Pants on Fire!
- Thread starter Vulcan
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
John Brown
Freeloading Social media influenza
Who?
The Times for the original false article, the people who complained or the Times for issuing an apology?
Agent_zed
Established Member
and the retraction will be on page 20 in font size 5, backwards and upside down in the margin.
Finding apologies hidden somewhere in newspapers reminds me of Arthur Dent complaining about the demolition of his house and mentioning that the plans were not properly displayed:
- Arthur Dent: “On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
- Mr. Prosser: “That’s the display department.”
- Arthur Dent: “With a flashlight.”
- Mr. Prosser: “Ah, well the lights had probably gone.”
- Arthur Dent: “So had the stairs.”
- Mr. Prosser: “But look, you found the notice didn’t you?”
- Arthur Dent: “Yes,” said Arthur, “Yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.’”
I thought that was obvious from the thread title. But to help you out, the Times making things up.
The Daily Mail had to print a retraction over some other nonsense they made up about EV’s some time ago.
Why do they do it, surely they must know they’ll get caught out?
Because it panders to the rightwing antiEV/antigreen/anti everything people who tend to be the major readers of such nonsense- and they know damn well that people like that never read past the 'big font' headlines- and certainly won't see the forced apology...
And they literally don't care about 'the truth' or anything else- sensational overblown headlines gains them what they want- eyes on their articles... (and $$$ from the advertisers)
And they know their target audience hates EV's, so what a few 'apologies' buried in the back worth, when its the big font 'headlines' that their readers will be remembering (and passing on in their echo chambers)
And they literally don't care about 'the truth' or anything else- sensational overblown headlines gains them what they want- eyes on their articles... (and $$$ from the advertisers)
And they know their target audience hates EV's, so what a few 'apologies' buried in the back worth, when its the big font 'headlines' that their readers will be remembering (and passing on in their echo chambers)
Because sensational news sells papers and, all they have to do is print a retraction later, they don't care, they sold the story. I stopped reading The Times when the News Corp Group took it over.
John Brown
Freeloading Social media influenza
Well, it wasn't obvious to me. Maybe I'm stupid. On the other hand, the article you linked to does say it was a rare successful complaint, so I guess they take the attitude that it's worth a try printing lies, as there's a good chance they'll get away with it.
Also, I thought the title referred to the new craze for wearing Lithium battery powered heated underpants.
I’m sure there plenty of leftwing people who fit the bill too. Any list that starts with a political leaning says more about the person writing the list than it does about the list.
sploo
Somewhat extinguished member
That they have more than one functioning braincell???
Shame they just use the non functioning ones.
Hmmm.
It still very much appears to me that (amongst a great many other things) the Venn Diagram of anti-EV and right-wing-propaganda has a far greater overlap than not.
I completely understand that EVs are "not suitable for everyone" (for example, circa 60 percent of urban dwellings don't have off road parking), however, just because they may not be suitable for everyone, that doesn't make those people "anti-all-EV". That moniker of "anti-all-EV fits best as a right-wing position. Witness the Daily Mail - very much a right wing disinformation mouthpiece - doing the "anti-all-EV" intentional pants on fire disinformation stories as strong evidence of this.
And you have published data on that? My issue is the propensity of people, on both sides of a discussion, to make generalisations based on a political leaning. It seems to me that the only people who do that are those who are so indoctrinated by an ideology that they instantly attribute anything they agree with as being on their side of the political spectrum.
Data is implicit within the world view. Interconnectedness is everywhere and in everything.
It is no great secret that Tufton Street are engaged in disinformation and misinformation ploys, at the behest of Big Fossil Fuel. It is no secret that Tufton Street is right wing/extreme right wing. It is no secret that Big Business and right wing are very close bed fellows ( =data about business and businessman donations to the right wing of politics are easy to trawl - and conspicuous in their rarity/absence to the left.) It's no secret that the talking points of Daily Mail, Telegraph, GBeebies, TalkCarp, et al read from the same party memos.
World views about disinformation stories - such as "Green energy is more expensive" (now a proven lie); "renewables will harm economy" and "least well off will suffer most" (intentional lies); "climate change is not real" or "global warming is a hoax" or "global warming is not man made" or "there's nothing we can do to combat global warming" etc, etc, etc - those world views are almost exclusively right wing tropes.
World views about "saving the environment", or investing in renewables or anything else that is opposite of the list above exist almost exclusively to the left. We know all this to be true, since we can see the world views play out from each individual and we know what each individual favours as an ideology. Feel free to research all of my posts on this forum and you shall see a pattern. Likewise, have a look at members who never miss an opportunity to criticise or display their fundamental hatred of Starmer or all things "woke" or left wing, and then match that person to their world views about global warming/renewables/zero emissions mandates/EVs and you will also see a very, VERY distinct pattern emerging.
Hence the proposition that: the Venn Diagram of "ANTI-EV" (not just "EVs are not workable around my circumstances, but may suit yours") and right-wing world view is almost a circle.
How about you, mate, whats your view and where do you sit on the world view spectrum? I don't want you particularly to write your answer on here - just that self scrutiny is a valuable commodity that ought to be harnessed more often by more people.
