Starmer & Lammy A Marriage Made In...
News3 mins ago
Bbc Scaremongering
The BBC project Fear continues apace; what is the purpose of this non-story other than to cause fear and confusion?
All we learn is that the locals are popular and an elderly lady is "worried", no facts of any description.
https:/
All we learn is that the locals are popular and an elderly lady is "worried", no facts of any description.
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Are you saying they shouldn’t have reported it (!!)
I didn’t hear what it was which was being referred to as the “worst case scenario” but whatever it was, saying it’s the worst case is actually putting a very positive spin on it, as worst case scenarios are statistically a lot less likely to happen. So it’s the opposite of scaremongering in this instance
I didn’t hear what it was which was being referred to as the “worst case scenario” but whatever it was, saying it’s the worst case is actually putting a very positive spin on it, as worst case scenarios are statistically a lot less likely to happen. So it’s the opposite of scaremongering in this instance
The central bank has been under fire from Brexiteers since publishing a “No Deal” scenario in which GDP collapses by 8 per cent in a year, as has its Canadian governor, Mark Carney — a controversial former employee of the Goldman Sachs banking corporation which ploughed hundreds of thousands of pounds into the Remain campaign during the EU referendum, along with several other multinational financial giants.
Even former members of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) such as Andrew Sentance — a committed Remainer — stepped forward to say the prediction was not a “real-world scenario,” and suggested it was “undermining its credibility and independence” by publishing such “extreme scenarios and forecasts.”
Now The Telegraph has revealed that the Bank knew full well that its reports could be “against [the] public interest” by giving “a suggestion of apparently precise scenarios [which] could be misleading and liable to misinterpretation,” citing previously unreleased minutes.
Governor Carney tried to defend the “scenarios” by suggesting that they were intended to “illustrate what could happen not necessarily what is most likely to happen” — but it is notable that they did not think to consider a single scenario in which Brexit led to a positive outcome for the United Kingdom.
Even former members of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) such as Andrew Sentance — a committed Remainer — stepped forward to say the prediction was not a “real-world scenario,” and suggested it was “undermining its credibility and independence” by publishing such “extreme scenarios and forecasts.”
Now The Telegraph has revealed that the Bank knew full well that its reports could be “against [the] public interest” by giving “a suggestion of apparently precise scenarios [which] could be misleading and liable to misinterpretation,” citing previously unreleased minutes.
Governor Carney tried to defend the “scenarios” by suggesting that they were intended to “illustrate what could happen not necessarily what is most likely to happen” — but it is notable that they did not think to consider a single scenario in which Brexit led to a positive outcome for the United Kingdom.
It's all clearly and emphatically outlined on here;
https:/
https:/
Far left and far right combine to trash the bbc and other stations while they have no compunction about posting their own distortions. Nothing new in that.
I’m confused now bhg: you are now saying the BBC DIDN’t report that it was the worst case scenario (which actually - if it’s the headline case - it isn’t)?
I guess I watch different BBC bulletins to yhe ones you watch :-)
I’m confused now bhg: you are now saying the BBC DIDN’t report that it was the worst case scenario (which actually - if it’s the headline case - it isn’t)?
I guess I watch different BBC bulletins to yhe ones you watch :-)
No it isn't, Khandro. I could understand your point of view if the referendum had yet to take place. But to what end do you believe the BBC is continuing this 'project fear'? The brexiteers won, we are leaving the EU (allegedly) and the only votes now are those cast by the MPs themselves. Do you believe that the BBC is attempting to sway those votes with stories such as the one you highlighted? And do you believe any of our MPs would be swayed by it?
ken; // Do you believe that the BBC is attempting to sway those votes with stories such as the one you highlighted? And do you believe any of our MPs would be swayed by it?//
I have no idea, and I suggest neither have you, what influence the media has on an individual M.P.s thinking, but the BBC's constant leftist/remainer bias is endemic, and the Brexit show is yet far from over, with talk of new referendums and extensions, so they keep up the narrative.
You have to look no further than BBC's Question Time which often has a panel of 4 remainers to one Brexiteer combined with an audience largely of remainers (admitted by Dimbleby).
Nigel Farage used to be a regular but has only been invited on once since the referendum - he's simply too good at arguing the case for Brexit for his inclusion.
I have no idea, and I suggest neither have you, what influence the media has on an individual M.P.s thinking, but the BBC's constant leftist/remainer bias is endemic, and the Brexit show is yet far from over, with talk of new referendums and extensions, so they keep up the narrative.
You have to look no further than BBC's Question Time which often has a panel of 4 remainers to one Brexiteer combined with an audience largely of remainers (admitted by Dimbleby).
Nigel Farage used to be a regular but has only been invited on once since the referendum - he's simply too good at arguing the case for Brexit for his inclusion.
'Often has a panel of four remainers to one Brexiter','Admitted by Dimbleby'. I see you watched the episode filmed in Scarborough:-/ Or did you read this in the Express? A newspaper which must attack the BBC once every 2 days or their editorial staff suffer from withdrawal symptoms. You, like they, have taken one episode and used it as a template for all episodes.
Ken, No it isn't only the Express by any means, there's a plethora of other sources of evidence for this. What about the Institute of Economic Affairs?
https:/
https:/
Which suggests that the ratio of bias is two to one and not your four to one. Do make your mind up, Khandro:-) Back to my original point, i still don't see why anyone would want to continue with this 'project fear' that some Brexiteers keep banging on about. The way i interpreted the story in your original link was that we were being informed how a little corner of France could be affected by the uncertain future of Brexit. Nothing more, nothing less. I saw nothing sinister in the report. Certainly nothing to sway my way of thinking.
I think folk are reading too much into it. It's a human interest story about folk not trusting that politicians have two or more IQ points to rub together, and wondering if, as a result, there will be mass repatriation. Clearly most everyone knows that, that occurring has a vanishingly small chance. Thus the scornful comments here.
Ken, You are quite right, the subject matter of the OP was a non-story about 'Brexit fears' in a small French village, when as New Judge pointed out, there is not only no story, but there is no evidence that there is anything to fear. But as happens, we have moved on a bit along this thread to the general view that the BBC is biased, of which there is a mountain of incontrovertible evidence. Question Time was simply used by me as an example, but many others could be quoted.
Ich - I've been out all day, hence late reply.
For clarification: I saw Mark Carney live on the Beeb and he said the forecast for a no-agreement Brexit was a worst case scenario and most unlikely to happen. Minutes later on the BBC 5 o' clock news the headline was that Mark Carney said that a no-deal Brexit would lead to doom and gloom, only later did they mention it was worst case etc.
For clarification: I saw Mark Carney live on the Beeb and he said the forecast for a no-agreement Brexit was a worst case scenario and most unlikely to happen. Minutes later on the BBC 5 o' clock news the headline was that Mark Carney said that a no-deal Brexit would lead to doom and gloom, only later did they mention it was worst case etc.
“No reason to fear” is not the same as “no fear”
And in any case “nothing to fear” is as biased a view as any.
On the subject of Brexit, as I’ve remarked before, in the weeks before the referendum, there were sometimes three Brexit supporters on the QT panel, versus only 2 Remain supporters. In fact each time I happened to see it it was like this. I assume that on other weeks it was 3-2 the other way. Rather an odd set up to be honest if true.
Thanks for your answer bhg btw.
And in any case “nothing to fear” is as biased a view as any.
On the subject of Brexit, as I’ve remarked before, in the weeks before the referendum, there were sometimes three Brexit supporters on the QT panel, versus only 2 Remain supporters. In fact each time I happened to see it it was like this. I assume that on other weeks it was 3-2 the other way. Rather an odd set up to be honest if true.
Thanks for your answer bhg btw.
Latest Posts
Crosswords3 mins ago
Jobs & Education4 mins ago
News7 mins ago
Lord Botham Falls Into An Australian...
News10 mins ago
