comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 15 seconds ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 1 minute ago
Certainly the news coverage of the Queen's death is overwhelming and irritating if you're not interested but can anyone demonstrate the misleading element to it?

'It's propaganda because I disagree with it' seems to be the argument here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the press were doing their duty and presenting a balanced view - even 75% all-consuming love of the monarchy vs. 25% indifferent or actively against, that would be fair - but they're not, so why are they giving us biased news? - especially the BBC who are 'impartial' apparently
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah it seems like you've got a reason to be annoyed tbf. Doesn't qualify what they're showing as propaganda, though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're going on and on about the history, the traditions, the legacy of the Queen and using it to increase support for Charles. It is propaganda.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course it's not propaganda, I'm beginning to think you don't know what it means.

It’s misleading when Britain already had sovereignty.

Propaganda = news coverage I don't agree with.

According to JA606.

Propaganda isn’t propaganda because people agree with it.

Also JA606.

comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 59 seconds ago
Propaganda isn’t propaganda because people agree with it.

Also JA606.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Whooosh.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

The grey area is in the misleading part of the definition of propaganda. Is it misleading to say Britain has a long tradition of a having a monarch that's revered around the world? No.

Fred *


Thought this was interesting:

https://twitter.com/greg_jenner/status/1569617456880041984?s=21&t=gCpFJ9yioV7y1wtXh1pHqg

comment by Edinspur (U1109)
posted 13 seconds ago
Fred *


Thought this was interesting:

https://twitter.com/greg_jenner/status/1569617456880041984?s=21&t=gCpFJ9yioV7y1wtXh1pHqg
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Think we've found Anfield RAP.

Now, you can disagree with the monarch being revered. You can not value tradition. But you can't say (apparently) billions do.

comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 1 minute ago
Certainly the news coverage of the Queen's death is overwhelming and irritating if you're not interested but can anyone demonstrate the misleading element to it?

'It's propaganda because I disagree with it' seems to be the argument here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the press were doing their duty and presenting a balanced view - even 75% all-consuming love of the monarchy vs. 25% indifferent or actively against, that would be fair - but they're not, so why are they giving us biased news? - especially the BBC who are 'impartial' apparently
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah it seems like you've got a reason to be annoyed tbf. Doesn't qualify what they're showing as propaganda, though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're going on and on about the history, the traditions, the legacy of the Queen and using it to increase support for Charles. It is propaganda.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it's not. You don't like it, but it's not lies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'I didn't lie, I just didn't tell the whole story' - so lying by omission then?

And presenting a not-wholly-accurate image of the Queen. Wonder why they would want to do that?

comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 1 minute ago
Certainly the news coverage of the Queen's death is overwhelming and irritating if you're not interested but can anyone demonstrate the misleading element to it?

'It's propaganda because I disagree with it' seems to be the argument here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the press were doing their duty and presenting a balanced view - even 75% all-consuming love of the monarchy vs. 25% indifferent or actively against, that would be fair - but they're not, so why are they giving us biased news? - especially the BBC who are 'impartial' apparently
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah it seems like you've got a reason to be annoyed tbf. Doesn't qualify what they're showing as propaganda, though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're going on and on about the history, the traditions, the legacy of the Queen and using it to increase support for Charles. It is propaganda.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it's not. You don't like it, but it's not lies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'I didn't lie, I just didn't tell the whole story' - so lying by omission then?

And presenting a not-wholly-accurate image of the Queen. Wonder why they would want to do that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Totally, I agree they won't be telling the whole story. Largely because she just died and so many people value the monarchy and the traditions. Also because the bad things she did reflect badly on the country and the whole world's looking.

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 4 hours, 58 minutes ago
‘ Showing disrespect to the dead is disgusting behavior.’

It’s not though if you have no respect for a person who has died, whether that be the queen or anyone.

Like I said earlier, many people were literally dancing in the streets when thatcher died and they had every right to do so.

Some people hate everything the royal family stands for and that includes the queen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re a right piece of pondlife, aren’t you?

comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 1 minute ago
Certainly the news coverage of the Queen's death is overwhelming and irritating if you're not interested but can anyone demonstrate the misleading element to it?

'It's propaganda because I disagree with it' seems to be the argument here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the press were doing their duty and presenting a balanced view - even 75% all-consuming love of the monarchy vs. 25% indifferent or actively against, that would be fair - but they're not, so why are they giving us biased news? - especially the BBC who are 'impartial' apparently
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah it seems like you've got a reason to be annoyed tbf. Doesn't qualify what they're showing as propaganda, though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They're going on and on about the history, the traditions, the legacy of the Queen and using it to increase support for Charles. It is propaganda.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it's not. You don't like it, but it's not lies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
'I didn't lie, I just didn't tell the whole story' - so lying by omission then?

And presenting a not-wholly-accurate image of the Queen. Wonder why they would want to do that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When Fergie dies, do you want 75% of the coverage to be negative because most people weren't Untied fans?

Or would you rather the coverage in the immediate aftermath is respectful?

comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
The grey area is in the misleading part of the definition of propaganda. Is it misleading to say Britain has a long tradition of a having a monarch that's revered around the world? No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The first sentence is a fair point.

On the latter I think most would say that the issue is that glorifying the Monarchy is part of a conservative effort to dampen opposition to the establishment.

People’s issue with Monarchy is how undemocratic it is, people have issues with the inequality in this country and feel the Monarchy embodies that. Conservatives need a popular Monarchy to reassert their own narratives around this inequality.

comment by Henry Chinaski (U21800)
posted 17 minutes ago
Certainly the news coverage of the Queen's death is overwhelming and irritating if you're not interested but can anyone demonstrate the misleading element to it?

'It's propaganda because I disagree with it' seems to be the argument here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If the press were doing their duty and presenting a balanced view - even 75% all-consuming love of the monarchy vs. 25% indifferent or actively against, that would be fair - but they're not, so why are they giving us biased news? - especially the BBC who are 'impartial' apparently
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you think they should be talking about various royal scandals throughout the queens rule, just for balance?

Good grief.

I'm just reading the BBC news on my app, and a page devoted to the protests.

comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 17 seconds ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
The grey area is in the misleading part of the definition of propaganda. Is it misleading to say Britain has a long tradition of a having a monarch that's revered around the world? No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The first sentence is a fair point.

On the latter I think most would say that the issue is that glorifying the Monarchy is part of a conservative effort to dampen opposition to the establishment.

People’s issue with Monarchy is how undemocratic it is, people have issues with the inequality in this country and feel the Monarchy embodies that. Conservatives need a popular Monarchy to reassert their own narratives around this inequality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd argue those who have an issue with how undemocratic the monarchy is are arguably buying into the propaganda around democracy whereby nobody ever talks about the negatives of it...

I don't see any response at all to those desperate for a president when I say "what about when that's Nigel Farage".

comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
The grey area is in the misleading part of the definition of propaganda. Is it misleading to say Britain has a long tradition of a having a monarch that's revered around the world? No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The first sentence is a fair point.

On the latter I think most would say that the issue is that glorifying the Monarchy is part of a conservative effort to dampen opposition to the establishment.

People’s issue with Monarchy is how undemocratic it is, people have issues with the inequality in this country and feel the Monarchy embodies that. Conservatives need a popular Monarchy to reassert their own narratives around this inequality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They are not glorifying the Royal family. The Queen yer because she is dead and earned a eulogy

comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Bãleš left boot (U22081)
posted 1 minute ago
The grey area is in the misleading part of the definition of propaganda. Is it misleading to say Britain has a long tradition of a having a monarch that's revered around the world? No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The first sentence is a fair point.

On the latter I think most would say that the issue is that glorifying the Monarchy is part of a conservative effort to dampen opposition to the establishment.

People’s issue with Monarchy is how undemocratic it is, people have issues with the inequality in this country and feel the Monarchy embodies that. Conservatives need a popular Monarchy to reassert their own narratives around this inequality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a very interesting point, and I'd definitely agree. As a part of the Establishment this a great opportunity for them to capitalise on their power.

My real objection is the idea that everyone is being subjected to propaganda. Which implies that there's not a big section of society that values the monarchy, that voted Conservative..

My personal opinion is that it sucks. Ideally we should be living in a much more equitable world. But the reality is we don't. And I don't believe that getting rid of the royal family would actually improve the lives of regular folk. They're just an easy target. Maybe marginally, but there's far more impactful things that could be done on a grassroots level. Like, voting for people that don't want to give tax breaks to the rich.

It’s a fair point about democracy, for many it’s sacrosanct but I it’s the best system we have.

You probably don’t see any response to the latter point because it’s a stupid point to raise. There are also different forms of presidential republics, ours would likely be parliamentary so the examples of France and USA aren’t relevant to that particular argument.

comment by Marcus The Triumvir Antony (U10026)
posted 10 seconds ago
It’s a fair point about democracy, for many it’s sacrosanct but I it’s the best system we have.

You probably don’t see any response to the latter point because it’s a stupid point to raise. There are also different forms of presidential republics, ours would likely be parliamentary so the examples of France and USA aren’t relevant to that particular argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on what, exactly? I've not seen that written anywhere.

Genuine question.

If Fergie died I'd want coverage that is accurate. Something along the lines of 'he was hated by many of his rivals, but also respected by many people too, and loved by United fans'

We're not getting that with the Queen. We're just getting 'she was universally loved'

Marcus is spot on with his points.

And MU52, I just had a look at the BBC News homepage, there's one article 1/3rd of the way down titled 'man charged after heckling Prince' and that's it. Can't speak for the app but it's hardly front and centre.

If the BBC were truly impartial they'd do a few articles on how fed up people are with the 24/7 rolling coverage, just for balance.

Bales, everyone is being subjected to propaganda everywhere all the time. That’s one thing I can be certain of, because we are living in an age that readily promotes untruths due to the internet and how corrupt politicians and kleptocrats are using it to push their agendas, and actually ascertaining what is true has become very difficult on a lot of issues for many people - you only have to look at the rise of conspiracy theories, and how they are permeating party politics as an example.

I do agree with your second paragraph. There’s bigger issues that need addressing. But then when you consider my point about that the establishment need for a popular Monarchy, it makes sense for people that what to address the more immediate issues to also highlight the Monarchy - most people hold more than just the Monarchy responsible for the inequality in this country.

If the BBC were truly impartial they'd do a few articles on how fed up people are with the 24/7 rolling coverage, just for balance.
---

They'd have to do that with pretty much every major news story. You're just being silly now