Jump to content

GB news


Archied

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

Some ministers go beyond mere understanding their briefs though- politicians such as Ed Balls, Ed Miliband, David willets etc. all applied ideological frameworks themselves to the development of policy and were real movers as opposed to merely understanding a policy brief. Over time this often becomes the difference between merely a solid, competent minister and someone who has a brighter future and compete at the top of politics. 

 You're overgeneralising I think to make what can be a valid point. Portillo is a good presenter, intelligent and has experience at the treasury so it's reasonable to assume he's a solid choice of a second person when Neil is giving the interview. 

He's been riding trains for the past 15 years, is published on multiple occasions and has used his educational background in history to great effect in that area. 

I have a long standing friend who worked at the treasury so know something of its workings in terms of policy development. His view was very much that the work goes on, whilst political figures rotate with a far higher frequency. 

I don't mind portillos presentation at all but I'm not going to suddenly view him as some kind of economics guru because he spent a couple of years in a political appointment. 

Where was the LSE professor? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

He's been riding trains for the past 15 years, is published on multiple occasions and has used his educational background in history to great effect in that area. 

I have a long standing friend who worked at the treasury so know something of its workings in terms of policy development. His view was very much that the work goes on, whilst political figures rotate with a far higher frequency. 

I don't mind portillos presentation at all but I'm not going to suddenly view him as some kind of economics guru because he spent a couple of years in a political appointment. 

Where was the LSE professor? 

 

I didn't say he was an economics guru merely that having worked at the treasury he'd have a good idea of what went on and you do also need the political element in the analysis given it's not simply a hypothetical economics question. 

I'd be a bit concerned if civil servants were changed as much as the politicians who run their department as institutional memory would be pretty thin in general but that doesn't invalidate my point. 

Maybe they'd have benefitted from an economics professor in the analysis- although they'd have to be pretty careful in their choice given the range of options (someone like Johnathan Portes for example is highly controversial) and the limited scope of a PhD's knowledge even in their chosen field has to be considered. Sometimes a generalist can be a bit better than a specialist unless you want to focus in on something in particular.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Exactly so. Not economics. 

Just out of interest did you watch Portillo's analysis?

Are you commenting one what you think his analysis was or what his analysis actually was?

I don't claim to be an economic guru, its not my field - but I found it to be informative.

Edited by maxjam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

It's so frustrating people just want to sit in their bubbles and denounce stuff when they don't know what it is.

(Not aimed at you @Carl Sagan I have just picked up on your line).

Welcome to popular politics in the 21st Century.

Thanks to:

1. The internet allowing individual batchends to congregate and gain some kind of Clausewitzian offensive mass on social media.

2. Disconnected central govt bubbles and out-of-touch politicians.

3. Pooh stirrers - agenda peddlers, chancers, bloggers, narcissists, second-string celebs, has beens, influencers, etc. Bots? Foreign State actors?

 

All perspective has disappeared.

If you want to make a few quid and have a nice car/house you are DESTROYING THE PLANET.

If you want to share wealth out you are a COMMIE PARASITE.

If you are proud of your country and its history YOU ARE A RACIST BIGOT.

 

Suddenly people are chasing an inoffensive BBC producers down the street. 

 

I have watched a bit of GB News .... and ... I think its a bit beige to be honest. It doesn't look like a Fascist coup in the offing, at times its looked like a 6th Form project.

I don't really care. I will scout out my own news looking at different sources and talking to people I know are #ITK. (As I bet you do @Carl Sagan

But I guess GB News must be doing something right as we are up in arms on the forum of a well-loved unfashionable East Midlands football club forum. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Just out of interest did you watch Portillo's analysis?

Are you commenting one what you think his analysis was or what his analysis actually was?

I don't claim to be an economic guru, its not my field - but I found it to be fer informative.

No I didn't. Nor would I. If I want to understand economics then I will go to an economist. 

If I wanted to know what the government are likely to do next then I would have. But I'm not at this stage interested enough. 

Horses for courses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

Er, no. Why? He has expertise in selecting politically palatable choices from the options that others analyses have derived for him. 

This is the crux of our system. The smes are in the civil service, the politicians apply political overlay only ie,  is it in line with the manifesto, what do the focus groups say? 

He is immensely qualified - to sit on his bum on a train and let somebody else do the work (the engine driver).

Saying that, I do enjoy his 'Railway Journeys' programmes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

The treasury does the economics. The chancellor does the presentation.

So who's doing the equivalent role to the treasury for portillo? 

Cos if the answer is he was doing it himself based on a short political stint some years ago, then my view is and remains that he is very unlikely, on that basis, to produce a high quality analysis. 

If it's purely a political show, a presentation off, fine, get on with it, but I will treat it for what it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Eddie said:

He is immensely qualified - to sit on his bum on a train and let somebody else do the work (the engine driver).

Saying that, I do enjoy his 'Railway Journeys' programmes.

As do I. My only challenge to the OP was on what exactly does he think he's being educated in? 

Is it real in depth stuff, or presentational flim-flam dressing up some serious work?

I quite liked Clarkson presenting top gear. But I wouldn't let him near my motor..... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

As do I. My only challenge to the OP was on what exactly does he think he's being educated in? 

Is it real in depth stuff, or presentational flim-flam dressing up some serious work?

I quite liked Clarkson presenting top gear. But I wouldn't let him near my motor..... 

Going completely off topic, you should check out Clarkson's Farm (couple of reviews in the watchable telly thread).  Its got a hint of Top Gear about it as he goes through an entire year on his farm.  Amazon Prime only though which I guess limits most people from accessing it on here - but it well worth a watch, one of the best things I've seen all year tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, maxjam said:

Going completely off topic, you should check out Clarkson's Farm (couple of reviews in the watchable telly thread).  Its got a hint of Top Gear about it as he goes through an entire year on his farm.  Amazon Prime only though which I guess limits most people from accessing it on here - but it well worth a watch, one of the best things I've seen all year tbh.

I've got prime so I'll give that a go, cheers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/06/2021 at 23:33, maxjam said:

Nope, I watched the opening monologue from Andrew Neil and tbh think they will attract the average guy in the street that feels they can't say what they want to say anymore because literally everything offends someone and the disillusioned 'red wall' labour voter that just wants someone to listen to them and not be subject to globalist/London centric wokery that is a million miles from their daily life.

It'll be either far(ish) right like Fox News or it will fail. There's no money to be made in the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bob The Badger said:

It'll be either far(ish) right like Fox News or it will fail. There's no money to be made in the middle.

I'd disagree with that tbh.

A lot of people are fed up with the BBC and Sky is subscription tv.  GB News could hoover up a lot of views simply being an alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been watching GB news for ten minutes great article about the divisions being created in society in the race to the bottom on who is the biggest victim today and how counter productive this can be to the actual person. Not had time to watch all of it but this would never be discussed on BBC or SKY what a refreshing change well done.

Just for the record the person who mentioned this was not male or pale.

Also just found out from a website that I can possibly claim indirect sexual discrimination in the work place if I am not offered assistance with certain tasks if this is true I should be able to claim indirect racial discrimination as well but I have managed 40 years of continuous employment without playing the victim so would never go down that route but need to do some more research on this topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the subject of cancel culture..

I see that last year Churchill College Cambridge set up a working group to critically assess Winston Churchill's legacy 

https://www.chu.cam.ac.uk/news/2021/feb/25/statement-churchill-college-its-programme-churchil/

Quote

The purpose of the series and the role of the College as home to Churchill’s papers is to support an honest reckoning with the past in all its complexity and nuance.

But after the second event, under pressure from the right-wing press and Churchill's family, the college have forced the working group to disband and cease any further activity 

 

But it's only the left who engage in cancel culture remember ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

For saying this news channel is supposedly anti mainstream/establishment it’s sure getting a couple of favours from the mainstream/establishment.

 

899E8B7A-ED2C-49E8-A365-2560B66AE4E9.png

I'm only surprised that the Culture War Secretary took this long to take issue with it. But whilst he can threaten museums' funding if they displease him, I'm sure that even he knows that private companies can decide how and where they spend their own advertising budgets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

That's perhaps the most disappointing thing I've ever seen you post, Sage. This Week was a glorious political show on the BBC for many years, rating into the millions at midnight, until it was cancelled by the Beeb. Last night it was recreated to an extent, with the Chancellor of the Exchequer being grilled by the nation's most forensic interviewer for 20 minutes and then his responses being dissected by an expert panel including Michael Portillo. Real in-depth thoughtful useful and important TV. I learnt stuff.

It's so frustrating people just want to sit in their bubbles and denounce stuff when they don't know what it is. While the Twitter hate mob calls for it to be cancelled and boycotted because they're terrified they'll hear things that might challenge them and make them think.

I think you have misunderstood my post. It was philosophical rather than accusationary.

It was a critique of how divided and partisan we have grown as a nation over the last few years.

All this talk of different people having different news channels based on their beliefs.  It's a slippery slope and I don't want us to end up like the U.S. 

It's perhaps an indication of that divide that my post was misconstrued.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...