Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[sevenlayermuddle]

Today’s headline link

This matters: is this the ‘climate election’?

We are linked to a video that presents climate change extremists, like the well known Swedish child, as if they were undisputed scientific experts.   The whole tone seems dumbed down, as if aimed at teenage disciples of said child, who wouldn’t know the difference between a real scientist and a Labrador.

I gather the BBC will be publishing further episodes, on other topics,  telling us what matters.    But imho, we should be making up our own minds about what matters, rather than being told by BBC.

[re0]

I tuned out of the BBC a few years ago and very, very, very rarely use any part of their website. I have uninstalled all of their apps from my phone. My opinion is that a lot of what comes out of the BBC is metrocentric, and there are videos that are not conspiracy floating around that would indicate that there are some biases within their studios that have presented themselves in some of their programmes.

It is a shame really since the BBC has been involved in some pretty decent productions in the past, especially some of the documentaries in the past.

As you said, this publication is not really aimed at us. To me, it is oversimplified and aimed out those who are impressionable and a bit wet behind the ears. People may disagree with me, but I truly hope that the voting age for general elections is never reduced to 16 since the potential of this stuff being shown in schools is pretty high with actual information and understanding being pretty low.

Anyway, the thing that really humoured me in this video is the tone used to say "and Jane Fonda's out getting herself arrestedat climate protests now." So cool to be arrested, right?

I was reluctant to share my views here since I do not use this forum to give political opinions or opinions on the political leaning of certain organisations. I have kept it pretty tame.

[chenks]

the swedish child is being used as a puppet.
also, shouldn't she be at school rather than sailing around the world (and getting lost).

[dee.jay]

To talk on topic about BBC bias but in a slightly different context - politics. My word, it is so biased to the left it is incredible. I'd always assumed that the BBC were supposed to be impartial, but this is not the case.

I do agree with the earlier point about 16/17 year old's voting - they are too young. I mean, they can't buy a pint, why should they be voting? (as an aside, parliament tried to rush that through because they think they'll get more people wanting to vote remain, but that's another debate for another thread)

[chenks]

isn't "bias" totally objective?
you'll get people on the right saying it's bias to the left and the people on the left saying it's bias to the right.

with regards to age, if they are old enough to pay tax then they are old enough to vote.
is the ability to buy alcohol a primary gauge for allowing a vote? i'd suggest that people who buy too much alcohol should not be allowed the vote.

[sevenlayermuddle]

I’m not so sure it’s a political bias, maybe more of a bias to whatever stories they think might become a hit on social media, thus drawing in more casual viewers, to screen and website.

The “getting arrested is cool” message, relating to climate extremists, is an example.  Even if not subsequently convicted it’s something they’ll always carry with them and have to recall and declare, such as if ever - even decades later - they apply to travel to USA or some other countries.   And if they are convicted or cautioned same applies with even more emphasis.  It’s not cool, and I think BBC should be stressing that fact, over and over again.

The sixteen year old voting certainly worries me.     From what I remember of being sixteen, we tended to form into groups of friends, with one or two more dominant members possessing natural leadership skills - probably destined to be ‘captains of industry’ later in life.   At that age, if such a pal  said “let’s all vote for Spotty Dog from the Woodentops, it’ll be a laugh”, I’d probably have done so. 

[chenks]

The sixteen year old voting certainly worries me.     From what I remember of being sixteen, we tended to form into groups of friends, with one or two more dominant members possessing natural leadership skills - probably destined to be ‘captains of industry’ later in life.   At that age, if such a pal  said “let’s all vote for Spotty Dog from the Woodentops, it’ll be a laugh”, I’d probably have done so. 

plenty of people much older who could quite easily do the same thing.

[sevenlayermuddle]

plenty of people much older who could quite easily do the same thing.

Yes I agree.

There’s been a few electoral outcomes around the world would in recent years (avoiding specifics)  that have surprised me so much, I have genuinely wondered if it might be attributable to some SM message going viral, saying “do this, it’ll be a laugh”.

[jelv]

Today’s headline link

We are linked to a video that presents climate change extremists, like the well known Swedish child, as if they were undisputed scientific experts.   The whole tone seems dumbed down, as if aimed at teenage disciples of said child, who wouldn’t know the difference between a real scientist and a Labrador.

Greta is honest. She in no way pretends to be a scientific expert, instead her message is listen to the scientists and do something about it.

If anything the BBC in the past has leaned the other way by repeatedly trotting out Nigel Lawson who knew sod all about it (except that doing something about it would damage him and his buddies finances because of the impact on companies in which they had investments/directorships) to "balance" the scientists who actually knew about it. There's a reason the BBC couldn't find genuine scientists saying climate change is bunkum - there aren't any!

[j0hn]

with regards to age, if they are old enough to pay tax then they are old enough to vote.

This.

I'm a big fan of votes for 16 year olds and proud Scotland have introduced it for the Scottish Parliament elections.

If you can get married, have kids and pay taxes at 16 then you should be allowed to vote.

It's no surprise to me that only 1 major party objects to votes for 16-17 year olds.

[broadstairs]

I think there has to be a limit on the lower age for voting and I'm inclined to agree the current age is certainly as low as it should go. Yes there are some 17 year olds who would take it seriously but I very much doubt that many 16 year olds would fall into that category. I believe that some experience of real life would be a good thing prior to being able to vote and personally think raising to 21 would not be a bad thing. There is a lot more to deciding on how to vote than climate change, since until we can get India, China and the USA to fully sign up nothing significant will change.

Stuart

[chenks]

you can't take tax off someone who isn't allowed to vote, as they are essentially paying into the country but having no say in it.
so you would be happy for someone to die in combat working for the country, but have no say in the way it is run?

[sevenlayermuddle]

I’d also favour a voting age of 21, though there’s not much chance of that.

That said, imo,  the thing that makes 18 a ‘special age’  and the right compromise is that 18 is the age at which citizens cease to be children.  Details vary among UK nations but for most purposes, below that age, a person is legally a child.  And rightly so in my view, being termed ‘children’ affords them extra protections in recognition of their immaturity.

I don’t think that the taxation argument holds water in relation to a voting age of 16.   Everybody in the UK pays taxes, including income tax at any age, nothing changes at age 16.   It might be unusual for young children to earn enough to pay income tax but it’s not impossible.   And each time they buy a new toy out of pocket money they are paying VAT, regardless of age.

[chenks]

so you'd apply an age limit of 21.
but that 21yo can work, pay income pay, gamble, drink, fight in the army, but no say in how the country is run?

IMO i'd remove the vote from anyone over the age of 80.
if the likelood of you not living long enough for the term of government to expire than you lose the right to have a say in how the country is run.
and 80 is a reasonable age to limit that to.

[sevenlayermuddle]

so you'd apply an age limit of 21.

I went on to qualify that with a reasoned case why I think 18 is the right compromise, in recognition of the fact that others may/will disagree.