I see the point completely I just disagree with it. You are suggesting that only certain publications are valid on here.
Why don’t you list them for all of our benefit?
No, there’s difference between credibility and validity. What I’m putting forward is an argument to be made against the credibility of The Canary.
Like I said above, it’s your prerogative to link any auld bollocks. Just don’t expect to be taken seriously.
Why would anyone not take facts seriously?
We’ve had enough of experts. And facts.
6 Likes
I’m impressed by your skills in completely disregarding previous posts and context.
How have I done that?
Followed by, “Well if I have to tell you…”
I used to follow the Canary, as I am generally in line with its political viewpoint, but the bias has become really grating, and I’ve had to stop. It’s almost worse for me to see a left wing outlet so biased than a right wing one (but not quite).
I don’t share anything that I see from it any more, as I always have to fact check it, so might as well use the reliable source.
1 Like
I agree, it’s agenda is very clear. Yes it is biased; so is every publication I’ve ever read. Ive stopped reading editorials from anywhere, I’m not interested in what any particular journalist as to say. I am interested in facts though. As long as the article is correct then I have no problem. In this case the Canary quoted the register of MPs, so unless they misquoted it’s to be taken as fact. Bob linked the same story from the Guardian, which many people have problems with, me included, I find it too wishy washy liberal for my tastes. I still read it but again as long it quotes facts I have no problem. I wouldn’t (lazily) link anything that wasn’t a fact.
Trump has just given a statement regarding Iran, I saw it on BBC News. It will likely appear in the Huff, Graun, Canary etc. Does it matter where I read it as long as it’s accurate?
1 Like
Which you can easily tell, if it says he’s a massive cunt.
2 Likes
Pete, you’ve been hacked by that cunt Gove by the looks of it.
4 Likes
Does anybody posting on here actually take anything seriously (other than music, booze and hif-fi obviously)?
I’m confused now, particularly by anyone taking this thread seriously. I thought it was a web based version of a tipsy row over politics between a bunch of drunken mates after a long lunch…
2 Likes
But is this factual?
Factual? The best lies are distortions of the truth. I wouldn’t equate many publications to Breitbart because of the racism quotient. The Canary is (i) usually wildly distorted and (ii) shockingly badly written. I can filter out the distortions, but the bad writing is unforgivable.
On the other hand, you can bring what you want to a rumpus in the pub…
ftfy
2 Likes
Checked and verified as a credible source of satire
3 Likes
I like the 65% marginal rate of tax on earnings, that’s a great incentive to work 
Well it’s got to be paid for somehow. There’s no such thing as a magic ‘tax richer people a bit more’ tree you know.
VB
3 Likes
4 Likes
Universal credit. Whichever civil servants thought dumping four weeks of benefit on a claimant who quite possibly is incapable of budgeting or has a chaotic lifestyle deserves a clip ‘round the head.
When I was claiming I had a fortnightly giro cheque which I needed to take to the post office to cash. Many times the cash was immediately spent on a half ounce of cannabis resin and pornography. Fortunately I was young and could subsist on quaker oats and spaghetti hoops for the next ten days or so.
The delivery of universal credit hasn’t been thought through at all and I’m pleased the gov’t has been paused on this one.
3 Likes