I haven't trusted the BBC on anything, including it's sports reporting, for several years. It used to be gold standard but not anymore.I would take that BBC / Israel report with great suspicion considering it's source.
I haven't trusted the BBC on anything, including it's sports reporting, for several years. It used to be gold standard but not anymore.I would take that BBC / Israel report with great suspicion considering it's source.
My issue was that when someone has a different opinion to you, as happened earlier, you accuse them of getting their facts and/or opinions from far right social media accounts. You could engage in a discussion and ask why they think what they think, have a back and forth and maybe learn something you didn't know but you go straight in with baseless accusations.
Instead of accusing you of getting your information from far left media, I asked where you got it from because that's what open minded people do, seek facts to try and gain understanding. What specific sources do you use? Do you do what you accuse others of and only believe those that affirm what you have decided is the only way to look at something? The BBC, for example, has just been found to have breached its own editorial guidelines 1,500 times over its reporting of the current Israel situation. People getting their information from them have been misled. They have reported fake news in some instances and people have believed and repeated it.
It was a story in the Telegraph. Rather a long read but it basically involved 20 independent data analysts. I never read the BBC so have no idea what they've been saying. Just read the article and thought it was interesting.When you say they have been found to breaches it - that’s according to a bit of research led by a random British lawyer using AI.
No idea how credible they are. Does someone need to research their data and see how credible it is though?
Obviously not given what's been said earlier.Also Tommy Robinson is a ****, think everyone can easily agree on that. Just above Farage and prob on par with Trump
It's public domain. It'd be like me asking for your sources if you said Charles III is the current king - some things aren't really subject to debate.So where did you find that information?
Also Tommy Robinson is a ****, think everyone can easily agree on that. Just above Farage and prob on par with Trump
Obviously not. If everyone thought that way, he wouldn't have a following and would be irrelevant. However, there is a discussion happening on here so....
Obviously not given what's been said earlier.
Anyway, enough derailing. I'd take it to the pub thread except I'm boycotting it![]()
think you're missing the point it is the accusation that is dodgyI haven't trusted the BBC on anything, including it's sports reporting, for several years. It used to be gold standard but not anymore.
I didn't miss the point at all. I bypassed making a comment on your assertion of the possibility of the findings of the report being dodgy/biased because I don't want to get into a religion/war/choosing sides type of argument and made a general comment on my position regarding the BBC.think you're missing the point it is the accusation that is dodgy
You're doing that thing again where you're making it about Tommy Robinson and what he's done and said etc. I'm not interested in talking about him. I wanted to know where mito (and subsequently, Solid, seeing as he responded) went to get their information. It wasn't a general question, it was asked specifically of them, mainly mito because he is so quick to shut people down. It's almost like you're not allowed to have the opposite opinion. It doesn't encourage debate or help us.to understand a different view if your first response to another view is to insult the other person.It's public domain. It'd be like me asking for your sources if you said Charles III is the current king - some things aren't really subject to debate.
Robinson makes no secret of his extreme right-wing views, and is/has been openly active in various NF/EDL type groups - bigotry masquerading as national pride. Anti everything that isn't white English.
People get their info from different sources depending on the topic under discussion - as Robinson is the topic how can anyone answer you without referencing him?You're doing that thing again where you're making it about Tommy Robinson and what he's done and said etc. I'm not interested in talking about him. I wanted to know where mito (and subsequently, Solid, seeing as he responded) went to get their information. It wasn't a general question, it was asked specifically of them, mainly mito because he is so quick to shut people down. It's almost like you're not allowed to have the opposite opinion. It doesn't encourage debate or help us.to understand a different view if your first response to another view is to insult the other person.
well if you're making a general point i would suggest using an example a disputed report isn't the best way .I didn't miss the point at all. I bypassed making a comment on your assertion of the possibility of the findings of the report being dodgy/biased because I don't want to get into a religion/war/choosing sides type of argument and made a general comment on my position regarding the BBC.
It doesn't though. I want to know specifically where mito gets his information because he is the one accusing others of getting their information from extreme right wing social media accounts. He's been specific. I wanted him to be specific back. Does he get his information from extreme left wing social media accounts? Only he can answer where he gets his from.People get their info from different sources depending on the topic under discussion - as Robinson is the topic how can anyone answer you without referencing him?
Anyway, the first sentence of my post you quoted answers your question - the info is out there in the public domain for anyone to see. No need to dig deep.
As to your last sentence, I might point out that the first post sent to me yesterday (not from you) on this topic accused me of being credulous and lazy - both presumptuous and insulting.
The general point in question wasn't the report, it was my not trusting the BBC.well if you're making a general point i would suggest using an example a disputed report isn't the best way .
I wasn't expecting you to, I was just pointing out that insults can fly in all directions, and get us nowhere.It doesn't though. I want to know specifically where mito gets his information because he is the one accusing others of getting their information from extreme right wing social media accounts. He's been specific. I wanted him to be specific back. Does he get his information from extreme left wing social media accounts? Only he can answer where he gets his from.
I'm sorry you felt insulted for being called credulous and lazy. It wasn't me so I don't have to answer to it.

It doesn't though. I want to know specifically where mito gets his information because he is the one accusing others of getting their information from extreme right wing social media accounts. He's been specific. I wanted him to be specific back. Does he get his information from extreme left wing social media accounts? Only he can answer where he gets his from.
I'm sorry you felt insulted for being called credulous and lazy. It wasn't me so I don't have to answer to it.
. (we've discussed this before too)It doesn't though. I want to know specifically where mito gets his information because he is the one accusing others of getting their information from extreme right wing social media accounts. He's been specific. I wanted him to be specific back. Does he get his information from extreme left wing social media accounts? Only he can answer where he gets his from.
I'm sorry you felt insulted for being called credulous and lazy. It wasn't me so I don't have to answer to it.
It was a story in the Telegraph. Rather a long read but it basically involved 20 independent data analysts. I never read the BBC so have no idea what they've been saying. Just read the article and thought it was interesting.