Mailwatch(ed) Forum

The fetishisation of the dreadful Palestine position still infects.

Syed again, luckily behind a paywall.

He thinks debate means people gruffly agreeing with him.

I'd say that he may have a point though, in that whenever the subject is raised in the media, the assumption is that it's bad, and how best to reduce it. I'd love to see the pro-immigration camp get equal exposure.

This on the other hand is very funny

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:32 pm He thinks debate means people gruffly agreeing with him.

I'd say that he may have a point though, in that whenever the subject is raised in the media, the assumption is that it's bad, and how best to reduce it. I'd love to see the pro-immigration camp get equal exposure.

James O’Brien in schadenfreude mode has tried to open a discussion as to why immigration from Muslim countries and Africa has boomed this decade. Strangely those who obsess about this subject don’t want to talk about it.

Andy McDandy wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:32 pm He thinks debate means people gruffly agreeing with him.

I'd say that he may have a point though, in that whenever the subject is raised in the media, the assumption is that it's bad, and how best to reduce it. I'd love to see the pro-immigration camp get equal exposure.

We've been saying this since well before 2007. "Have a debate" = "There's too many of them here". I can't remember anyone ever having a proper pros and cons debate.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2024 7:45 pm This on the other hand is very funny

I 'like' the bloody footprints.

Egghead Matthew Syed speaks. Fortunately behind a paywall.

Do Kris Guru-Murphy and Cathy Newman really bang on about diversity all the time? I've missed it if they do.

It's an election results show. It's got 3 people who've presented politics for years on other channels, plus 2 podcasters (one ex-Labour advisor, one ex-Tory MP) plus Claire Balding. That's not exactly a lefty GB News, is it? Why does it need Andrew Neil or Matthew Goodwin on as well?

It's just more "Aaaaaah, we're the real rebels" crap. The Times is awful for it.

Channel 4’s election night coverage sounds excellent. Must order up another case of prosecco.

I've always watched BBC on election night, and I don't recall them having what Syed seems to want. They have a presenting team who interview different people through the night. If it's OK for Kuensberg, Neil, David Dimbleby etc to present, then I've no idea why it isn't OK for Guru-Murphy, Maitlis and Newman to present.

Abernathy wrote: ↑Mon Apr 22, 2024 4:44 pm Channel 4’s election night coverage sounds excellent. Must order up another case of prosecco.

Emily cooing over the unfolding massacre and a seven-hour session of gentlemen's indulgence? Nailed on.

I'm not convinced that the political affiliations of the presenters of election night coverage matter. The polls are closed so they can have no influence. Apart from reading out the results and listening to the spin from the candidates about why it went so well/badly for them, the job amounts to filling the time in an engagingly enough to keep me from dozing off between results. I usually flick back and forth between BBC and Channel 4 depending who the guests in the studio are.
Is this a first for Clare Balding? I don't remember her being involved in political shows before (I know her best from her Ramblings programme on Radio 4).

The presence of a current Tory to provide the excuses would provide extra entertainment on top of a night of schadenfreude from Rory Stewart or George Osborne (who’ll be smirking away on ITV).