The Student Room Group

Press bias hitting the Right

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/migrant-crisis-italy-rescue-ships-matteo-salvini-libya-spain-latest-mission-lifeline-a8412591.html

I guess the Corbynites can't claim monopoly on press bias anymore.

1. Italy doesn't have a far-right government, the smaller part of the government is right-wing, not far-right.

2. Controlling the undesirable immigration and taking concerns of the Southern Italians to heart is what the government should do as a priority. The main purpose of governments is to protect their citizens, not others.

Scroll to see replies

It is funny how the far-right object to that label.

Why, almost as if their position is linked to genocide. But surely that is unfair, I mean it isn't like the new Italian government has singled out an entire ethnic group for interment camps, tracking, and expulsion... is it?
Society is just polarizing. In USA liberals even trying to put centrists to right-wing camp. Even the europe is becoming more polarized - you are either welcome predominantly working-age males (those refugees lol, defenders of their land lol) into your home or just a straight nazi who turns people into soap.
Reply 3
Original post by AngeryPenguin
It is funny how the far-right object to that label.

Why, almost as if their position is linked to genocide. But surely that is unfair, I mean it isn't like the new Italian government has singled out an entire ethnic group for interment camps, tracking, and expulsion... is it?


Anti-immigration ideology is a distance away from nazism or fascism, or any other far-right associated view. Open a book and read it, maybe.
Correct.
It is rhetoric like that that got Trump in and will keep Corbyn out.
The left have never acknowledged the part they played in Trump and Brexit winning.
Reply 5
Original post by Axiomasher
Whatever Adolf.


You're completely unhelpful considering there's a lot of youngsters here that may read your post and think it's funny or cool to use such language to dismiss other opinions. That's why we're moving backwards as a society.
Reply 6
Original post by freept
Anti-immigration ideology is a distance away from nazism or fascism, or any other far-right associated view. Open a book and read it, maybe.

Indeed it is. The fact that the most outspoken anti-immigration people tend to be hovering around fascism, on that spectrum, does speak for itself though.
Original post by Donald J.Trump
Why should Italy take more and more ships of Libyan migrants- there is no war there at all, you never hear of any reports like you do in Syria yet they want a taxi service into Europe which breaks the international law.


It's interesting when people only bring up international law when it suits their needs other than that it is ignored willy nilly be it invading countries, assasinating individuals, bombing civilians, torture etc. etc. etc.
So here we are, everyone who believes in some form of controlled and lawful immigration is a far-righter. That is the message from the far-left.
Original post by freept
Anti-immigration ideology is a distance away from nazism or fascism, or any other far-right associated view. Open a book and read it, maybe.


They talk about it as if the Communist regimes had open borders all over, instead of being places where you would be shot not only for entering but also leaving. Eventually, we will get tired of arguing such simplistic nonsense with people who really can't do better.
Reply 9
Original post by Napp
Indeed it is. The fact that the most outspoken anti-immigration people tend to be hovering around fascism, on that spectrum, does speak for itself though.


It's interesting when people only bring up international law when it suits their needs other than that it is ignored willy nilly be it invading countries, assasinating individuals, bombing civilians, torture etc. etc. etc.


So, by your logic, Corbyn should be bashed in thr media because he's been calling terrorists his friends? We're getting nowhere here.
Reply 10
Original post by freept
So, by your logic, Corbyn should be bashed in thr media because he's been calling terrorists his friends? We're getting nowhere here.


I've yet to see the media be especially friendly towards the man. Indeed, they frequently cudgel him with his past remarks on whom you call terrorists.
Reply 11
Original post by zhog
So here we are, everyone who believes in some form of controlled and lawful immigration is a far-righter. That is the message from the far-left.


Must you so brazenly warp the truth? No one is alleging that. You also seem to be neglecting to mention "some form of controlled and lawful immigration" literally means nothing as it covers the entire spectrum from an open boarder to subjectively shooting every 2/3 people trying to cross it.
Reply 12
Original post by Napp
I've yet to see the media be especially friendly towards the man. Indeed, they frequently cudgel him with his past remarks on whom you call terrorists.


Exactly, and they rarely listen to his side of the story.

As a skilled politician you need to work with everyone and reach consensus. That includes the bag guys at home and abroad. It doesn't automatically mean that it's okay to stick a label on you in the name of "free press". It's the liberal media's bias towards anyone and anything outside of the centre-left to centre-right spectrum because this spectrum means status quo and the media doesn't want a change, they're part of the establishment after all.
Reply 13
Original post by freept
Exactly, and they rarely listen to his side of the story.

As a skilled politician you need to work with everyone and reach consensus. That includes the bag guys at home and abroad. It doesn't automatically mean that it's okay to stick a label on you in the name of "free press". It's the liberal media's bias towards anyone and anything outside of the centre-left to centre-right spectrum because this spectrum means status quo and the media doesn't want a change, they're part of the establishment after all.


I make absolutely no comment on Corbyn or his policies

Indeed you do. No one, at least no one with a brain cell, has ever claimed politics is a particularly virtuous or clean "profession".
With respect to your comment on the so called "liberal media bias" though do I need to point out this is entirely a two way street and with vulgar outlets such as Fox, DM et al. quite clearly have their own biases in the opposite direction.
I would, however, be interested to know whom you are reffering to when you say 'liberal media'? As whilst you have the various papers and tv channels who can fall under said rubric you then have agencies such as AFP, Reuters, Tass et al. who simply state occurrences as opposed to putting on any overt bias.
Original post by Napp
Indeed it is. The fact that the most outspoken anti-immigration people tend to be hovering around fascism, on that spectrum, does speak for itself though.


It's interesting when people only bring up international law when it suits their needs other than that it is ignored willy nilly be it invading countries, assasinating individuals, bombing civilians, torture etc. etc. etc.


I never advocated invading any countries did I? Read my posts-what justifies your pre judgement in this instance.

Italy was within their rights in rejecting the boat- the problem is the Geneva Convention of 1951 states that refugees must seek Asylum in the nearest safe country, before Italy elected its Nationalist government they was being invaded by Libyans with a free taxi service into Europe, I remember reading a news article that ISIS was offering ยฃ700 to Libyans if they joined ISIS they will then use this money to make the crossing- this benefits ISIS as they have membership going through to Europe and North Africa is a huge muslim area- there is bound to be some radicals amongst the thousands which have swooped southern Italy.

The point being uncontrolled mass numbers being taxi serviced into Europe by NGO ships is not fair and its breaching the UN convention on Refugees settling in the nearest safe country which is Tunisia, not Italy.
Reply 15
Original post by Donald J.Trump
I never advocated invading any countries did I? Read my posts-what justifies your pre judgement in this instance.

Italy was within their rights in rejecting the boat- the problem is the Geneva Convention of 1951 states that refugees must seek Asylum in the nearest safe country, before Italy elected its Nationalist government they was being invaded by Libyans with a free taxi service into Europe, I remember reading a news article that ISIS was offering ยฃ700 to Libyans if they joined ISIS they will then use this money to make the crossing- this benefits ISIS as they have membership going through to Europe and North Africa is a huge muslim area- there is bound to be some radicals amongst the thousands which have swooped southern Italy.

The point being uncontrolled mass numbers being taxi serviced into Europe by NGO ships is not fair and its breaching the UN convention on Refugees settling in the nearest safe country which is Tunisia, not Italy.


It was a general example of a common double standard, not necessary applicable to you in your own right though.

I never said they werent although i believe the law actually states they're obliged to render and and all assistance to a boat in distress. Equally, the nearest safe country, depending on where they leave from, is likely Italy - Tunisia is a stretch it must be said, not to mention if you start pooring refugees in theere instead of to Europe the state will almost certainly implode. After all its barely hanging on at present any way.
It does raise an interesting point though with regards to Iraqis, Afghans, Syrians and Libyan refugees is the west [NATO to be specific] not morally obligated to take in these people as it, without question, entirely NATO countries fault for this occurance? With Libya as a prime example the argument can very easily be made that Europe is simply reaping what it sowed here - they destroyed Libya and blew up the damn and now you're having to live with it.

With the NGO ships though I dont disagree with you per se. Indeed, the argument that they are de facto, if not de jure, participating in human smuggling is rather convincing to my eyes.
Original post by freept
You're completely unhelpful considering there's a lot of youngsters here that may read your post and think it's funny or cool to use such language to dismiss other opinions. That's why we're moving backwards as a society.


The last thing I want to be is helpful to is the far-right and what constitutes 'moving backwards' is a matter of political opinion.
Reply 17
Original post by Axiomasher
The last thing I want to be is helpful to is the far-right and what constitutes 'moving backwards' is a matter of political opinion.


You're being unhelpful to the society which you imply you care about by fighting the bad far-right guys that don't form part of the Italian government.
Reply 18
Original post by Napp
I make absolutely no comment on Corbyn or his policies

Indeed you do. No one, at least no one with a brain cell, has ever claimed politics is a particularly virtuous or clean "profession".
With respect to your comment on the so called "liberal media bias" though do I need to point out this is entirely a two way street and with vulgar outlets such as Fox, DM et al. quite clearly have their own biases in the opposite direction.
I would, however, be interested to know whom you are reffering to when you say 'liberal media'? As whilst you have the various papers and tv channels who can fall under said rubric you then have agencies such as AFP, Reuters, Tass et al. who simply state occurrences as opposed to putting on any overt bias.


You've highlighted in a response to my other thread that you have problems reading and understanding the content. The text of my thread implies that it's a two-way street.

Liberal media is the establishment, the sons and daughters of the elites, sent to private schools and top universities, securing jobs at influential establishments. This is something widely reported on by those who succeed in media without these advantages, like Owen Jones. It's no secret that elites want to preserve the status quo and rightly so, otherwise they would be threatened. So as explained in my post, any politician or party that want to change ''the order'' (thus outside of the centre-left to centre-right spectrum) is a threat and is attacked.
Reply 19
Original post by freept
You've highlighted in a response to my other thread that you have problems reading and understanding the content. The text of my thread implies that it's a two-way street.

Liberal media is the establishment, the sons and daughters of the elites, sent to private schools and top universities, securing jobs at influential establishments. This is something widely reported on by those who succeed in media without these advantages, like Owen Jones. It's no secret that elites want to preserve the status quo and rightly so, otherwise they would be threatened. So as explained in my post, any politician or party that want to change ''the order'' (thus outside of the centre-left to centre-right spectrum) is a threat and is attacked.


Yes I am oh so bad at reading :rolleyes: pull the other one please.
So by Your white touching definition we should never listen to a single news report because they must ipso facto be lying - pray tell where you get your news fr then, this stuff beyond repute?

Quick Reply