Off Topic Liam Rosenior

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
  • Like
Reactions: Idi Amin
i read one of his articles and unfortunately it was full of factual errors. if it had been anyone else, i would have said it was full of lies and distortions. the guardian and the independent are written by ideologically corrupt activists, not journalists. both are as bad as the daily mail.
 
x said:
i read one of his articles and unfortunately it was full of factual errors. if it had been anyone else, i would have said it was full of lies and distortions. the guardian and the independent are written by ideologically corrupt activists, not journalists. both are as bad as the daily mail.
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to the article ? How can it have been in both newspapers ?
 
x said:
i read one of his articles and unfortunately it was full of factual errors. if it had been anyone else, i would have said it was full of lies and distortions. the guardian and the independent are written by ideologically corrupt activists, not journalists. both are as bad as the daily mail.
Click to expand...
he wrote blog/opinion pieces. I can’t comment on “factual errors” without you quoting examples, but there is a difference between straight reporting and opinion pieces
Newland Tiger said:
Do you have a link to the article ? How can it have been in both newspapers ?
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/profile/liam-rosenior
 
  • Like
Reactions: Newland Tiger
Newland Tiger said:
Do you have a link to the article ? How can it have been in both newspapers ?
Click to expand...

i didn't say it was in both comics. i mentioned that both are crap. it wasn't specifically about football and i'm not up for debating its content, so i'm afraid i won't be adding a link.
 
Newland Tiger said:
Thanks brownbagtiger

I'm guessing you disagree with his views then 'x' as it's an opinion piece
Click to expand...

it was one specific article and his views were based on misinformation. if his views had been based on facts that would have been fine, but the article mentioned the fallacies upon which his opinions were based. the same untruths are common currency in the uk, which accounts at least partially for his bellief in them. had it been written by a regular guardian staffer claiming to be a journalist, i would have put it down to deliberate mendacity and disingenuousness.
 
x said:
it was one specific article and his views were based on misinformation. if his views had been based on facts that would have been fine, but the article mentioned the fallacies upon which his opinions were based. the same untruths are common currency in the uk, which accounts at least partially for his bellief in them. had it been written by a regular guardian staffer claiming to be a journalist, i would have put it down to deliberate mendacity and disingenuousness.
Click to expand...
I'm with Rosie on this.
 
brownbagtiger said:
he wrote blog/opinion pieces. I can’t comment on “factual errors” without you quoting examples, but there is a difference between straight reporting and opinion pieces

https://www.theguardian.com/profile/liam-rosenior
Click to expand...

i don't disagree with you. however, if a piece includes - as it should and did - the bases (that's the plural of basis) on which the opinions are based, it also claims these bases as factual. and many of them were not. if it appeases you to any degree, his knowledge of us politics is superficial and based on
 
x said:
it was one specific article and his views were based on misinformation. if his views had been based on facts that would have been fine, but the article mentioned the fallacies upon which his opinions were based. the same untruths are common currency in the uk, which accounts at least partially for his bellief in them. had it been written by a regular guardian staffer claiming to be a journalist, i would have put it down to deliberate mendacity and disingenuousness.
Click to expand...

So you disagree with him , fine , no problem with that .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back