|
This is the US lawyer's denial, we had the royal one already. The fact that other celebrities also get special treatment is part of the problem, it doesn't make it miraculously ok.
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 15:32 |
|
|
Can the beeb (or any outlet) do anything more than "person makes accusation" "accused denies claims" without opening themselves up to libel charges?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 14:34
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:This is the US lawyer's denial, we had the royal one already. The fact that other celebrities also get special treatment is part of the problem, it doesn't make it miraculously ok. On the flipside, the fact that celebrities have to deal with much larger media interest (and potential for influencing the jury) is not ok either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 14:45
|
|
|
Party Boat posted:Can the beeb (or any outlet) do anything more than "person makes accusation" "accused denies claims" without opening themselves up to libel charges? No. They can't. They've reported that claims have been made. And they've reported that people have issued statements on them and what they are. As its a civil matter, they cant say charges as there arent any. They also report on normal people 'strongly denying' crimes that make the news too, before we forget that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 14:45
|
|
|
It makes sense that they report on it, but I always love the use of "strongly deny" etc, as if anyone ever weakly denies it ("Nah, pretty sure I didn't do it!"), doesn't deny it at all ("I probably didn't, but who knows?") or admits it ("Well it's a fair cop, guv") when accused of raping a child. The quote from the lawyer makes him appear to be a complete piece of poo poo, though. He basically said "well she's lied about something in her life, so this is definitely a lie too".
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:"Defendant denies charge" is not often made into a headline, it seems to me. Bias is shown through the selection of stories as well as the actual writing.(Your use of 'outrage' would be an example of the latter.) Defendant denies charge headline is so they can put up another story about it when there is almost no new developments. The story hasn't progressed at all, and unlikely will for many months/years to come, until then they need to find a way to keep talking about it without seeming to just be repeating themselves. That Prince Andrew has denied it, and now the lawyer also , which was obvious that he would at some point, is enough to throw up another article. Mega Comrade fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:they need to find a way to keep talking about it Why? It's the BBC, they haven't the excuse of needing to sell papers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 16:39
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:Why? It's the BBC, they haven't the excuse of needing to sell papers. I don't know, a feeling they should attempt to keep up with the other outlets? The independent have run 8 articles on the thing, the daily mail 12. Makes BBCs 4 look fairly tame.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
Prince Andrew is head of the English freemasons too isn't he? Please don't tell me the pedo rings were all involving some secret society that would be extremely cliche.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:01
|
|
|
Mega Comrade posted:I don't know, a feeling they should attempt to keep up with the other outlets? I agree that the BBC thinks it should run all the same stories as commercial papers, but I cannot see a good reason for it (except that regurgitating tabloid crap is cheap, of course). It's not as if the British press has a good reputation, let alone a better one than the one the BBC is now pissing away. And of course given the rightwing dominance of the press it means that the BBC is following a rightwing agenda in its topic selection.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:12
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:I agree that the BBC thinks it should run all the same stories as commercial papers, but I cannot see a good reason for it (except that regurgitating tabloid crap is cheap, of course). It's not as if the British press has a good reputation, let alone a better one than the one the BBC is now pissing away. And of course given the rightwing dominance of the press it means that the BBC is following a rightwing agenda in its topic selection. This is the oddest, most contrived view. It's a public accusation of a crime against a member of the country's royal family. It would be reported on by every media outlet in any country in the world. It's news. I don't understand what you're complaining about. You started with the completely dead wrong, nonsensical idea that news agencies don't put denials of allegations as updates to stories on their websites, now you're spinning it as "right wing agenda". Then for the record, the BBC is probably the most respected news organisation in the entire world. Not saying the reputation is right or wrong, I'm saying you're pulling stuff out of your arse to make up a point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
Reminder that Prince Andrew helped arms dealers trade with the Indonesian government during the embargo on selling British arms there, and even after he knew that Hawk jets were used in the East Timor massacre. Whatever the outcome of this case, he's already been proven to be a very bad person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
Here's something I don't understand. The denial came from Buckingham Palace itself, who were able to 'categorically' deny that Prince Andrew had sex with minors. How does the palace know that? The only person who can possibly know whether it happened or not is Prince Andrew himself, so I don't see why they've got the palace denying the claims for him. I mean, the whole thing sounds very plausible. What if it turns out he did actually have sex with the girl? It'll backfire on the palace.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Margaret Thatcher posted:I mean, the whole thing sounds very plausible. What if it turns out he did actually have sex with the girl? It'll backfire on the palace.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
Hoops posted:It would be reported on by every media outlet in any country in the world. It's news. I don't understand what you're complaining about. I suggested (not an original suggestion) that the the selection of stories is an important way in which the news is biased. It is part of the way an ideological hegemony is created. You are replying that it is a hegemony. This is true, and it does not stop it being biased or ideological. quote:Then for the record, the BBC is probably the most respected news organisation in the entire world. Not saying the reputation is right or wrong, I'm saying you're pulling stuff out of your arse to make up a point. If you read what I wrote a bit more carefully you will see that this agrees with what I said: the BBC's reputation is better than that of the press (which I suggested made its desire to take its agenda from the press questionable). Perhaps you don't think the BBC's reputation is declining at all, and I freely admit I was only going by the opinions of me and my acquaintances on that one, but obviously proof either way would need stats showing change over time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:11
|
|
|
Party Boat posted:Can the beeb (or any outlet) do anything more than "person makes accusation" "accused denies claims" without opening themselves up to libel charges? it's tricky. "Person makes accusation" is okay but you have to keep the story pretty much to that single fact, so it's not normally a big story. "Person denies accusation" gives you a lot more leeway, especially as by definition you can't libel someone by reporting their own statement (as long as you do it honestly of course), so that'll tend to be the big story. It's why the "Make the sonofabitch deny it" story has such resonance. Given the truly spectacular (but curiously vague) claims Jane Doe #3 is making about being abused by men other than Epstein and the way in which she's making the claims (in a lawsuit against Epstein on an edge case related to his prior prosecution, rather than in an an actual suit against Andrew or anyone else), I'm actually a little surprised that any of the press touched it, prior to the denial.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:34
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:I suggested (not an original suggestion) that the the selection of stories is an important way in which the news is biased. It is part of the way an ideological hegemony is created. You are replying that it is a hegemony. This is true, and it does not stop it being biased or ideological. You do know that the BBC is routinely blasted by both sides of the political spectrum for being biased in favour of the other, right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
Of course I do. I also know that it would be whatever it said and that the howls of party hacks don't prove a single thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 18:51
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:I suggested (not an original suggestion) that the the selection of stories is an important way in which the news is biased. It is part of the way an ideological hegemony is created. You are replying that it is a hegemony. This is true, and it does not stop it being biased or ideological. quote:If you read what I wrote a bit more carefully you will see that this agrees with what I said: the BBC's reputation is better than that of the press (which I suggested made its desire to take its agenda from the press questionable) quote:Perhaps you don't think the BBC's reputation is declining at all, and I freely admit I was only going by the opinions of me and my acquaintances on that one, but obviously proof either way would need stats showing change over time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Hoops posted:What are they taking "from the press"? Are you suggesting that the BBC are only running this because the tabloids are?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
would you prefer the good old days when the news media would ignore / actively hush up accusations of child sexual abuse against influential establishment figures?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Pesky Splinter posted:You do know that the BBC is routinely blasted by both sides of the political spectrum for being biased in favour of the other, right? The problem with "balanced" news is that reporting on an issue in any way becomes FACT for most readers/viewers. They report that Osborne says "everything is so great, no one is unemployed". Now the story might report that "bla bla said 'no one is unemployed because the tories have just implemented their slave camp initiative, what a bunch of fuckers' but it's too late, people have read that everything is so great and no one is unemployed. A "balanced" article turns into Tory spin without any actual input for the Tories themselves just by how people absorb 24 hour news/web news/poo poo rag tabloids. I guess if you run the same amount of bullshit stories from a "leftist" perspective things would work out. But, now I might be out of line here, it's always appeared to me that outright lying in the pursuit of political power is a right wing staple. The far left gets tediously bleeding-heart/maoist-third-worldist-wildcard but the far right makes up stories about Muslim gypsies getting non-halal cream eggs banned by the Jewish mafia EU sharia court.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:The problem with "balanced" news is that reporting on an issue in any way becomes FACT for most readers/viewers. Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that there aren't problems with things like that. I thought Oh dear me's points were specifically about accusations of BBC bias, as opposed to whatever point he's trying make about the BBC's representation of the allegations against Prince Andrew.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Hoops posted:A person who holds power and influence in society is accused of engaging in a serious crime. I have no problem at all with that being a lead news story. Wasn't your original complaint that the BBC were reporting the denial rather than the accusation though? No, my original point was that bias can be shown in topic selection. I have asked why the BBC needs to cover this story for days (i.e. after 'Prince Andrew accused' was news). It was suggested that the BBC thinks it needs to cover the same stories other media outlets do (and there's evidencefrom inside to this effect, see Robert Peston's claims about the BBC obsession with the Daily Mail). I have argued that this is a bad reason to cover a story, since those outlets are worse than the BBC, and further that letting them drive topic selection will naturally cause rightwing bias. The constant harping on immigration is an example, I think. Oh dear me fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:No, my original point was that bias can be shown in topic selection. quote:I have asked why the BBC needs to cover this story for days on end (i.e. long after 'Prince Andrew accused' was news). edit: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/02/prince-andrew-named-us-lawsuit-underage-sex-allegations Says the palace was contacted on Thursday, so the papers got a hold of it almost certainly that day. quote:It was suggested that the BBC thinks it needs to cover the same stories other media outlets do (and there's evidencefrom inside to this effect, see Robert Peston's claims about the BBC obsession with the Daily Mail). I have argued that this is a bad reason to cover a story, since those outlets are worse than the BBC, and further that letting them drive topic selection will naturally cause rightwing bias. The constant harping on immigration is an example, I think. Hoops fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
TinTower posted:In other Paedogeddon news, ]a Lib Dem councillor who got caught up in Operation Ore has been formally notified by the Met there is no case to answer. Thanks for the update TinTower, I think I posted about this one a couple of months ago saying it looked like an uncomfortable 'trial by media'. The full story, in his letter published today (assuming no further facts come to light) is a real loving shambles. This man's life has been destroyed by this council. The bumbling police haven't helped matters either. quote:The Metropolitan Police have confirmed in writing that no images were found on my computer and that I was not charged because of a lack of evidence (the only evidence linking me to the offence was someone using my card and email address) despite the council’s claims that the lack of charge was due to a technicality.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
Hoops posted:Sure, but not in this case. The Dershowitz story dropped on Thursday, UK media picked it up yesterday so it appeared in this morning's papers. The BBC didn't run the story until the denial because like I said they're on shaky ground legally given the way the accusations have been made
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
The second Alan Dershowitz denied involvement, I instantly knew he was involved. I hope the woman making the allegations wasn't pushing for tenure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:Prince Andrew is head of the English freemasons too isn't he? Please don't tell me the pedo rings were all involving some secret society that would be extremely cliche. That's Prince Edward
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
Party Boat posted:Can the beeb (or any outlet) do anything more than "person makes accusation" "accused denies claims" without opening themselves up to libel charges?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
mfcrocker posted:That's Prince Edward We have loads more princes than I suspected.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 22:58
|
|
|
But who is the Prince of this thread? I nominate the guy who soiled himself at the train station. Or maybe Breath Ray.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:But who is the Prince of this thread? As the nearest we have to landed aristocracy, I nominate General China.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
He strikes me more as a Viscount.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
I'd say a jaffa cake, personally
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:30
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:I'd say a jaffa cake, personally Pretends he's in the biscuit class from his tax-reduced cake tower?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:I'd say a jaffa cake, personally Masquerading as an honest working-class biscuit but secretly a spongey class traitor? (I can't be mad at jaffa cakes they're too nice) E:F;B
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
mfcrocker posted:(I can't be mad at jaffa cakes they're too nice) that's what people say about the queen you bourgie sympathiser.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
So what's a best case scenario from the election this year (apart from things like, say, The Rapture happening on the same day)? No Tories. No Labour. No LibDems. No UKIP. ...Monster Raving Loony Party revival?
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 15:32 |
|
|
BisonDollah posted:So what's a best case scenario from the election this year (apart from things like, say, The Rapture happening on the same day)? Best case semi-realistic scenario would be: - LibDem wipeout, Labour wipeout to SNP in Scotland. - Both Labour and Tories losing seats overall. - At least ~30% of the popular vote going to minor parties - Minority Labour government with a confidence and supply arrangement (but not formal coalition) with the SNP. - Greens picking up a few seats (retaining Brighton and winning another 2-4 on a very good day) - Slightly more dubiously, I'd like UKIP to get just enough seats to expose themselves as disingenuous asshats without gaining enough power to be dangerous.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2015 00:15
|
|
