2015 Election season ..........stuff it in here.

[Darkon84]

I can't watch brand for that long.

 

Haha luckily its 90 seconds

[Strokes]

Makes Owen Jones look like the messiah.

Steady on.

Haha luckily its 90 seconds

, at a push maybe.

[MiniFox]

 

Miliband and Russell Brand interview is out if anyone's interested.

 

'Milibrand'

[Alf Bentley]

Back on track just what is Ed Miliband doing? Just watched a little bit of the preview of this 'interview' and what on earth is he doing sitting there sucking upto Russell Brand? Can you even begin to imagine leaders like Blair, Churchill or Thatcher even entertaining the thought of being held to account by an idiot like this let alone crawling up his arse trying to get him to tweet his followers asking for their vote.

 

 

Inaccurate caricature of the interview there, Matt (just watched the full 15 minutes). But the interview's on Youtube and link posted above, so people can make their own minds up.

 

Obviously, he's looking to win votes by doing this. Hardly surprising or unreasonable in the middle of an election campaign! If anything, though, he was politely holding Brand to account, making clear that democracy matters, that you should vote (contrary to Brand's recommendation) and that it is possible to take on powerful vested interests.

 

I certainly could imagine Blair, Churchill & Thatcher doing this if they were leaders in this election. Think about it. One of the things that those 3 had in common was their skill at using the dominant media formats of their day (radio for Churchill, TV for Thatcher and Blair) to get their points across. Miliband has the sense to realise that Internet is now massively important for getting your points across - particularly to young people disillusioned by politics. Good for him!

 

As for Cameron thinking that it's a joke for him to meet Brand, here's Call Me Dave with some "serious political commentators" (Katie Hopkins, Clarkson, One Direction, Barbara Windsor et al)....

http://www.newstatesman.com/media-mole/2015/04/david-cameron-has-no-time-hang-out-russell-brand-fits-jeremy-clarkson-and-katie

[MooseBreath]

You're really going for it today Moosey, aren't you?

I've probably asked you this before, but how would you define 'proper job'?

I think it's a good option; much more relaxed than many places.

That said, rural east coast US (New Hampshire etc) is an option too, horrifying healthcare system aside.

You can get a work visa for all these places, no problem? I thought you were an English teacher? Respectfully I can't imagine English teachers being in much demand in the US or New Zealand?

[MiniFox]

Inaccurate caricature of the interview there, Matt (just watched the full 15 minutes). But the interview's on Youtube and link posted above, so people can make their own minds up.

 

Obviously, he's looking to win votes by doing this. Hardly surprising or unreasonable in the middle of an election campaign! If anything, though, he was politely holding Brand to account, making clear that democracy matters, that you should vote (contrary to Brand's recommendation) and that it is possible to take on powerful vested interests.

 

I certainly could imagine Blair, Churchill & Thatcher doing this if they were leaders in this election. Think about it. One of the things that those 3 had in common was their skill at using the dominant media formats of their day (radio for Churchill, TV for Thatcher and Blair) to get their points across. Miliband has the sense to realise that Internet is now massively important for getting your points across - particularly to young people disillusioned by politics. Good for him!

 

As for Cameron thinking that it's a joke for him to meet Brand, here's Call Me Dave with some "serious political commentators" (Katie Hopkins, Clarkson, One Direction, Barbara Windsor et al)....

http://www.newstatesman.com/media-mole/2015/04/david-cameron-has-no-time-hang-out-russell-brand-fits-jeremy-clarkson-and-katie

 

Whether people like Russell Brand or not, he has a big audience who follow him, comfortably getting around 100k views plus per video, almost 10m Twitter followers and over a 1m YouTube subscribers.

 

Clearly, these people aren't happy for one reason or another, if anything this will go in Miliband's favour imo, not massively, but it could still have an impact.

[Darkon84]

Urgh god, I felt awkward just watching that, with Brand encroaching upon on Miliband's space and pushing himself on to him. What a nob. Overuse of the hands too. I can't watch Brand there without thinking of Ricky Bobby

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5magAtuOaI

[Jon the Hat]

Just read where IDS failed to show up for a public hustings in his own constiantcy where the sister of an ex-army server who died after his  benefits were stopped was making an appearance. All the other 6 candidates showed up. Also Esther McVey did not show up for a radio show that she was supposed to be on. And would you believe another MP failed to show up at a public meeting where the subject was welfare reforms.

Maybe they had more important business to attend to rather than meet the public and it is just a coincidence that they all missed meetings where they may have had  to answer a couple of awkward questions from the public. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt as it was in the Mirror as we all know is a leftie paper so cannot be believed.

 

Enough of this nonsense I am off for a pint and watch City. COYB.

 

There are quite a lot of hustings, not all MPs go to all of them.

[leicsmac]

You can get a work visa for all these places, no problem? I thought you were an English teacher? Respectfully I can't imagine English teachers being in much demand in the US or New Zealand?

 

The US wouldn't be a problem, I could get a visa to live there if I wanted through other reasons than employment. As for NZ, there's more physics and engineering jobs in academia, teaching and industry there than you might think. Worth looking at some point in the future, certainly.

 

I do appreciate your concern though.  

 

 

 

Anyhow, back on topic...I'm honestly not sure what to make of that Brand/Miliband 'interview'. It smacks of shallow populist rhetoric, but as Alf says most effective politicians are adept at using new media to their advantage, and perhaps that's what Ed is doing here. 

[Benji]

Anyone seen the Margaret Hodge stories this morning re: tax?  It's in the Times/FT but you need a subscription.

 

A fervent critic of companies using corporate vehicles and jurisdictions to reduce tax (and rightly so) to the point that businesses are genuinely concerned about what she's going to do if Labour come into power - and then this story breaks. Hypocrasy of the highest order if it turns out to be true. 

[Rincewind]

There are quite a lot of hustings, not all MPs go to all of them.

nice to be able to  pick and choose. Although as he has  a 12000 majority I don't suppose he is bothered  by a few protesters  who might catch him out. The  majority will still  follow him. Baaa.

 

An  ideal proper job for me would be one where I could  sit in an office and post on Foxestalk all day.

[MooseBreath]

The US wouldn't be a problem, I could get a visa to live there if I wanted through other reasons than employment. As for NZ, there's more physics and engineering jobs in academia, teaching and industry there than you might think. Worth looking at some point in the future, certainly.

I do appreciate your concern though.

Anyhow, back on topic...I'm honestly not sure what to make of that Brand/Miliband 'interview'. It smacks of shallow populist rhetoric, but as Alf says most effective politicians are adept at using new media to their advantage, and perhaps that's what Ed is doing here.

Money wasn't very good in NZ when I was there a few years back. Nice place but a bit of a backwater vibe, understandably. Trumped by Australia in most respects.

[Buce]

Murdoch is scum #764:

The Sun in England: Vote Tory to stop SNP running the country.

The Sun in Scotland: Vote SNP.

[Rincewind]

I expect no less. Are they both owned by him?

[Rincewind]

UKIP have  made a complaint about HIGNFY.  They sayh a  comment about  Farage may damage his chances.  I thought it  was fair considering how much stick the other parties received.

 

http://www.itv.com/news/2015-04-29/ukip-asks-police-to-investigate-the-bbc-over-have-i-got-news-for-you/

[leicsmac]

Murdoch is scum #764:

The Sun in England: Vote Tory to stop SNP running the country.

The Sun in Scotland: Vote SNP.

 

I almost admire his single minded desire for control. It's a real tale of success, how a foreign national who has never stood for election in his life can have so much influence over the UK political process...

 

...isn't it?

[Buce]

I almost admire his single minded desire for control. It's a real tale of success, how a foreign national who has never stood for election in his life can have so much influence over the UK political process...

...isn't it?

When other forms of media have to remain impartial, but the press - largely owned by donors to a political party - do not, there is something very wrong.

The law needs to be changed.

[Footballwipe]

So the last 24 hours tht attention of the election has turned from a debate about what's going to happen to every man and his dog rounding on the BBC?

 

Now I'm biased and love the BBC so I'm not getting into a licence fee argument etc, but whenver I read news article comments, broadcasting forums and Twitter, the right think the BBC is left, the left think the BBC (especially the Today programme apparently) is disproportionate in giving preference to the right. Which is it guys, because they can't be biased both ways? (Rhetorical question of course, your ideology will lock you into which way they're "biased.")

 

Now the Conservatives and UKIP are squealing and looking for a scapegoat if they lost the election? They've got almost every newsapaper and a five point lead in a poll, crow about that. Be positive, don't negatively campaign and you might get positive stories.

 

Sometimes you feel the BBC just shouldn't broadcast anything to do with the elections, or politics altogether, they'll never get praised.

[leicsmac]

When other forms of media have to remain impartial, but the press - largely owned by donors to a political party - do not, there is something very wrong.

The law needs to be changed.

 

But the BBC (the biggest challenge to the mainstream press) isn't impartial! It shows a clear left wing bias!

 

*ahem*

 

 

In any case, thankfully such regulation may not end up being necessary...press media is on a pretty strong decline, and with the rise of the Internet I expect that to continue, outside of the web pages for those same newspapers, of course.

 

Of course the same problems - probably magnified - exist there, but at least the number of sources is greater and so things can be viewed from a greater variety of angles rather than just the one one group wants you to see.

[leicsmac]

So the last 24 hours tht attention of the election has turned from a debate about what's going to happen to every man and his dog rounding on the BBC?

 

Now I'm biased and love the BBC so I'm not getting into a licence fee argument etc, but whenver I read news article comments, broadcasting forums and Twitter, the right think the BBC is left, the left think the BBC (especially the Today programme apparently) is disproportionate in giving preference to the right. Which is it guys, because they can't be biased both ways? (Rhetorical question of course, your ideology will lock you into which way they're "biased.")

 

Now the Conservatives and UKIP are squealing and looking for a scapegoat if they lost the election? They've got almost every newsapaper and a five point lead in a poll, crow about that. Be positive, don't negatively campaign and you might get positive stories.

 

Sometimes you feel the BBC just shouldn't broadcast anything to do with the elections, or politics altogether, they'll never get praised.

 

This. ThisthisthisTHIS.

 

When you've got both sides giving you stick, you can pretty sure you're close to the middle, which is where the Beeb should be.

[Alf Bentley]

I almost admire his single minded desire for control. It's a real tale of success, how a foreign national who has never stood for election in his life can have so much influence over the UK political process...

 

...isn't it?

When other forms of media have to remain impartial, but the press - largely owned by donors to a political party - do not, there is something very wrong.

The law needs to be changed.

 

Is it a single-minded desire for control - or for sales, advertising and, ultimately, wealth? Murdoch is backing the SNP in Scotland as it is currently the "winner" there, just as he backed Blair when New Labour was the dominant force across the UK.

 

He's always likely to prefer parties of the right that promote free markets, deregulation and low tax, as he believes this will boost his corporate profits. But if he might lose sales or advertising revenue by opposing other parties that are dominant (SNP in Scotland; Blairite New Labour), he's quite happy to jump into bed with them for personal/corporate gain. Might be different if they were proposing policies to clamp down on his freedom to do what he wants and earn as much as possible, but the SNP aren't doing that, are they?

 

He's probably quite keen to keep Labour out of power as Miliband has taken him on over phone hacking and excessive market domination, and would probably increase taxes and regulation for large corporations. Another reason why he'd be quite happy for the SNP to massacre Labour in Scotland, which he hopes will help Cameron hang on in the UK as a whole.

 

Is the media largely owned by donors to a political party, Buce? That's a genuine question. Maybe I'm naive, but I wasn't aware of Murdoch or other right-wing moguls actually making donations to the Tories or anyone else. Dirty Desmond at the Express has made donations to UKIP, but he's the only one I'm aware of. No doubt many of Murdoch's corporate advertisers make donations to the Tories, a more indirect personal/corporate interest further encouraging him to back Cameron & co.

 

I hope that the rise of the Internet as a news source means that Murdoch's political influence is on the wane somewhat - and terrestrial TV has always been there to offer more balance. Of course, the slow drip of malign influence is there all the time, dumbing down people's view of politics, ridiculing Labour politicians and distorting policies in the interests of his global corporate profit maximisation....but hopefully he has less influence than he once did.

[Guest MattP]

Inaccurate caricature of the interview there, Matt (just watched the full 15 minutes). But the interview's on Youtube and link posted above, so people can make their own minds up.

 

Obviously, he's looking to win votes by doing this. Hardly surprising or unreasonable in the middle of an election campaign! If anything, though, he was politely holding Brand to account, making clear that democracy matters, that you should vote (contrary to Brand's recommendation) and that it is possible to take on powerful vested interests.

 

I certainly could imagine Blair, Churchill & Thatcher doing this if they were leaders in this election. Think about it. One of the things that those 3 had in common was their skill at using the dominant media formats of their day (radio for Churchill, TV for Thatcher and Blair) to get their points across. Miliband has the sense to realise that Internet is now massively important for getting your points across - particularly to young people disillusioned by politics. Good for him!

 

As for Cameron thinking that it's a joke for him to meet Brand, here's Call Me Dave with some "serious political commentators" (Katie Hopkins, Clarkson, One Direction, Barbara Windsor et al)....

http://www.newstatesman.com/media-mole/2015/04/david-cameron-has-no-time-hang-out-russell-brand-fits-jeremy-clarkson-and-katie

 

I don't think it was inaccurate at all, I was cringing watching it and all Millipede seems to do is try to agree with him and then sort of explain why he can't actually do anything and then try to detract away from his policy by just criticising the Tories, it was like watching some weird alliance based on nothing but a hatred of the Tories.

 

The whole scene of watching two millionaires argue with each other about exploiting the poor is actually quite sickening to me. I really didn't like it, I'm happy for it to happen though as doing things like this with Brand can't help him.

 

I don't know why you have put Cameron up as a response to me, I've been just as critical of him for this sort of thing over the last few years and I also layed into Farage the other week for hanging out with Joey Essex, the dumbing down is a plague on the campaign, they know they have to appeal to the idiots to get elected. I hate it.

 

I'm sick of this whole 'disiilusionment' thing - if people can't be bothered to take an interest in politics then don't, politics shouldn't change and lower it's own standards so people like One Direction can lecture a million people on the subject.

 

nice to be able to  pick and choose. Although as he has  a 12000 majority I don't suppose he is bothered  by a few protesters  who might catch him out. The  majority will still  follow him. Baaa.

 

An  ideal proper job for me would be one where I could  sit in an office and post on Foxestalk all day.

 

Plenty of them about Ken, only need a business administration qualification and some basic IT skills. Anyone can do that.

 

Murdoch is scum #764:

The Sun in England: Vote Tory to stop SNP running the country.

The Sun in Scotland: Vote SNP.

 

The Sun in populist shocker, does anyone really take any notice of them anyway? I doubt it, I remember seeing a few years ago despite them backing Cameron Sun readers were still likely to be working class people who vote Labour.

 

And your accusation about political donations is a lie.

 

The editor of the Sun is on BBC DP now, basically openly admitting it's trying to back the winner and it's more an anti-Labour message, says their demographic north of the border want the SNP and south of the border want the Tories, completely stone faced as well saying it

 

UKIP have  made a complaint about HIGNFY.  They sayh a  comment about  Farage may damage his chances.  I thought it  was fair considering how much stick the other parties received.

 

http://www.itv.com/news/2015-04-29/ukip-asks-police-to-investigate-the-bbc-over-have-i-got-news-for-you/

 

They are supposed to adhere to rules during the 4 weeks before the election, don't think it will help UKIP though doing things like this, just sit back and take it, it's not right that the rules are different when attacking Farage and Bennett (and Miliband to a certain extent) but that's just the way it is.

 

So the last 24 hours tht attention of the election has turned from a debate about what's going to happen to every man and his dog rounding on the BBC?

 

Now I'm biased and love the BBC so I'm not getting into a licence fee argument etc, but whenver I read news article comments, broadcasting forums and Twitter, the right think the BBC is left, the left think the BBC (especially the Today programme apparently) is disproportionate in giving preference to the right. Which is it guys, because they can't be biased both ways? (Rhetorical question of course, your ideology will lock you into which way they're "biased.")

 

Now the Conservatives and UKIP are squealing and looking for a scapegoat if they lost the election? They've got almost every newsapaper and a five point lead in a poll, crow about that. Be positive, don't negatively campaign and you might get positive stories.

 

Sometimes you feel the BBC just shouldn't broadcast anything to do with the elections, or politics altogether, they'll never get praised.

 

This is just an obscene post, you should have stopped as 'Now I'm biased' as we all know what was going to follow.

 

Tonight they have set up a Question Time special and are openly admitting the audience will be divided evenly between the three main parties, how can they justify that level of Lib Dem support? As I've mentioned before they have serious form on this, in Clacton the audience were fervently left wing and a few hours later at the polls they returned a UKIP candidate with 60% with the Tories in second with about 25%.

 

Have a look at the two screenshots I posted on the last page, indefensible stuff from a suppose unbiased broadcaster, as mentioned by someone a few posts up the Margaret Hodge story broke yesterday that was a pretty big piece of news, was it mentioned on the BBC news? Of course it wasn't.

 

They even managed to describe UKIP yesterday as an 'anti immigration party' - what a shameful misrepresentation, stopping mass migration in favour of a points system certainly doesn't make you an 'anti-immigration party, this is what the beeb often does, it slyly turns left wing opinion mainstream when it isn't, in the same way Sky News do it the other way, although Sky don't try and pretend to be independent and you don't have to pay money to Murdoch through a stealth tax.

 

Even the head of the BBC a few years back openly admitted the company had a problem with it's left wing bias, it's incredible people still try and put forward a viewpoint that this isn't true, laughable almost, I've never seen the Beeb attacked for being too right wing wither apart from the cultist bellends from the SNP who can't listen to reason or logic anyway.

 

So many more examples I could give as well, the charge sheet on the beeb would be as long as Jimmy Savile's.

 

On the plus side the token Tory is Andrew Neil, who is quite brilliant.

[SMX11]

I don't care about bias as long as they are openly supporting a position/party. The problem with BBC is that it clearly goes against its mandate of being 'impartial'. Whenever a UKIP representative is having an interview they generally avoid asking about policy and just keep asking questions about some random crack pot member that said something stupid. Yet they never ask Tory /Lab/Lib about any of the incidents with their 'clowns'.

[MooseBreath]

The Brand Miliband interview was awful. Two ostriches barely talking to each other but rather exchanging opportunities to preach their usual crap. Even the very, very silly people who like brand's politics can't have gained anything from that. Brand's use of "we" throughout was disgusting as well. If he's going to say that he should clarify who he thinks he is speaking for, that's if he even knows the names of the scum he hangs out with down the half way house.

[Guest MattP]

Brilliant, someone has uploaded the interview from DP with the class war party.

 

I'm not winding people up here but can anyone actually explain why it is that the further left you go the most outrageous, wacky and queer you have to get? Why does having a far left viewpoint make someone want to dress up as a woman for a serious political interview?