|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Feb 29, 2024 19:59:17 GMT
Actually I did pick that bit of news up today, but it was from some independent guy who reads all the newspapers and crap so I don't have to. Yes I'm aware roughly how it works. I'm not really a tax expert, so I defer to those who know more than I do. By the way, I certainly don't think GB News should be banned, but I do have a problem with reliability of information. There are things i know about and know in depth and there are things I don't know about, e.g. non-dom tax status. I don't judge GB news on the things i don't know about. I forensically check reports where I have expert knowledge, and I do the same with the BBC. You won't like my findings, but I do find on average the BBC do check their facts. They certainly don't give balanced reports when it suits them and can suffer terrible dumbing down, but lets say they do a programme on nuclear physics, they will have checked it with the professors before publication so they score well there. With GB News I find a lot of error in the things I know about. Those I don't I keep an open mind about, neither believing nor disbelieving. The non-dom thing was a brief item. Who's a tax expert lol, it's a minefield, that's what solicitors are for. However. Given your forensic checks I'm slightly concerned that, ref GB News, you claim to have a problem with the reliability of information. This is concerning, perhaps an example would be helpful... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 29, 2024 20:09:55 GMT
What weight does a 38 degrees website petition put on anyone to "Switch off GB News"? The left tried to kill them off with a lobby against advertisers. The left do not like free speech, unless it is their own, of course. They don't seem to be able to make their minds up: When starting a petition, try to proof read it first.  |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 29, 2024 20:38:15 GMT
Actually I did pick that bit of news up today, but it was from some independent guy who reads all the newspapers and crap so I don't have to. Yes I'm aware roughly how it works. I'm not really a tax expert, so I defer to those who know more than I do. By the way, I certainly don't think GB News should be banned, but I do have a problem with reliability of information. There are things i know about and know in depth and there are things I don't know about, e.g. non-dom tax status. I don't judge GB news on the things i don't know about. I forensically check reports where I have expert knowledge, and I do the same with the BBC. You won't like my findings, but I do find on average the BBC do check their facts. They certainly don't give balanced reports when it suits them and can suffer terrible dumbing down, but lets say they do a programme on nuclear physics, they will have checked it with the professors before publication so they score well there. With GB News I find a lot of error in the things I know about. Those I don't I keep an open mind about, neither believing nor disbelieving. The non-dom thing was a brief item. Who's a tax expert lol, it's a minefield, that's what solicitors are for. However. Given your forensic checks I'm slightly concerned that, ref GB News, you claim to have a problem with the reliability of information. This is concerning, perhaps an example would be helpful... They make a lot of errors on China and a lot of errors on green technology regarding for example a common one is car battery technology. Granted both subjects are highly complicated and I certainly don't know it all, but the errors they make are pretty simple ones and they keep repeating them over and over again. Covid science was another one. That was really dreadful in many publications and interviews. Again though, for covid science the BBC was probably one of the most reliable of mainstream broadcasters. Oddly enough so was The Sun. You often think of the Sun as the peddlers of all manner of crap, but when it was serious shit they did get the science right. The thing is there is no hard and fast rule a lot of the time. Papers consult different people,hence there is a rather random element to some of it. I also do take issue with a lot of what is said about macroeconomics and what is going on in world markets. Some GB news reports on this are good and some are fuckups. A common one was about our interest rate hikes and inflation and why it happened. For those who have to take it all on trust, it is a minefield. Maybe in time they will get a bit more professional. I accept the BBC has a hell of a lot more funding and expert consultancy does not come cheap. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Feb 29, 2024 21:06:45 GMT
The non-dom thing was a brief item. Who's a tax expert lol, it's a minefield, that's what solicitors are for. However. Given your forensic checks I'm slightly concerned that, ref GB News, you claim to have a problem with the reliability of information. This is concerning, perhaps an example would be helpful... They make a lot of errors on China and a lot of errors on green technology regarding for example a common one is car battery technology. Granted both subjects are highly complicated and I certainly don't know it all, but the errors they make are pretty simple ones and they keep repeating them over and over again. Covid science was another one. That was really dreadful in many publications and interviews. Again though, for covid science the BBC was probably one of the most reliable of mainstream broadcasters. Oddly enough so was The Sun. You often think of the Sun as the peddlers of all manner of crap, but when it was serious shit they did get the science right. The thing is there is no hard and fast rule a lot of the time. Papers consult different people,hence there is a rather random element to some of it. I also do take issue with a lot of what is said about macroeconomics and what is going on in world markets. Some GB news reports on this are good and some are fuckups. A common one was about our interest rate hikes and inflation and why it happened. For those who have to take it all on trust, it is a minefield. Maybe in time they will get a bit more professional. I accept the BBC has a hell of a lot more funding and expert consultancy does not come cheap. Yes indeed however, given your forensic checks I imagine you have many examples of the GB News errors you speak of? Perhaps you could furnish me with just one... |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Feb 29, 2024 21:27:12 GMT
Baron, if anyone makes errors about China, it's you.
How do I put this mildly?
It's a fucking dictatorship which has killed millions.
|
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Feb 29, 2024 21:34:07 GMT
RT lost its licence to broadcast on the 18th of March because it was broadcasting war propaganda. It was banned whilst an act of genocide was occurring at Bucha. The website is still up. I am not clear who is deciding what is war propaganda. I do not know what is or is not propaganda but even if RT is it can either be easily seen through or provide a different perspective. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Feb 29, 2024 21:39:11 GMT
Baron, if anyone makes errors about China, it's you. How do I put this mildly? It's a fucking dictatorship which has killed millions. And one with a long memory that holds grudges …that despises weakness too. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 29, 2024 22:00:24 GMT
They make a lot of errors on China and a lot of errors on green technology regarding for example a common one is car battery technology. Granted both subjects are highly complicated and I certainly don't know it all, but the errors they make are pretty simple ones and they keep repeating them over and over again. Covid science was another one. That was really dreadful in many publications and interviews. Again though, for covid science the BBC was probably one of the most reliable of mainstream broadcasters. Oddly enough so was The Sun. You often think of the Sun as the peddlers of all manner of crap, but when it was serious shit they did get the science right. The thing is there is no hard and fast rule a lot of the time. Papers consult different people,hence there is a rather random element to some of it. I also do take issue with a lot of what is said about macroeconomics and what is going on in world markets. Some GB news reports on this are good and some are fuckups. A common one was about our interest rate hikes and inflation and why it happened. For those who have to take it all on trust, it is a minefield. Maybe in time they will get a bit more professional. I accept the BBC has a hell of a lot more funding and expert consultancy does not come cheap. Yes indeed however, given your forensic checks I imagine you have many examples of the GB News errors you speak of? Perhaps you could furnish me with just one... There are so many stupid things they say. I mean with electric cars they will make all sorts of fatuous claims like they will never be environmental due to the stuff batteries use, I've heard you can't recover it, but you can. They go on about the fires but fail to understand the different battery chemistries. Farage is a particularly bad one on this kind of thing. It' wild vague generalisations and no reasoning given. They are like pub conversations after a few pints. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Feb 29, 2024 22:03:15 GMT
Yes indeed however, given your forensic checks I imagine you have many examples of the GB News errors you speak of? Perhaps you could furnish me with just one... There are so many stupid things they say. I mean with electric cars they will make all sorts of fatuous claims like they will never be environmental due to the stuff batteries use, I've heard you can't recover it, but you can. They go on about the fires but fail to understand the different battery chemistries. Farage is a particularly bad one on this kind of thing. It' wild vague generalisations and no reasoning given. They are like pub conversations after a few pints. So like all other channels then . |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 29, 2024 22:11:15 GMT
Baron, if anyone makes errors about China, it's you. How do I put this mildly? It's a fucking dictatorship which has killed millions. Those deaths were from one faction in China going after another faction. The government of the time was very ideological, much like Labour and its ideas about equality and inclusivity, they took it to the logical extreme and as a result the whole place went crazy. If you took the trouble to learn the history you will learn many lessons about how not to govern. In China these lessons are already learnt the hard way, hence why they clamp down on free speech where it incites rebellion. That Palestinian march recently would have been banned in China. There was a time though when the government backed the right to protest and encouraged it.
By the way, are you aware that one of the UKIP's MEPs is some woman whose great grandmother was a missionary in China around the time they deposed the last dynasty.
Here is a really interesting story for you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 29, 2024 22:12:48 GMT
There are so many stupid things they say. I mean with electric cars they will make all sorts of fatuous claims like they will never be environmental due to the stuff batteries use, I've heard you can't recover it, but you can. They go on about the fires but fail to understand the different battery chemistries. Farage is a particularly bad one on this kind of thing. It' wild vague generalisations and no reasoning given. They are like pub conversations after a few pints. So like all other channels then . Yep, they all copy each other in journalistic circles. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Feb 29, 2024 22:15:36 GMT
So like all other channels then . Yep, they all copy each other in journalistic circles. Seems a bit harsh to single out GB news then ( not that you do ). |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Feb 29, 2024 22:15:56 GMT
Yes indeed however, given your forensic checks I imagine you have many examples of the GB News errors you speak of? Perhaps you could furnish me with just one... There are so many stupid things they say. I mean with electric cars they will make all sorts of fatuous claims like they will never be environmental due to the stuff batteries use, I've heard you can't recover it, but you can. They go on about the fires but fail to understand the different battery chemistries. Farage is a particularly bad one on this kind of thing. It' wild vague generalisations and no reasoning given. They are like pub conversations after a few pints. I see. So M'Lud, in spite of the defendants forensic examination of GB News, he can provide no evidence to support any of his claims, other than his own opinion of course. Could it be the defendant is confusing evidence with opinion? No further questions M'Lud. |
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Feb 29, 2024 22:22:55 GMT
There are so many stupid things they say. I mean with electric cars they will make all sorts of fatuous claims like they will never be environmental due to the stuff batteries use, I've heard you can't recover it, but you can. They go on about the fires but fail to understand the different battery chemistries. Farage is a particularly bad one on this kind of thing. It' wild vague generalisations and no reasoning given. They are like pub conversations after a few pints. I see. So M'Lud, in spite of the defendants forensic examination of GB News, he can provide no evidence to support any of his claims, other than his own opinion of course. Could it be the defendant is confusing evidence with opinion? No further questions M'Lud. Do you really expect me to log this bullshit? It's about as easy to do as remember the positions of the raindrops on my front doorstep a week ago. I've cut it out now so it is fading from my memory fast. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Feb 29, 2024 22:32:11 GMT
I see. So M'Lud, in spite of the defendants forensic examination of GB News, he can provide no evidence to support any of his claims, other than his own opinion of course. Could it be the defendant is confusing evidence with opinion? No further questions M'Lud. Do you really expect me to log this bullshit? It's about as easy to do as remember the positions of the raindrops on my front doorstep a week ago. I've cut it out now so it is fading from my memory fast. Not at all, but given the fact that you 'forensically check reports' I think it's reasonable to ask for just one example... |
|
