Boris Johnson- Prime Minister (Vol. 2)

[Zirconia]

deadslow said:

Dont like rolls said:

The SOUND BITE format was never going to do more that confirm peoples existing position, no "debate" was possible.

"debate was possible and Boris won convincingly" states FactCheckUK

Stick them all on a one to one interview with Andrew Neil, hour show.

They will all get pulled apart. Far better format I think than a quick fire rubbish the other party show.

(and lets see Twitter fake accounts run during that).

[techguyone]

All these debates are just bullst, format should be something like:

Leader one asks leader two questions for 20 mins

Leader two asks leader one questions for 20 mins

last 20 mins is audience questions directed to each leader in turn.

Best bit is a strictly enforced method of timekeeping:

green light on mic when to reply

1 min in, light turns orange

2 mins in light turns red and mic gets cut.



You might then, perhaps get something resembling a debate rather than the 30 sec quick shot soundbite ste we were treated to.

[deadslow]

Breadvan72 said:

deadslow said:

"debate was possible and Boris won convincingly" states FactCheckUK

Er ...., You do know that was the Tory Press Office scamming, don't you? Maitlis shredded Cleverly about the scam.

yerp, should have given it its full title ToryCheatFactCheckUK

[williamp]

bhstewie said:

Good to see that appalling "Fact Check" stunt being called out for what it is.

CCHQ masquerading as a fact checking organisation.

Couldn't make it up.

Meh they all do it. The bbc started it, and are annoyed htis is showing thatba nonsense they actually are. Its what they dont fact check (corbyn claim about racism being investigated, for example) which is always more telling

[bitchstewie]

williamp said:

Meh they all do it. The bbc started it, and are annoyed htis is showing thatba nonsense they actually are. Its what they dont fact check (corbyn claim about racism being investigated, for example) which is always more telling

When you have a Government changing their official Twitter profile to pretend to be a fact checking organisation during a General Election so that they can pump out propaganda disguised with the intention that more people might read it and believe it than otherwise might, that should be of concern to anyone.

[768]

Why?

It's completely transparent. No one was taken in by it, it is just, as you said, a stunt.

(Not the official government account btw).

[Dont like rolls]

bhstewie said:

When you have a Government changing their official Twitter profile to pretend to be a fact checking organisation during a General Election so that they can pump out propaganda disguised with the intention that more people might read it and believe it than otherwise might, that should be of concern to anyone.

THREE places on the page said it was a Fact Check service from the Conservatives.

I agree, Braille PC screens are needed for the semi blind "I'm Offended" brigade.

[andymadmak]

768 said:

Why?

It's completely transparent. No one was taken in by it, it is just, as you said, a stunt.

Because people WANT to believe that millions were taken in by it. They WANT to believe, so that they have something to justify their refusal to accept results when they don't do their way

[bitchstewie]

768 said:

Why?

It's completely transparent. No one was taken in by it, it is just, as you said, a stunt.

(Not the official government account btw).

If no one was taken in by it why would they do it?

"Fact Checks" courtesy of the Government.

I wonder where we usually see that kind of thing.

[andymadmak]

bhstewie said:

768 said:

Why?

It's completely transparent. No one was taken in by it, it is just, as you said, a stunt.

(Not the official government account btw).

If no one was taken in by it why would they do it?

"Fact Checks" courtesy of the Government.

I wonder where we usually see that kind of thing.

At a slight tangent - I'm not on Twitter so I don't know what CCHQ put up during their hour of fact checking. (Presumably you had to go to the Conservative Twitter feed to find it?), but did they actually fact check anything incorrectly?

[Dont like rolls]

bhstewie said:

If no one was taken in by it why would they do it?

"Fact Checks" courtesy of the Government.

I wonder where we usually see that kind of thing.

Because the lies and misinformation pumped out by Momentum/Labour/LibDems is huge and needs honest facts published to counter ?

For example, the LibDems and their misleading "charts" on published and delivered leaflets ?

[deadslow]

andymadmak said:

At a slight tangent - I'm not on Twitter so I don't know what CCHQ put up during their hour of fact checking. (Presumably you had to go to the Conservative Twitter feed to find it?), but did they actually fact check anything incorrectly?

[andymadmak]

deadslow said:

I read in the media that the change was in place only during the debate? Is that not the case?

[loafer123]

Anyone who relies on social media generally, and Twitter specifically, for facts, deserves anything they get, the tts.

[bitchstewie]

Dont like rolls said:

Because the lies and misinformation pumped out by Momentum/Labour/LibDems is huge ?

For example, the LibDems and their misleading "charts" on published and delivered leaflets ?

Why does it always come down to "but someone else does it too".

They're as bad as one another but being the Government should probably count for something.

I don't get what's so hard about saying "Yeah not a good idea, what on earth were they thinking?".

[chrispmartha]

Dont like rolls said:

bhstewie said:

If no one was taken in by it why would they do it?

"Fact Checks" courtesy of the Government.

I wonder where we usually see that kind of thing.

Because the lies and misinformation pumped out by Momentum/Labour/LibDems is huge and needs honest facts published to counter ?

For example, the LibDems and their misleading "charts" on published and delivered leaflets ?

So why did they need to change their Twitter profile to do this? And what facts did they check?

[turbobloke]

bhstewie said:

Dont like rolls said:

Because the lies and misinformation pumped out by Momentum/Labour/LibDems is huge ?

For example, the LibDems and their misleading "charts" on published and delivered leaflets ?

Why does it always come down to "but someone else does it too".

Possibly because, as a result, it's not an effective way of differentiating between them. They all do it to different degrees at different times.

Can't see anybody ignoring it, but that's not the same thing as accepting reality then voting for the spinny fibbers who represent the least worst option overall as each individual sees it.

[Stussy]

All it does is back up the statement of don’t believe everything you read online

[TTwiggy]

chrispmartha said:

So why did they need to change their Twitter profile to do this? And what facts did they check?

I imagine this is all part of Cummings' apparent 'genius'. They will have known that they would be called on it, and then have to face media 'scrutiny' over it, which in turn becomes further opportunity to call Corbyn a liar over the NHS.

[Zirconia]

Reading that Raab defending the fake twitter account saying no one gives a toss about such.

That explains why they spend a lot of time and money on it and rely on getting liked and re tweeted etc. and compadres in the circle to get the message out there across many platforms. Raab, your nose got longer.

https://twitter.com/marcowenjones/status/117580274...

No, no one pays attention.