domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Mar 29, 2023 15:04:48 GMT
Are you a member of Prof Goodwin's new elite hoovering class? Here is a handy summary of his 7 criteria with some amusing responses including one from our former esteemed host ( who sadly scores badly): Lol, don't even come close, damn I must really be a social conservative.. Aaarggh! Honestly it's like something Trev would write. What a charlatan Goodwin is. Odd how this 'new elite' has zero control of govt policy at the moment, that's controlled by the actual conservative English establishment elite. It's a classic case of perpetrator casting themselves as victim which is always the case with aggressive attacks on other societies or sections of society. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Mar 29, 2023 15:13:49 GMT
Britain secures agreement to join Indo-Pacific trade bloc š„³ š„³www.politico.eu/article/britain-secures-agreement-to-join-indo-pacific-trade-bloc/Henig Ć®s tweeting like crazy with fabricated nonsense.  TBC if US, India or others join CPTPP in the future and like the "fake gotcha" gang from UKPR then I note he never gives a source for his fabricated opinion (as only those in his 'bubble' had those opinions). Pretty sure the 'Remain' bubble said CPTPP couldn't be done and would mean no SPS deal with EU but whatever. It was always possible to have agreements with lots of different countries/blocks. Perhaps now that UK has led the way then Swiss, Norway, etc might like to follow 
|
|
|
|
Post by peterbell on Mar 29, 2023 15:15:14 GMT
The Tory press is less powerful today than was the case in the 1970s when it made Tony Benn a bogeyman. It only had limited success then - and by the 1987 GE few people were interested in Benn. Ditto Corbyn today. The print media isn't where most people go for News. DM etc is an outdated bogey man-aka an excuse. Top 10 news sources used by age % of all adults using each source for news nowadays. ( 2022) All Adults-top 5-BBC1/ITV/FB/BBC News/Sky News (DM/MoS-15%-tenth) Under 24s-top 5 -Instagram/FB/BBC1/Twitter/BBC website ( DM/Mos-outside top 10) Over 65-top 5-BBC1/ITV/BBC News/DM.MoS/Sky from :-https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research-and-data/tv-radio-and-on-demand/news-media/news-consumption , and where do BBC and Sky go for many if not most of their headlines - the press of course. Can't speak for the others, ITV etc., as I rarely watch them. Both BBC and SKy have their paper reviews every night, for 1.25 hours in Sky's case and the Mail, Express, Sun & Torygraph are always well featured with only the Guardian in serious opposition. In addition, there are often headlines from the press featured in the actual news broadcasts, so don't tell me that the Mail etc. are irrelevant. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,643
|
Post by steve on Mar 29, 2023 15:16:13 GMT
hiretonAnd I was still waiting my membership confirmed in the anti growth coalition
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Mar 29, 2023 15:19:07 GMT
Britain secures agreement to join Indo-Pacific trade bloc š„³ š„³www.politico.eu/article/britain-secures-agreement-to-join-indo-pacific-trade-bloc/Henig Ć®s tweeting like crazy with fabricated nonsense. TBC if US, India or others join CPTPP in the future and like the "fake gotcha" gang from UKPR then I note he never gives a source for his fabricated opinion (as only those in his 'bubble' had those opinions). Pretty sure the 'Remain' bubble said CPTPP couldn't be done and would mean no SPS deal with EU but whatever. It was always possible to have agreements with lots of different countries/blocks. Perhaps now that UK has led the way then Swiss, Norway, etc might like to follow Wow haven't seen that old chestnut for a while. It's like it's 2019 |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,643
|
Post by steve on Mar 29, 2023 15:22:14 GMT
@trevor
Entering the Agreement could increase UK GDP by an extra Ā£1.8 billion and boost trade by Ā£3.3 billion, which is about a 0.08% GDP increase .
So just the 4.92% less than we've lost because of Brexit.
Those Brexit bonuses keep on coming
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Mar 29, 2023 15:23:54 GMT
It's still where the older generation often go for news off or online and the BBC takes the print media agenda and runs with it. Populism wouldn't have a chance without the Mail/Express/Telegraph messaging just as Trump etc are reliant on outlets like Fox in the US The Guardian said ( 22/12/22) that Starmer "targets new swing voter āmiddle-aged mortgage manā" "Party sees identifying 50-year-old male home-owners as key to electoral success" OFCOM say that 21% of this age group use newspapers for their news ( 33% with the websit/app) So a good third of a target demographic and many more watching tv news that has it's agenda in no small part set by those newspapers. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Mar 29, 2023 15:27:28 GMT
@trevor Entering the Agreement could increase UK GDP by an extra Ā£1.8 billion and boost trade by Ā£3.3 billion, which is about a 0.08% GDP increase . So just the 4.92% less than we've lost because of Brexit. Those Brexit bonuses keep on coming but the point of it all is not real economic gains but having something vague to crow about (as trev has just demonstrated) and potentially being a bigger fish in a pond where.. sniff.. maybe they'll respect us like wot we deserve. |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Mar 29, 2023 15:33:09 GMT
Britain secures agreement to join Indo-Pacific trade bloc š„³ š„³www.politico.eu/article/britain-secures-agreement-to-join-indo-pacific-trade-bloc/Henig Ć®s tweeting like crazy with fabricated nonsense. TBC if US, India or others join CPTPP in the future and like the "fake gotcha" gang from UKPR then I note he never gives a source for his fabricated opinion (as only those in his 'bubble' had those opinions). Pretty sure the 'Remain' bubble said CPTPP couldn't be done and would mean no SPS deal with EU but whatever. It was always possible to have agreements with lots of different countries/blocks. Perhaps now that UK has led the way then Swiss, Norway, etc might like to follow So who's a member of the "fake gotcha" gang? Sounds fun, can anyone join? |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Mar 29, 2023 15:38:28 GMT
Talk about missing the big picture. The future of the country is more important than your own sense of personal betrayal. Grow up. I can only suggest that you take your own advice re-the big picture. There are quite a few of us who are not attracted by a programme of Bland Blairism coupled with more than a touch of authoritarian Stalinism.
Then presumably you'll be happy with another Tory government then as that's what you'll get if enough people feel and vote like you. like you. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blipā¦
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Mar 29, 2023 15:51:11 GMT
Here's a non-medical example as an analogy. Back in the day, and I used to play a lot of the arcade games, including one based on Star Wars. At one stage in the game, a digitised Alex Guinness says "Use the Force". Far from being just a background sound effects, it is actually an instruction. At that point in the game, it is the flying down the trench bit which is the game version of the finale of the film. There are many enemies to shoot, so the temptation is to fire back. However, by flying down the entire trench without firing at all, and merely dodging everything thrown at you, you will get bonus points "for using the force" (which are significantly more points that would have been gained by shooting everything). Since the ChatGPT database goes up to about 2019, I reckoned that asking it about a 1980s arcade game would be a way of testing its knowledge. However, the answer it gave was based on one of the PC games (released in the 2010s), rather than the arcade version, where using the force is entirely different (used to levitate objects, amongst other things) Hence, unless the medical question posed was extremely specific, there is a significant chance that ChatGPT (or another large langauge system) would make a response based on something that was similar to, but distinct from, the actual symptoms. Someone who did not have detailed knowledge would not be aware that the response generated might not relate to what was presented. "Hideously dangerous" sounds about right. Thanks for your post EmCat , and sorry for the delay in replying - been busier, but also been thinking about it all. Indeed you are right, the chatGPT bot can get things wrong, and in looking around I have found additional ways it can go wrong. For example, on Statnews there was an article talking about how sometimes it cites phantom academic research that doesnāt actually exist! And indeed a weakness of the approach is, as you highlight, a lack of precision at times. (Itās good when there isnāt a precise answer, which is why it can be quite handy for some essays). However, nonetheless it may still do Ok versus doctors, as I shall post in a bit in my answer to PJW on the matter, and there is perhaps something extra to be done about it, by adding extra capability, as I shall also postā¦ |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Mar 29, 2023 15:53:12 GMT
Danny - there are "barges" and "barges". They range from little more than bare shells used for bulk carrying of coal, to the very luxurious. You may like to search for holidays on exactly such on the canals of France - you'll find them quite expensive. Likewise I remember working in Leningrad around 1990 in the middle of winter and our accomodation was a passenger ship in the harbour. (Finnish owned, I think?) Because it was the most luxurious accomodation in Leningrad at the time. (Even had satellite phones! I also remember phoning the office (at Ā£Ā£Ā£'s per minute!!) only to be immediately told "can you hold" and no chance to say how much it was costing! But I digress......) You seem to be implying that "barges and passenger ships" must be an inferior form of accomodation. That is far from necessarily true. Jenrick is making it clear in his statement to parliament that the revised accommodation is supposed to be minimal and unpleasant: "Accommodation for migrants should meet their essential living needs and nothing more, because we cannot risk becoming a magnet for the millions of people who are displaced and seeking better economic prospects" - so I think luxury barges are out. Perhaps they could just add extra rats and cockroaches to ensure that asylum seekers are properly punished for fleeing persecution. It is this punitive element that is so awful. They seem to have it in their heads that everyone is just coming for a council house and benefits. I'm coming to conclusion that these kind of Tories ( i.e. the ones currently in government and the ERG types) simply lack empathy. They seem unable to walk in the shoes of the unemployed, the homeless, those using foodbanks, those needing to supplement their full time work with benefits, people who rent, people who are ill, disabled or have mental health problems and people fleeing persecution, danger and death. This attitude that if you are any of the above things it's your own fault. Your either lazy or stupid or on the make.... What a sad indictment that people voted for these people in enough numbers to put them into government - a place they are completely unfit for. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Mar 29, 2023 16:03:27 GMT
'Water under the Bridge' issues do not swing many votes. That is now true of Brexit , the 2003 Iraq War - and Corbyn. "That is now true of Brexit" - Not for me! That is fair enough. I don't doubt there will be some people who will still swing on the basis of Chamberlain's 1938 Munich Agreement - and others by the Suez debacle. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Mar 29, 2023 16:04:19 GMT
mercian I am not entirely certain why you find the notion of housing asylum seekers who are awaiting the decision of our authorities in humane conditions while our incredibly inefficient processes grind on problematic. Asylum seekers in the UK are not permitted to seek gainful employment and are not in receipt of benefits , ten percent are children. There is of course no such thing as an " illegal immigrant " people aren't illegal they're still people .There are people whose presence in UK is unlawful however none of these are asylum seekers housed in hotels, they are under current U.K. and international law here legally until their cases are concluded, after which the vast majority will be granted leave to remain mostly as refugees, those who aren't can then be deported. Local authorities already routinely house other UK resident homeless people in hotels and other temporary accommodation, the difference being of course that they can seek work, are free to live elsewhere and are in receipt of benefits where applicable. I am not sure where you want to see desperate people that our regime refuses permission to work to live while their status is assessed, other than presumably in another country.That's not a concern over accommodation that's xenophobia. There was no " small boats" problem before the regime implemented its Brexit and the backlog of asylum seeker claims isn't as Sunak and other ministers have lied about in parliament " half that under the last Labour government " it's actually eight times as high. There are currently over 160,000 asylum seekers in the UK awaiting a decision on their status in 2010 there were 18000. The problem in the UK isn't down to desperate people seeking safety it's down to the Tory regime manufacturing a crisis through inept management of the process, a hostile environment towards asylum seekers with ludicrous restrictions on their rights to work and the Brexit agreement which removed Brexitania from the Dublin accord. I agree that the process is woefully managed, but I object to the term xenophobia. Like most people I have no objection to the 100,000 or so Ukrainians who are here. It's the fake refugees that annoy me, especially those who have passed through various safe countries. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,643
|
Post by steve on Mar 29, 2023 16:06:24 GMT
grahamBecause obviously there's a direct comparison between events that happened before most of the population were born and a decision which is stealing the rights and opportunities of every one still alive!
|
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Mar 29, 2023 16:12:47 GMT
"That is now true of Brexit" - Not for me! That is fair enough. I don't doubt there will be some people who will still swing on the basis of Chamberlain's 1938 Munich Agreement - and others by the Suez debacle. You're the one always saying that 1970 doesn't seem that long ago so 2020 can hardly be classed as ancient history! I know you jest but if I think about it something like the Irish famine still has an effect on how I view the English upper classes today (and by extension their party of choice). |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,643
|
Post by steve on Mar 29, 2023 16:14:44 GMT
"It's the fake refugees that annoy me" Oh ffs if asylum seekers claims are proven invalid they can be deported if not they're refugees there's no such thing as a " fake refugee" Where people choose to seek refuge has nothing to do with whether their claim is valid or not. In the 1939 before the outbreak of the war the kinder transports took Jewish children from Nazi occupied areas to the UK.They passed through the " safe " countries of France and the Netherlands. Your definition which is utterly inconsistent with ratified EHCR and UN definitions agreed and signed by the UK government would define them all as " fake refugees " On the subject of village idiots they now have their own village. youtu.be/RO0NLQd3PLU |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Mar 29, 2023 16:15:37 GMT
"That is now true of Brexit" - Not for me! That is fair enough. I don't doubt there will be some people who will still swing on the basis of Chamberlain's 1938 Munich Agreement - and others by the Suez debacle. And you by an old man who lost two elections. |
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Mar 29, 2023 16:18:14 GMT
Very worrying. I've suggested that we (European countries, not just EU) should build a massive refugee camp in a relatively stable country in North Africa (Algeria?), with all mod cons - electricity, sanitation, food, water etc. It would be hugely expensive but better than Europe drowning in waves of migrants. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blipā¦
Posts: 6,721
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Mar 29, 2023 16:18:25 GMT
Here's a non-medical example as an analogy. Back in the day, and I used to play a lot of the arcade games, including one based on Star Wars. At one stage in the game, a digitised Alex Guinness says "Use the Force". Far from being just a background sound effects, it is actually an instruction. At that point in the game, it is the flying down the trench bit which is the game version of the finale of the film. There are many enemies to shoot, so the temptation is to fire back. However, by flying down the entire trench without firing at all, and merely dodging everything thrown at you, you will get bonus points "for using the force" (which are significantly more points that would have been gained by shooting everything). Since the ChatGPT database goes up to about 2019, I reckoned that asking it about a 1980s arcade game would be a way of testing its knowledge. However, the answer it gave was based on one of the PC games (released in the 2010s), rather than the arcade version, where using the force is entirely different (used to levitate objects, amongst other things) Hence, unless the medical question posed was extremely specific, there is a significant chance that ChatGPT (or another large langauge system) would make a response based on something that was similar to, but distinct from, the actual symptoms. Someone who did not have detailed knowledge would not be aware that the response generated might not relate to what was presented. "Hideously dangerous" sounds about right. I looked at Carfrew's link and the manufacturers claimed it was 86% accurate, which must mean it is also 14% inaccurate. I accept doctors don't get things 100% right either but a 14% error rate does sound much too high in a health context. More work needed I think. Well, as I wrote to EmCat , they are improving the tech, but there is also the possibility of teaming it with other tech, like an answer engine which I shall cover briefly next. However, itās also handy to compare the performance of the bot with other doctors. Below is a study in which they compare the performance of GPT with online symptom-checkers, and with the the performance of doctors. - symptom checkers listed the correct diagnosis within the top three options just 51% of the time
- physiciansā¦ were much more likely to list the correct diagnosis within the top three options (84%)
- chatGPTā¦ listed the correct diagnosis within the top three options in 39 of the 45 vignettes (87%, beating symptom checkersā 51%)ā¦so in comparison with doctors, GPT doesnāt do so badly. (NB - They talk about using GPT3 in the article, but GPT4 has now been released with various improvements so it may perform even better. Iāll post the link and some relevant quotes in the health thread). ukpollingreport2.proboards.com/post/77297/thread |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Mar 29, 2023 16:25:32 GMT
That is fair enough. I don't doubt there will be some people who will still swing on the basis of Chamberlain's 1938 Munich Agreement - and others by the Suez debacle. And you by an old man who lost two elections. He did manage a Hung Parliament in 2017 and so denied the Tories a clear win. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,643
|
Post by steve on Mar 29, 2023 16:25:38 GMT
"better than Europe drowning in waves of migrants. "
This from the man who said he wasn't xenophobic!
|
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,643
|
Post by steve on Mar 29, 2023 16:27:18 GMT
graham"He did manage a Hung Parliament in 2017 and so denied the Tories a clear win." Because having them dependent on the dup flat earther God botherers really worked well!
|
|
|
|
Post by mercian on Mar 29, 2023 16:28:56 GMT
I can only suggest that you take your own advice re-the big picture. There are quite a few of us who are not attracted by a programme of Bland Blairism coupled with more than a touch of authoritarian Stalinism.
Bland Blairism is probably not what we'll get but I think a lot of the children who got a better start in life through Bland Blairism that they certainly wouldn't have under the Tories would quibble that it was that bland. Doing stuff under the tabloid radar is sometimes necessary in this country alas, alas. It would be nice if social justice could be shouted from the rooftops by a British government but the poison in our media will not allow it. There are not enough of those who think like you to make anything like an electoral difference as the Labour party has no doubt calculated whereas not scaring erstwhile floating voters (who are easily scared and have a lot of people just itching for any opportunity to scare them) has a lot of mileage in it. I think this harping on about the media (by which I assume you mean newspapers, radio and TV), not just by you is overblown. For instance this shows the decline in newspaper sakes in the last 15 years or so. it's about a third of what it was. www.statista.com/statistics/476016/expenditure-on-newspapers-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/With the rise of the internet and social media in particular there are many more sources available. A lot of these are highly dubious but they are nevertheless very influential. e.g. Andrew Tate as one example but there are many others of all shades of opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by thylacine on Mar 29, 2023 16:31:23 GMT
That is fair enough. I don't doubt there will be some people who will still swing on the basis of Chamberlain's 1938 Munich Agreement - and others by the Suez debacle. And you by an old man who lost two elections. Steady on Barbara, "old man " is an extremely incendiary pejorative to be throwing around in the environs of ukpollingreport2 š |
|
|
|
Post by EmCat on Mar 29, 2023 16:34:34 GMT
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Mar 29, 2023 16:39:38 GMT
mercian I am not entirely certain why you find the notion of housing asylum seekers who are awaiting the decision of our authorities in humane conditions while our incredibly inefficient processes grind on problematic. Asylum seekers in the UK are not permitted to seek gainful employment and are not in receipt of benefits , ten percent are children. There is of course no such thing as an " illegal immigrant " people aren't illegal they're still people .There are people whose presence in UK is unlawful however none of these are asylum seekers housed in hotels, they are under current U.K. and international law here legally until their cases are concluded, after which the vast majority will be granted leave to remain mostly as refugees, those who aren't can then be deported. Local authorities already routinely house other UK resident homeless people in hotels and other temporary accommodation, the difference being of course that they can seek work, are free to live elsewhere and are in receipt of benefits where applicable. I am not sure where you want to see desperate people that our regime refuses permission to work to live while their status is assessed, other than presumably in another country.That's not a concern over accommodation that's xenophobia. There was no " small boats" problem before the regime implemented its Brexit and the backlog of asylum seeker claims isn't as Sunak and other ministers have lied about in parliament " half that under the last Labour government " it's actually eight times as high. There are currently over 160,000 asylum seekers in the UK awaiting a decision on their status in 2010 there were 18000. The problem in the UK isn't down to desperate people seeking safety it's down to the Tory regime manufacturing a crisis through inept management of the process, a hostile environment towards asylum seekers with ludicrous restrictions on their rights to work and the Brexit agreement which removed Brexitania from the Dublin accord. I agree that the process is woefully managed, but I object to the term xenophobia. Like most people I have no objection to the 100,000 or so Ukrainians who are here. It's the fake refugees that annoy me, especially those who have passed through various safe countries. The wilful ignorance of EUphiliacs (incl. Yvette Cooper) about what is actually happening in EU countries (and NE.Africa and Balkan routes) is hardly a surprise but Dublin III has gone the same way as Dublin I and II. Italy finally (temporarily) scrapping it last year - although it's had plenty of ON/OFFs before that.
EU ministers wade back into row over migrant landingswww.france24.com/en/live-news/20230309-eu-ministers-wade-back-into-row-over-migrant-landingsWith no "returns" policy (again) within EU then France isn't going to agree to any UK->France returns as Italy is not taking back returns from France - despite the 'virtue signalling' by likes of Cooper and other ill informed people. The problem in places like Italy is much, much worse than it is in UK and the Northern EU countries don't want to accept more immigrants via 'transit' countries like Italy yet expect Italy to take everyone who first landed in Italy back?!?! From Oct'22 before Italy finally had enough and officially scrapped Dublin III ('temporarily' pending rEU stepping up and showing some of the much talked about but rarely seen 'solidarity' and doing more to co-fund "Stop(ping) the Boats" in the Med.)
EU drafts plan to share migrant influx ā voluntarilywww.politico.eu/article/eu-migration-plan-share-migrant-influx-voluntary/ |
|
|
|
Post by barbara on Mar 29, 2023 16:40:53 GMT
And you by an old man who lost two elections. Steady on Barbara, "old man " is an extremely incendiary pejorative to be throwing around in the environs of ukpollingreport2 š Sorry. It was said by an old woman if that makes it any better! |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Mar 29, 2023 16:42:10 GMT
That is fair enough. I don't doubt there will be some people who will still swing on the basis of Chamberlain's 1938 Munich Agreement - and others by the Suez debacle. You're the one always saying that 1970 doesn't seem that long ago so 2020 can hardly be classed as ancient history! I know you jest but if I think about it something like the Irish famine still has an effect on how I view the English upper classes today (and by extension their party of choice). I see no contradiction there though because elections are invariably fought on the contemporary issues of the day. The issues which dominated the February 1974 election did not do so at the October election held the same year.The 2019 election was very much a response to the seemingly endless ongoing parliamentary chaos and paralysis of the previous 3 years. Only a minority held really strong views on the issue itself on either side of the debate.It was far too technical a matter to be left to direct democracy and it will always reflect badly on Cameron that he held the vote at all. That said- there was never a great wave of enthusiasm in favour of joining the EEC in the early 1970s. The Common Market was far from being popular and almost certainly contributed to Heath's defeat in early 1974.Oddly enough on the Brexit issue I think Starmer has read the public mood pretty well. It is odd that his judgement is so awry re- Corbyn. Maybe it is something personal between them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2023 16:43:03 GMT
The print media isn't where most people go for News. DM etc is an outdated bogey man-aka an excuse. Top 10 news sources used by age % of all adults using each source for news nowadays. ( 2022) All Adults-top 5-BBC1/ITV/FB/BBC News/Sky News (DM/MoS-15%-tenth) Under 24s-top 5 -Instagram/FB/BBC1/Twitter/BBC website ( DM/Mos-outside top 10) Over 65-top 5-BBC1/ITV/BBC News/DM.MoS/Sky from :-https://www.ofcom.org.uk/research-and-data/tv-radio-and-on-demand/news-media/news-consumption , and where do BBC and Sky go for many if not most of their headlines - the press of course. Can't speak for the others, ITV etc., as I rarely watch them. Both BBC and SKy have their paper reviews every night, for 1.25 hours in Sky's case and the Mail, Express, Sun & Torygraph are always well featured with only the Guardian in serious opposition. In addition, there are often headlines from the press featured in the actual news broadcasts, so don't tell me that the Mail etc. are irrelevant. Can't comment on BBC News-dont watch it. Its awful-they are destroying it. I watch Sky who are excellent-very good reporters and presenters. But not all strictly without bias :- Political Team :- Rigby-leftish Coates-Rabidly anti-Tory John Craig-reasonable. Adam Parson-EU fan Evening presenter and ocassional reporter in the field- Mark Austin-brilliant-very balanced. Secker and the other presenters-absolutely fine I think you are obsessed with DM-you seem to see it everywhere  |
|
