Jump to content

Peak guardian?

TheCat

By TheCat
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

JohnL

JohnL

Posted
Posted

Oh and the only thing the Guardian will have written is the headline. To read an article or extract from a book in any newspaper you need to remove the click bait headline.


I think I'm on the wrong thread to be moaning about click bait headlines which are everywhere and spoil an article.

TheCat

TheCat

Posted
  • Author
Posted

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Oh and the only thing the Guardian will have

> written is the headline. To read an article or

> extract from a book in any newspaper you need to

> remove the click bait headline.

>

> I think I'm on the wrong thread to be moaning

> about click bait headlines which are everywhere

> and spoil an article.


Isn't that just freelancing? Which is standard practice. It's a graun article. They published it.

dontbesilly

dontbesilly

Posted
Posted

What makes me laugh about Guardian readers is when there is an article about drugs and in the comments section below there will be an utterly HILARIOUS (!) stream of people quoting Brasseye/Chris Morris quotes about drugs, every time.


Cake! hahahaha!


Puked up pelvis bone! hahaha!


Its not a drug its a drink! hahahahahaha!

  • 1 month later...
TheCat

TheCat

Posted
  • Author
Posted

More 'balance' from our friends at the Graun....


So, the Guardian on 31 July: ?The Guardian view on delaying elections: it?s what autocrats do.? This was in response to a suggestion from the US President that the elections might need to be delayed on account of Covid. And then on 17 August: ?By delaying the New Zealand election, Jacinda Ardern appears magnanimous and conciliatory.? This was in response to the New Zealand Prime Minister postponing the elections on account of Covid.

diable rouge

diable rouge

Posted
Posted

Exactly snowy, the US and NZ constitutions and election rules are completely different, NZ's, and I believe the UK's too, allows for delaying an election, the US's doesn't, even leading Republicans have come out and said the election can't be delayed, come Jan '21 Trump will stop being the US president unless he wins the Nov election. Even if the election was somehow delayed Trump couldn't remain President, yet he want's to do both. Recently he's spoke about remaining President beyond the fixed 2 terms, whereas genuinely successful Presidents have had to step down after their second term because that's what's required constitutionally. The man is deranged, have you read his 'tribute' to his recently deceased bother, it's all about him, quite extraordinary.

Do you seriously think Trump would ask for a delay if he was polling 60+% like Ardern currently is? Ardern would win a landslide, she's clearly putting the health of the country before politics. The two countries have had completely different strategies in dealing with Covid, NZ wanted to hit the virus 'hard and early' by having a total lockdown, which until this recent outbreak (minuscule compared to the US's daily rate of cases) was extremely successful compared to most countries. Delaying the election by a month is a continuation of this strategy and hopefully will reap similar results. Whereas with the US there has been no coherent strategy, no total lockdown, so what would delaying the US election actually achieve apart from Trump trying to avoid an election defeat? As usual it's about Trump putting himself before country, just as he always has...

TheCat

TheCat

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Of course they're different. Didn't intend to start a in-depth discussion on the why's and wherefore's of the differences in context/polling/constitutions, or my opinions on who's right or wrong to delay elections.


More wryly amusing that the Graun can publish one blanket statement headline with no reference to context (they could have use any number of healines for the trump article...but that's what they chose)...then contradict themselves within weeks in a different context because it suits their narrative....

uncleglen

uncleglen

Posted
Posted

Lemming Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> When your 'newspaper' starts re-writing 40

> year-old comedy sketches as 'serious journalism' -

> it might be time to call it a day.

>

>



Should've called it a day years ago- it's the most unbalanced purveyor of half-truths and lefty shyte in the world and since they had to start begging for money months, even years, ago it just goes to show that a lot of people are 'waking' up to the rubbish from them (and the BBC)

snowy

snowy

Posted
Posted

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Of course they're different. Didn't intend to

> start a in-depth discussion on the why's and

> wherefore's of the differences in

> context/polling/constitutions, or my opinions on

> who's right or wrong to delay elections.

>

> More wryly amusing that the Graun can publish one

> blanket statement headline with no reference to

> context (they could have use any number of

> healines for the trump article...but that's what

> they chose)...then contradict themselves within

> weeks in a different context because it suits

> their narrative....

I can hear the sound of moving goalposts...

TheCat

TheCat

Posted
  • Author
Posted

snowy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> TheCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Of course they're different. Didn't intend to

> > start a in-depth discussion on the why's and

> > wherefore's of the differences in

> > context/polling/constitutions, or my opinions

> on

> > who's right or wrong to delay elections.

> >

> > More wryly amusing that the Graun can publish

> one

> > blanket statement headline with no reference to

> > context (they could have use any number of

> > healines for the trump article...but that's

> what

> > they chose)...then contradict themselves within

> > weeks in a different context because it suits

> > their narrative....

> I can hear the sound of moving goalposts...


...or....you can acknowledge the fact that I posted it in a thread specifically about the Guardian...not a thread about Trump or a thread about Jacinda Arden....

snowy

snowy

Posted
Posted

Keep telling yourself that if it makes you happy.


I?m confused more about how this prompted forum fantasist glenn to emerge and regurgitate his usual word salad; to your credit at least you can engage and talk about something even if i disagree with you. He seems to emerge from his YouTube right wing nutter rabbit hole.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • Forest Hill Climber
      Are we now under a flight path?

      By Forest Hill Climber · Posted

      In 2016 London City Airport began using concentrated flight paths. When there's a predominantly westerly wind, incoming aircraft approach from East London (north of the River). When there's a predominantly Easterly wind, incoming aircraft approach the airport from the West: circling through Forest Hill, Dulwich, Vauxhall, Tower Hamlets, Docklands. This latter flight path affects many of us in South East London. https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/london-city-airport-concentrated-flight-paths The planes going into City are often below 2,000 ft, so very noisy. Sometimes we have incoming Heathrow at the same time, flying higher. The early flights that I hear e.g. 04:30 are incoming to Heathrow. They are scheduled to land at 05:30 but are 'early'. Apparently the government allows a percentage of flights to arrive early and late (but these are now established as regular occurrences, informally part of the schedule). IMHO Londoners are getting very poor political representation on this issue. Incredible that if you want to complain about aircraft noise, you're supposed to contact the airport concerned! Preposterous and designed solely in favour of aviation expansion.
    • DulwichParker
      Local plumber and gas engineer - Jafar - Portrait Plumbing

      By DulwichParker · Posted

      Yet another recommendation for Jafar. Such a nice guy, really reliable and fair. He fixed a problem with our boiler and then incredibly kindly made two more visits to replace a different part at no extra cost. 
    • Sue Klein
      Are we now under a flight path?

      By Sue Klein · Posted

      I didn't have any problems with plane noise until city airport started flying planes to and from about 5-8 minutes apart from 5.30 am or  6 am,  and even with ear plugs and double glazing I am woken at about 6 well before I usually would wake  up. I have lived here since 1986 and it is relatively recently that the planes have been flying far too low over East dulwich. I very much doubt that they are headinbg to Heathrow or from Heathrow. As the crow flies we are much , MUCH closer to City Airport than Heathrow or Gatwick. I even saw one flying so low you could see all the windows, when I was in Peckham Rye Park.
    • Jenijenjen
      The Chapel of Rest

      By Jenijenjen · Posted

      Robert Redford

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...