And yet the folks I know (degree educated) would be apoplectic with rage at this statement.
It's a funny old game as they say!
And yet the folks I know (degree educated) would be apoplectic with rage at this statement.
It's a funny old game as they say!
The BBC's attempt inherent bias is towards "balance" but that is a pretty nebulous concept. Brexit referendum was the classic example - we've got two groups, so we have to give equal weighting to "brexit will make the country worse off" and "brexit will make the country better off" regardless of the fact there was a mountain of evidence in favour of the former and only one or two economists arguing the latter. (Classic case of if one person tells you it's raining and one says it isn't, it's your job to stick your head out of the window and see who's right.) There's also a huge confirmation bias in what people notice, so people on the brexit side think that there's too much doom and gloom because of what they notice and people on the anti-brexit side think it's mad they've given equal weight to one or two lunatics. (That's before you consider they have statutory responsibilities to give both sides equal treatment during a referendum.)
There's also certain basic assumptions - racism is bad, tolerance is good and the sheer fact that it's much easier to frame an argument as "why isn't the government solving this problem", rather than "why is the government getting involved in this problem". Most of that lead you to a more left wing framing (that's not saying that right wingers are inherently racist but does open up questions about things like positive discrimination which does tend to split left/right).
If you are on (or to) the left of Labour, then things like general support for british instutions - the monarchy, the stock market, Wimbledon, parliament as a concept probably look like right wing bias in the sense of being conservative, rather than Conservative. Also, they do tend to platform Farage and reform a lot more than, say, Green politicians but, mostly, you can put that down to him making more of an impact when he does appear because Green politicians, sadly, are dull as anything.
Very well put and that's pretty much what I've tried to say to the Tory crowd. But they just got angry...
As is life these days, so many people just get angry v quickly over anything and everything
It's because, at least at a subconscious level, that they know that they are wrong and being mugged off. Or at the very least that the Cognitive dissonance makes their head hurt.
If you're compromising between good and evil or a lie and a truth, then yes both sides will accuse you of bias.
Journalism isn’t really set up for the situation when one side is happy to just tell outright lies and their supporters don’t mind or don’t believe it when exposed. Which, obviously, you see to a much greater extent in the US.
Another of Thatcher's legacies - she consistently accused the BBC of anti-Tory bias and threatened to axe the licence fee - sparking a concerted (and ongoing) campaign (by the Daily Mail especially) to discredit the broadcasting corporation.
T'Sun and Mail take particular delight on going after Auntie at every opportunity (salaries, innocuous Tweets by Lineker etc). This is not a coincidence.
Fully support the government enfranchising 16 and 17 year olds, so they have a say in the issues that will affect their entire lives. AI, climate, jobs, education etc. Hope the next move is to disenfranchise the over 65s, who have fucked up all these things.
Age isn't really the problem, you should get to vote if you do alright in your GCSEs. If you do shit you can resit annually until you reach an acceptable level where you can be trusted with the vote.
In my day to day, I work with some really, really clever people with lots and lots of really, really impressive academic qualifications, and who can do really, really clever things and are fully conversant with really, really complicated stuff that I could never really hope to understand at any useful technical level.
And yet I wouldn't trust some of then to boil an egg, or tie their own shoelaces properly so I'm not sure that logic works universally, unfortunately.
Academic success is definitely not the same as being knowledgeable. I could give examples.
I've long held that there should be a simple test to qualify you to vote. It should be basic things around how our representative democracy (theoretically) works, and how you are being represented at various levels. It would be fascinating to see how many might fail it.
Before we get into the critical thinking and spotting fascism questions.
There should definitely a basic cuntaptitude test
I would imagine the sensible starting point would be teaching Civics as a topic in schools.
Only if it's the Type R model.
It's really not the kids I worry about. It rather seems that a rounded view of the world is inversely proportional to age. There's obviously a point of inflection somewhere....newborn babies don't know a lot about the world.
Needy cunts as well, I've heard.