The dubious journalism of the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
MrSki
Who am I to say you're wrong
I have deleted it. Can you do the same on your quote?
YouSir
Retired from Urban
Other people who work in the media, the ones who'll hire her, promote her and defend her. Doesn't matter if she talks to Seamus Milne or Diane Abbott or whoever, just that she doesn't offend her peers. New government won't mean new media.
keybored
Well done. You remember cat good.
That's some dedication gone into compiling that. Whoever had to watch that much QT must be made of the same stuff as a Chernobyl liquidator.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
Aye and it’s not like the practice of encouraging pile ons when you have a huge twitter following hasn’t been highlighted before.
MrSki
Who am I to say you're wrong
Her bodyguard.
Humberto
Justice is order
The fact is the left lost and the Tories won. They aren't citizens on the same terms as you or I. They are traders, eager to make their own money. What we could have is far better and everyone could have it. OK some words, but what do I mean? I mean we are evidently all better off when we are (to borrow the lying phrase) all in it together. Why?
Because inheritance is the basic issue. There shouldn't be inheritance of estate, title or wealth from one to another. That's it. This essentially horrifies the 'haves'. We are talking a large section of the populace of this country being in extreme poverty, at one time or most of the time. What we should have is public ownership, shared wealth and 'for each according to their need.' That is why they try to ruin the NHS. And have made it shitter.
Because inheritance is the basic issue. There shouldn't be inheritance of estate, title or wealth from one to another. That's it. This essentially horrifies the 'haves'. We are talking a large section of the populace of this country being in extreme poverty, at one time or most of the time. What we should have is public ownership, shared wealth and 'for each according to their need.' That is why they try to ruin the NHS. And have made it shitter.
krtek a houby
Anger is Hi-NRG
Wolveryeti
Detty Pig
The key difference is that Krishnan didn't tweet that the guy was a Labour activist and link to his Twitter.
It facilitated another pro-govt narrative that this confrontation was in bad faith and just engineered to make Boris look bad, and was an invitation for a Twitter mob to descend on this poor guy who's already got a lot on his plate.
At best it is fantastically naive about what the consequences would be - but I doubt a 24/7 hack like Laura K can really hide behind that excuse.
Totally ignoring of course another massive porky told by our PM - apparently so busy with govt's new legislative agenda he has to prorogue - as he does a bit of blatant electioneering.
Smokeandsteam
Working Class First
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
The tweets have been taken out of context too: like politics dot com tweeted the story then Laura in conversation straight off the bat was like “yeah it turns out he’s a labour activist”. I mean why would you?
The deliberation over this is annoying me- aye the father in question is being sensible- he’s got more to worry about and I’d be the same I reckon in the midst of a less important twitter fury- but she was still being an absolute dick- straight up no confusion. Pouring over and over it distorts that. That’s not OUTRAGE, she just was.
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
He did link to his twitter, on which the guy had spoken about the confrontation himself.
Before she did.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
There’s a whiff of solidarity in Kristian’s post though. Can’t you sense it man? I dunno, I’ve always thought Guru-Murthy was sound, his tweets on the Syrian conflict certainly didn’t trigger a desire to punch him in the face anyway.
/post based on gut feelings only
That is very very revealing, hope it gets shared, not one for BBC bias overall, but that is glaring.
colacubes
Mr Hot Cookie
Sorry but bollocks. There’s no whiff of solidarity at all. It’s just a slightly different tone.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
Massively different and entirely different context too.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
Blah blah, it’s not that though is it. Save the BBC BIAS stuff for the loons.
colacubes
Mr Hot Cookie
Are they also going to reveal all the other interviews where Kirsty Wark interrupted a bloke? Or is it perhaps due to women having a more consensual and collaborative style of talking to each other? Genuinely don’t know if that’s the case but I’d like to see more data and proof of this. Cos on the whole men have been shown (see Caroline Criado Perez recent book) to be massively more likely to talk over women. And that is also my lived experience.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
Except how many women in this thread pointed out she was being a wanker? Me, Rutita.. etc etc.
colacubes
Mr Hot Cookie
I’m not saying I agree with her tweet. But I think the level of ire aimed at it is disproportionate considering all the other male reporters who did the same earlier. As is all the criticism she gets.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
Don’t you get a bit suspicious of people, esp dudes- throwing that in right away though? It’s a bit try hard isn’t it. There’s no way that her being a woman is what motivated people on urban to say Christ fuck off Laura. We’ve got a hard enough time dealing with actual sexism without getting bogged down in red herrings.
And also- women don’t have a collaborative consensual style of speaking to each other. Particularly not where there’s a huge class divide.
HoratioCuthbert
Deep seated inconsequence
I grew up almost entirely around women though till my dad appeared on the scene. Us debating= all voices getting louder and louder all culminating in a glorious crescendo of self righteousness
colacubes
Mr Hot Cookie
But why did they not say fuck off Guido; or fuck off Krishnan; or fuck off any of the other many other journos who did it before she did in the hour before she did? The people I saw getting criticised most when it happened were Laura Kunesberg and Beth Rigsby from Sky News. Not the other 20 odd male journos who had done it. That’s not to say I agree with any of it. But it’s a bit telling. And also actual legit journalism tbf. Even the man filmed has said he doesn’t have a problem with it. It’s not exactly doorstepping Gareth Edwards parents to tell them he’s HIV positive.
I agree with you to some extent re the consensual thing across class divide but actually that’s to do with the patronisation of the working class which is an entirely different issue in this context imho.
Similar threads
