markyb_lcy said:
unident said:
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
The problem is you put all the people you don't agree with into the same conspiratorial bag. You then create situations where you demand evidence, but have a secret list of rules that apply to it, meaning you can disregard unless it passes your arbitrary tests of reliability.
I have to remember it's really just a load of randoms on the internet and of little practical importance in real life, my only hope is you don't spend your real life making everything so difficult.
Breadvan said he came on here to vent apparently when he was busy at work. I pop on to read and pass comment when I’m not busy. It’s a way to pass time rather than be serious. However, some on here are taking their conspiracies way too seriously. I have to remember it's really just a load of randoms on the internet and of little practical importance in real life, my only hope is you don't spend your real life making everything so difficult.
A lot of you defend each other to the hilt no matter how bizarre the claims. This latest one is a classic example with people writing all sorts of stuff to try to prove that there was a huge protest in London despite there being zero credible evidence from anywhere. It’s not too big a leap to think that the media that opposes the government would have a field day with these protests, yet they’ve said nothing.
And yes I know that means it’s all a great big cover up.
Jesus christ unidense, you really are the gift that keeps on giving
At this point, I'm actually jealous of your pig-ignorance.
markyb_lcy said:
I suppose James Melville must know some really good "crisis actors", then?
Look how many this guy knows! Total amazing turnout for his “Dicks out for Harambe” meethttps://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/76046574899320...
Amazing, I’m sure you’ll absolutely agree, as it’s posted on Twitter, so must be true.
unident said:
markyb_lcy said:
I suppose James Melville must know some really good "crisis actors", then?
Look how many this guy knows! Total amazing turnout for his “Dicks out for Harambe” meethttps://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/76046574899320...
Amazing, I’m sure you’ll absolutely agree, as it’s posted on Twitter, so must be true.
markyb_lcy said:
unident said:
markyb_lcy said:
I suppose James Melville must know some really good "crisis actors", then?
Look how many this guy knows! Total amazing turnout for his “Dicks out for Harambe” meethttps://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/76046574899320...
Amazing, I’m sure you’ll absolutely agree, as it’s posted on Twitter, so must be true.
unident said:
markyb_lcy said:
unident said:
markyb_lcy said:
I suppose James Melville must know some really good "crisis actors", then?
Look how many this guy knows! Total amazing turnout for his “Dicks out for Harambe” meethttps://twitter.com/aljwhite/status/76046574899320...
Amazing, I’m sure you’ll absolutely agree, as it’s posted on Twitter, so must be true.
unident said:
RonaldMcDonaldAteMyCat said:
The problem is you put all the people you don't agree with into the same conspiratorial bag. You then create situations where you demand evidence, but have a secret list of rules that apply to it, meaning you can disregard unless it passes your arbitrary tests of reliability.
I have to remember it's really just a load of randoms on the internet and of little practical importance in real life, my only hope is you don't spend your real life making everything so difficult.
Breadvan said he came on here to vent apparently when he was busy at work. I pop on to read and pass comment when I’m not busy. It’s a way to pass time rather than be serious. However, some on here are taking their conspiracies way too seriously. I have to remember it's really just a load of randoms on the internet and of little practical importance in real life, my only hope is you don't spend your real life making everything so difficult.
A lot of you defend each other to the hilt no matter how bizarre the claims. This latest one is a classic example with people writing all sorts of stuff to try to prove that there was a huge protest in London despite there being zero credible evidence from anywhere. It’s not too big a leap to think that the media that opposes the government would have a field day with these protests, yet they’ve said nothing.
And yes I know that means it’s all a great big cover up.
Are you denying it took place? If so, how do you explain the livestreamed video posted on here?
And please don't trot out the canard that it was the anti-Israeli one which took place in an entirely different location.
I suspect your 'credible evidence' is only what you deem it to be.
Edited by Red Devil on Tuesday 18th May 22:01
NickCQ said:
jm doc said:
Can you explain why a protest on such a fundamental issue should be blocked by the BBC?
The BBC has reported on these protests on multiple occasions in the past and will probably continue to do so. I suspect this weekend they felt like the Palestine protest was a more important and interesting news story.jm doc said:
There has been a complete removal of the human rights of the entire population for over a year.
I was not aware we had all been tortured, sold into slavery etc. Hyperbole helps nothing.jm doc said:
All we hear from the media is about the risks we are facing from the virus. Many people think this is on the same level as the anti-vaxxers.
This is not a fair portrayal of the media's reporting. I have posted here and elsewhere a number of articles that demonstrate the progress made with vaccinations, protections against variants and so on, as well as balanced reporting from the BBC on the Great Barrington declaration. Equating that to totally fact-free vaccine opposition is nonsense.I've heard nothing from the BBC's mainstream news about protests nor any analysis of the damage caused by lockdowns which may even not be effective.
The reaction to yet another variant is in a par with anti-vaxxers. It's non-science.
CobolMan said:
Have you read the Ofcom rules about reporting on Covid? No conspiracy theory needed for that, it's been published.
I don't know whether you are referring to this doc or whether something more recent has been published but it looks pretty vague?https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/00...
"However, we remind all broadcasters of the significant potential harm that can be caused by material relating to the Coronavirus. This could include:
• Health claims related to the virus which may be harmful.
• Medical advice which may be harmful.
• Accuracy or material misleadingness in programmes in relation to the virus or public policy
regarding it. We will be prioritising our enforcement of broadcast standards in relation to the above issues"
If you look at enforcement it's predominantly pretty far out stuff on faith channels like 5G / Bill Gates / Wuhan lab conspiracy theories:
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/00...
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/in...
jm doc said:
Freedom of movement, freedom of association, the right to go to work are the most basic of human rights. Millions of people from this country have died defending these principles and quite frankly your response is an embarrasment.
If that's what you meant then that's what you should have said. To call lockdowns a "complete removal of the entire population's human rights" is preposterous hyperbole.Red Devil said:
Either there was a protest in London last weekend about Coronavirus restrictions or there wasn't. It's binary. There is no third option.
Are you denying it took place? If so, how do you explain the livestreamed video posted on here?
And please don't trot out the canard that it was the anti-Israeli one which took place in an entirely different location.
I suspect your 'credible evidence' is only what you deem it to be.
I am asking for proof that it happened. Nobody has provided any. That livestream is utter garbage and could be anything from any time. Are you denying it took place? If so, how do you explain the livestreamed video posted on here?
And please don't trot out the canard that it was the anti-Israeli one which took place in an entirely different location.
I suspect your 'credible evidence' is only what you deem it to be.
Edited by Red Devil on Tuesday 18th May 22:01
My credible evidence is ANY NEWS OUTLET ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. ANY NEWS OUTLET. I’ve said that over and over again, with only one caveat, that being that I will ridicule any link to any loony tunes website.
Surely it’s not difficult to find one respectable news outlet somewhere in the world that currently doesn’t support the government that would enjoy reporting on something like that.
markyb_lcy said:
Can’t wait to hear all about how Reuters isn’t a credible source.
Can’t wait to see the linkNickCQ said:
I don't know whether you are referring to this doc or whether something more recent has been published but it looks pretty vague?
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/00...
"However, we remind all broadcasters of the significant potential harm that can be caused by material relating to the Coronavirus. This could include:
• Health claims related to the virus which may be harmful.
• Medical advice which may be harmful.
• Accuracy or material misleadingness in programmes in relation to the virus or public policy
regarding it. We will be prioritising our enforcement of broadcast standards in relation to the above issues"
If you look at enforcement it's predominantly pretty far out stuff on faith channels like 5G / Bill Gates / Wuhan lab conspiracy theories:
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/00...
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/in...
There was a list of do's and dont's published last year that was a lot more specific than that which, as you say, is a bit vague. It was very much a case of toeing the government line. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/00...
"However, we remind all broadcasters of the significant potential harm that can be caused by material relating to the Coronavirus. This could include:
• Health claims related to the virus which may be harmful.
• Medical advice which may be harmful.
• Accuracy or material misleadingness in programmes in relation to the virus or public policy
regarding it. We will be prioritising our enforcement of broadcast standards in relation to the above issues"
If you look at enforcement it's predominantly pretty far out stuff on faith channels like 5G / Bill Gates / Wuhan lab conspiracy theories:
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/00...
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/in...
NickCQ said:
jm doc said:
Freedom of movement, freedom of association, the right to go to work are the most basic of human rights. Millions of people from this country have died defending these principles and quite frankly your response is an embarrasment.
If that's what you meant then that's what you should have said. To call lockdowns a "complete removal of the entire population's human rights" is preposterous hyperbole.unident said:
Can’t wait to see the link
Does Yahoo news count? https://uk.news.yahoo.com/news/anti-lockdown-prote...Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff