#COVID19 | Page 153 | Vital Football

#COVID19

in_the_top_one said:
An inquiry, yes.

Nuremberg??
Click to expand...
Ask the families of those that died and are dying, ask the NHS staff that are getting and some dying and more will die.
The more days that go by the contagion on those on the front line , the more this virus will be seen.
Look at Italy and Spain, first it was senior citizens and those with conditions that were dying, in the last days and weeks, the effect of the virus is being felt by those at the front line that where and are exposed all the time.
No matter how much PPE they have and they use, the odds are against them.
 
da fuq said:
I really could get into it but I have tried with some posters in the past even provided links and articles about Murdoch from some of the best known publications in the world

However it was obvious that Pope did not read the articles when he later questioned me about proof once again

Anyway ill just leave this for those who may take a passing interest

I would suggest Pope look up basic stuff that you learn pre GCSE about media..stuff that 11 year old's can grasp

Class‐dominant theory

Mediated culture
Click to expand...
It will be a very rare thing for me to click on a link you post. Unless I know the source of it, I won't do it.

I can't believe you claim to have worked in the media and don't actually understand what is going on.

The Sun and all the newspapers write stories that their readership want to read. They don't tell their readers things that their owners want to see but their readers don't, because then no one would buy the paper.

The tone and emphasis of each paper is tailored to its audience, not its owner. The Daily Express I believe has recently been taken over by someone who is quite left wing. So we should have seen a shift to the left yes? But we have not. It's more of a Boris fanzine than ever; because it's readership will buy that.

Do papers exacerbate these politics? Absolutely! Right wing press will make anyone who is basically slightly tilted unfavourably to Muslims absolutely hate them. They will make anyone who has an ingrained fear of terrorism, no matter how vague, convinced it is just around every corner. They will make anyone who doesn't understand what the EU does for this country absolutely believe it is the source of all our problems.

But it takes attitudes that already exist it their readership and puts them on steroids. They create virtually nothing.

Every single time we have this discussion I give several examples that back up my point; whether it is the Express, the times or the Scottish sun. Every single time you just completely ignore those inconvenient points and skulk off with some more diatribes.

Your strategy whenever you are in trouble in a debate has never changed; ignore what you can't counter, brazen it out with arrogance and stock phrases ("it won't wash", "no shame" "been doing this for years", some tedious reference to "the 606 days, whatever). I particularly love this affectation you have where you pretend you are talking to some kind of admiring audience who all agree with you rather than the poster in question.

But I've seen it all before, and to use one of your phrases, it won't wash sunshine.

980 people died yesterday, more than have been killed by terrorism in this country in the last 50 years. The entirety of the press is ignoring this. On sky news it is story number 5. It no longer appears on the BBC top stories at all. Our journalists are absolutely shameful when it comes to asking lowball questions and not even attempting to follow up on dodged questions.

That is what we should be debating, not the fucking bias of the right wing press again
 
Pope John XXIII said:
It will be a very rare thing for me to click on a link you post. Unless I know the source of it, I won't do it.

I can't believe you claim to have worked in the media and don't actually understand what is going on.

The Sun and all the newspapers write stories that their readership want to read. They don't tell their readers things that their owners want to see but their readers don't, because then no one would buy the paper.

The tone and emphasis of each paper is tailored to its audience, not its owner. The Daily Express I believe has recently been taken over by someone who is quite left wing. So we should have seen a shift to the left yes? But we have not. It's more of a Boris fanzine than ever; because it's readership will buy that.

Do papers exacerbate these politics? Absolutely! Right wing press will make anyone who is basically slightly tilted unfavourably to Muslims absolutely hate them. They will make anyone who has an ingrained fear of terrorism, no matter how vague, convinced it is just around every corner. They will make anyone who doesn't understand what the EU does for this country absolutely believe it is the source of all our problems.

But it takes attitudes that already exist it their readership and puts them on steroids. They create virtually nothing.

Every single time we have this discussion I give several examples that back up my point; whether it is the Express, the times or the Scottish sun. Every single time you just completely ignore those inconvenient points and skulk off with some more diatribes.

Your strategy whenever you are in trouble in a debate has never changed; ignore what you can't counter, brazen it out with arrogance and stock phrases ("it won't wash", "no shame" "been doing this for years", some tedious reference to "the 606 days, whatever). I particularly love this affectation you have where you pretend you are talking to some kind of admiring audience who all agree with you rather than the poster in question.

But I've seen it all before, and to use one of your phrases, it won't wash sunshine.

980 people died yesterday, more than have been killed by terrorism in this country in the last 50 years. The entirety of the press is ignoring this. On sky news it is story number 5. It no longer appears on the BBC top stories at all. Our journalists are absolutely shameful when it comes to asking lowball questions and not even attempting to follow up on dodged questions.

That is what we should be debating, not the fucking bias of the right wing press again
Click to expand...

Hogwash I have in the past provided links and evidence to my points and just like now you have ignored them.

Did you read any of the links in the previous discussion? did you bob!

Have you even bothered to look up a couple of the basic things I have pointed out, no!

You have just gone back to your own idea of how the media works?

Yes

You are right in some of what you say so I will give you that
 
Last edited:
da fuq said:
Hogwash I have in the past provided links and evidence to my points and just like now you have ignored them

Did you read any of the links in the previous discussion did you bob

Have even bothered to look up a couple of the basic things I have pointed out no

You have just gone back to your own idea of how the media works?

Yes
Click to expand...
To my recollection you have provided nothing.

By all means repost these links that will prove me wrong. If I can see they are from a legitimate, reputable source I will click and read.

By all means feel free to explain the Scottish Sun any time you want
 
Pope John XXIII said:
To my recollection you have provided nothing.

By all means repost these links that will prove me wrong. If I can see they are from a legitimate, reputable source I will click and read.

By all means feel free to explain the Scottish Sun any time you want
Click to expand...

As for the Scottish Sun you have taken a very small sample to try and prove your point

If you want to find the links and the articles that i have posted go back and find them in the threads I have done this for you before and will not do it again because you evidently chose to ignore them on more than one occasion

They are there

Now go fetch
 
da fuq said:
As for the Scottish Sun you have taken a very small sample to try and prove your point

If you want to find the links and the articles that i have posted go back and find them in the threads I have done this for you before and will not do it again because you evidently chose to ignore them on more than one occasion

They are there

Now go fetch
Click to expand...
No thanks.

Scottish Sun? Times backing remain? The Express?

That's not a small sample at all is it? The wriggling here is acute.

I don't think you have posted anything so I'm not looking for what I don't believe is there.

Now try answering some points in the hear and now.

Maybe you think there is a big Murdoch conspiracy behind all news outlets having Boris walking/ Kenny Dalglish with Covid as their lead stories?

Rather than the simple explanation that all media online depend on clicks and the audience will happily click on a feel good story about cheery Boris but they run a mile from "1000 dead in a day".

But no, it's. Right wing conspiracy
 
Pope John XXIII said:
No thanks.

Scottish Sun? Times backing remain? The Express?

That's not a small sample at all is it? The wriggling here is acute.

I don't think you have posted anything so I'm not looking for what I don't believe is there.

Now try answering some points in the hear and now.

Maybe you think there is a big Murdoch conspiracy behind all news outlets having Boris walking/ Kenny Dalglish with Covid as their lead stories?

Rather than the simple explanation that all media online depend on clicks and the audience will happily click on a feel good story about cheery Boris but they run a mile from "1000 dead in a day".

But no, it's. Right wing conspiracy
Click to expand...

Oh stop Pope

The ownership of the media in this country is predominantly right wing and does control a lot of the narrative in this country as people do get their opinions from various sources and the media is the big gateway

Do you think people suddenly decide to have an opinion with out some influence? Do their opinions suddenly magically come out of nothing?

The vast majority of people in this Country, Australia and to some extent the US are informed by the Murdoch press

I am not saying it is a conspiracy you do like to make little movies in your head about me don't you

Of course they have to tailor to the readership but there is also the wholesale message going on in the background

As for all those examples you have given there are plenty of articles to disprove what you are saying
 
Last edited:
Pope, I'm curious (in a civil way, not starting an argument) on what you think of this quote (which I've posted before) by Edward Bernays in his book Propaganda

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, and our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of…. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind.
 
JC21 said:
Pope, I'm curious (in a civil way, not starting an argument) on what you think of this quote (which I've posted before) by Edward Bernays in his book Propaganda

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, and our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of…. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind.
Click to expand...


Oh I think he will be on the ignore

And then when this debate comes up again he will say that he doesn't remember or that he didn't see it

Plums is the same

To be honest you are wasting your time he will just write thousands of words arguing the toss and bore you into submission

I'm giving up
 
da fuq said:
Just as a gimme I will do a one off

Here are a couple of the things I have posted in the past which you chose to ignore amongst many others

This is the last time I will do it

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/03/magazine/rupert-murdoch-fox-news-trump.html

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/09/james-murdoch-fox-news-empire
Click to expand...

Pretty certain you have never poster these before, at least not in response to me. One is a week old.

Ok, couple of quotes from the first one

"The Murdoch empire did not cause this wave. But more than any single media company, it enabled it, promoted it and profited from it"


"It would be impossible for an empire as sprawling as Murdoch’s to be completely culturally and ideologically consistent. He is a businessman who wants to satisfy his customers"

i thank you for posting a link that so comfortably backs up everything I am arguing. Ta for that
 
Pope John XXIII said:
Pretty certain you have never poster these before, at least not in response to me. One is a week old.

Ok, couple of quotes from the first one

"The Murdoch empire did not cause this wave. But more than any single media company, it enabled it, promoted it and profited from it"


"It would be impossible for an empire as sprawling as Murdoch’s to be completely culturally and ideologically consistent. He is a businessman who wants to satisfy his customers"

i thank you for posting a link that so comfortably backs up everything I am arguing. Ta for that
Click to expand...

Again you have taken one minuscule part of the whole article

Well done

I can do the same but with way more quotes

"Yet his various news outlets have inexorably pushed the flow of history to the right across the Anglosphere"

"His influence became an uncomfortable fact of British political life, and Murdoch seemed to revel in it. “It’s The Sun Wot Won It,” The Sun declared on its front page in 1992, after helping send the Tory leader John Major to 10 Downing Street by relentlessly smearing the character of his opponent, Neil Kinnock"



"Murdoch used the same playbook in the United States. In 1980, he met Roy Cohn — the former adviser to Senator Joseph McCarthy and a Trump mentor — who introduced him to Gov. Ronald Reagan’s inner circle. It was a group that included Roger Stone Jr., another Trump confidant and the head of Reagan’s New York operations, who said in a later interview that he helped Murdoch weaponize his latest tabloid purchase, The New York Post, on Reagan’s behalf in the 1980 election. Reagan’s team credited Murdoch with delivering him the state that year — Murdoch gave Stone an Election Day printing plate from The Post over a celebratory meal at the 21 Club — and his administration subsequently facilitated Murdoch’s entry into the American television market, quickly approving his application for American citizenship so he could buy TV stations too."


I could go on but I think I've made my point

Any thoughts on what his son is saying in the 2nd article?

Go on give us a 10,000 word essay on it
 
Last edited:
JC21 said:
Pope, I'm curious (in a civil way, not starting an argument) on what you think of this quote (which I've posted before) by Edward Bernays in his book Propaganda

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, and our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of…. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind.
Click to expand...

It's an interesting one and I don't disagree per se.

But I believe that you have to have a base to start with. As in, people have to be open to that opinion and belief before you start.

Murdoch makes no attempt to persuade people like me. If it is so easy to do, why not? Surely as a teacher my entire social group would be invaluable to propagandist secret governments like the Murdoch's? After all, we could potentially sow the fertile ground of future consumers? But Murdoch's media empire makes no attempt to persuade me of any kind of ideology other than spending money on football.

Because I am inherently left wing. I don't go to his kinds of papers and of he purchased the Guardian or the i and tried to use them to push his opinions, I would no longer like what they write and buy them.

You can see this in Nazi Germany. Penetration of Nazi ideology was never that great. People bought it who wanted to; primarily northern and eastern protestants whose conservative "traditional" values and historic militarism already chimed in accordance with Nazi values. Very urbanised areas, border areas and the south saw far less ideological penetration.

More importantly, the Nazis were overwhelmingly more successful with the young, whose ideas were only just forming and whose opinions were there to be set, than they ever were with trying to shift the opinions of older Germans who weren't already inclined towards their ideas.
 
da fuq said:
Again you have taken one minuscule part of the whole article

Well done

I can do the same but with way more quotes

"Yet his various news outlets have inexorably pushed the flow of history to the right across the Anglosphere"

"His influence became an uncomfortable fact of British political life, and Murdoch seemed to revel in it. “It’s The Sun Wot Won It,” The Sun declared on its front page in 1992, after helping send the Tory leader John Major to 10 Downing Street by relentlessly smearing the character of his opponent, Neil Kinnock"



"Murdoch used the same playbook in the United States. In 1980, he met Roy Cohn — the former adviser to Senator Joseph McCarthy and a Trump mentor — who introduced him to Gov. Ronald Reagan’s inner circle. It was a group that included Roger Stone Jr., another Trump confidant and the head of Reagan’s New York operations, who said in a later interview that he helped Murdoch weaponize his latest tabloid purchase, The New York Post, on Reagan’s behalf in the 1980 election. Reagan’s team credited Murdoch with delivering him the state that year — Murdoch gave Stone an Election Day printing plate from The Post over a celebratory meal at the 21 Club — and his administration subsequently facilitated Murdoch’s entry into the American television market, quickly approving his application for American citizenship so he could buy TV stations too."


I could go on but I think I've made my point

Any thoughts on what his son is saying in the 2nd article?

Go on give us 10,000 word essay on it
Click to expand...
You continually mock someone got giving a thorough answer.

None of those things actually disprove my point about the origins of people's opinions not coming from Murdoch. And yes, I did read it.

Your American example has no relevance. I have never said Murdoch can't influence politicians; but so can any media Baron. Murdoch probably takes a modern prize for the breadth of this but the Rothermeres probably take the overall political influence prize. I have never even discussed this aspect with you. I have been talking about ordinary people
 
Pope John XXIII said:
It's an interesting one and I don't disagree per se.

But I believe that you have to have a base to start with. As in, people have to be open to that opinion and belief before you start.

Murdoch makes no attempt to persuade people like me. If it is so easy to do, why not? Surely as a teacher my entire social group would be invaluable to propagandist secret governments like the Murdoch's? After all, we could potentially sow the fertile ground of future consumers? But Murdoch's media empire makes no attempt to persuade me of any kind of ideology other than spending money on football.

Because I am inherently left wing. I don't go to his kinds of papers and of he purchased the Guardian or the i and tried to use them to push his opinions, I would no longer like what they write and buy them.

You can see this in Nazi Germany. Penetration of Nazi ideology was never that great. People bought it who wanted to; primarily northern and eastern protestants whose conservative "traditional" values and historic militarism already chimed in accordance with Nazi values. Very urbanised areas, border areas and the south saw far less ideological penetration.

More importantly, the Nazis were overwhelmingly more successful with the young, whose ideas were only just forming and whose opinions were there to be set, than they ever were with trying to shift the opinions of older Germans who weren't already inclined towards their ideas.
Click to expand...


https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/nazi-propaganda-and-censorship
 
Pope John XXIII said:
You continually mock someone got giving a thorough answer.

None of those things actually disprove my point about the origins of people's opinions not coming from Murdoch. And yes, I did read it.

Your American example has no relevance. I have never said Murdoch can't influence politicians; but so can any media Baron. Murdoch probably takes a modern prize for the breadth of this but the Rothermeres probably take the overall political influence prize. I have never even discussed this aspect with you. I have been talking about ordinary people
Click to expand...

Bullshit this whole thing we have done this soo many times and it has always been about Murdoch and how he has influenced normal people

Even recently where you did your tried and tested method of character assassination where you attribute things to me that I have never said or even thought off and try and make my whole opinion nuclear

like saying that I think Murdoch is some kind of Bond Villain like Blofeld

and if you cannot extrapolate the example of America to this country then you are just deliberately being disingenuous because I am right.

Rothermere does not have as much influence as Murdoch as he does not have the same portfolio but they are massive online if not the biggest in the UK

Yes his family have had a longer influence especially with Nazis and the right wing in this country as they had massive respect for Mussolini and Hitler

But they are no where near as influential or have the same reach as your hero Murdoch

So your thoughts on the 2nd article and the damning words from one of Murdochs own sons

He seems to think like me and have similar opinions about the media
 
Last edited:
Another question, Pope: you accept (rightly) that the media can influence politicians/governments (or at least you haven't said they can't) Do you think big corporations and banks can?
 
JC21 said:
Another question, Pope: you accept (rightly) that the media can influence politicians/governments (or at least you haven't said they can't) Do you think big corporations and banks can?
Click to expand...
I'm sure they do in arrangements of mutual convenience in order to help politicians into power, who inevitably then give payment in kind.

The extent depends on the country. Almost every country is influenced by some other agencies; in some undoubtedly the military are key, in others it will be banks, in some the media. In the USA I suspect all three have a role.

Had certain eventualities happened here then the Trade Unions and Mr McCluskey may have been playing that role.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.