Jump to content

ChezGiven

Donator
  • Content Count

    15,084
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ChezGiven

  1. I loved it in spite of

     

     

    the whole movements thing being a bit arthouse theatre, but I can forgive that given how good it was and how much the actors committed to those silly movements.

     

     

    Apparently considering a second season too, which surprised me.

    Loved the twist back to reality in the last episode and then the final scene twists again, casting doubt / belief back into the audience. Well written, can see a second season if they want to.

  2. You said social healthcare not universal and giving workers who cant afford healthcare, access to care was the first major step in Europe. The SHI v NHS systems are essentially the same apart from the extent of entitlement and importantly the German SHI mechanism was the inspiration for the leftist universal agenda. 

  3. Brits werent the pioneers of social healthcare, that was Bismark in the 1880s. A perfect example of why confirmation bias renders perceptions of media bias in the public completely unhelpful. 

  4. This bit here is bang on.

     

    There is a little cafe near the office that does really nice coffee and food.  Every now and then I shall pop in and have my lunch there.  I get ripped for it by some of the lads here, mostly from a kid who has to look at whoopsies in the supermarket because his bird doesnt give him enough dinner money FFS!

     

    Our lass is a financial planner so I should be canny to retire when planned.  But I bet a lot of people said that.  You dont know what's around the corner like.

     

    I went to see a financial planner, she reckoned people should aim for about 60 to 80% of their final income as their pension income. Seems reasonable until you think hang on, no kids, no mortgage, your own assets, savings obviously. How much do you actually need to be able to live comfortably? 

     

    Is that what people aim for? All depends what you earn but it seems a lot given how much less you should need to spend. 

  5. It was a joke about the earlier conversation that says people will be dismissive of any evidence they disagree with.

     

    It's a comparison of how europeans perceive bias in their countries.  In most countries the number that perceive a left wing bias outnumber those who perceive a right wing bias.  In the UK, the number that perceive a right wing bias outnumber those that perceive a left wing bias, more than in any other country.  Why are we special in this regard?

     

    Right :lol: Am a bit slow today. It was the comparison across countries, i do know the french press very well and i would say their nationalistic, chauvinistic instinct is as deep as our media's. 

  6. But surely the study isn't looking to determine any sense of objective reality, it's looking entirely at people's perceptions of something - of which their bias is fundamentally important, is it not?

     

    I agree, that was the point i wanted to make. However, its so subjective its not really comparable across countries. 

  7.  

    Why would the study be impossible to control?

     

    Because people's cognitive processes are dominated by heuristic bias. Therefore a study which assesses bias is flawed without adequate control. 

  8. Gan easy on the cowies, it's a school night.

    Would have loved one for that but was stone cold sober, not even a beer beforehand. Glad of it too, was a stunning gig, visually and musically brilliant.

  9. You could even argue that privately controlled media at least allows for a divergence of interests. State controlled media, the default setting outside the west, is inherently skewed and manipulated. In theory a government can't control a private media.

     

    Also the BBC did try and stop the Iraq war, Andrew Gilligan lost his job after the Hutton report accused him of misrepresenting the evidence. Dr Kelly lost his life in the whole debacle and Channel 4 were strong critics of the basis for war. I and a million other people marched in London against that war based upon what we had heard and read in the "MSM".

  10. People believe what they want, even intelligent people like Parky deride the media and then without a hint of irony say 1 in 50 articles are truthful. That sort of bizarre tautology just shows how inept people are at filtering nonsense. Russian propaganda was always at work, it's just become more effective due the real MSM, the Internet and social media. Also people are now willfully stupid due to their insatiable consumption of social media. I despair when I look around me at morons instagramming, facebooking, snapchatting and tweeting everything. The role of information has also changed, we are now becoming producers of media not just consumers which means that our relationship with the truth is changing too.

  11. It's not just staggering, it's willfully stupid. As if the fucking Iranians aren't playing for oil and power. The phrase MSM was invented to undermine trust in the only media in the world with a semblance of independence.

     

    Let's face it, what sort of shit journalist thinks 'I want to report the truth but I don't want to reach the masses'? An ineffectually stupid one.

×
×
  • Create New...