Current Affairs The Conservative Party

[tsubaki]

Here's an example of how the left dilute outrage to the point of unimportance.



All she's done is a bland "sources say" tweet, saying pretty much verbatim what she was told. It isn't "investigative journalism" - it doesn't need to be; it's just informative.

However, she's trending nationally with people outraged at her.

So instead of being laser focused on one issue, now it's an excuse to be outraged at everything possible.

I'm telling you an uncomfortable fact - all the end result is is white noise.

That absolutely isn't what she is done there, though. "Informative" means people are informed by what she is reporting, which is the opposite of what she has done.

The problem with that tweet is twofold. Firstly, she cites a source without ever saying what that source is or that she has been able to confirm the truth of what the source has told her. For all we know, that source could be the bloke sat next to a cashpoint in Victoria Street, or a small collection of bees that fly past her office window every morning.

Secondly, what the source has told her is demonstrably and logically untrue and flies in the face of what she has been told about his illness already - it is a clear breach of the lockdown conditions, who on earth would knowingly expose (by driving nearly 300 miles) elderly parents to this and his wife published a long account of Cummings illness that said he was bedridden for ten days. Does she acknowledge any of that? No.

That is why she is getting pelters this morning.

 

[tsubaki]

in fact, if people want to see what Laura did so wrong in near real time then take a look at these tweets:





The first one was sent at 8.27pm. The second, which suggests she had actually checked the sources story, was sent at 9.38pm. Why did it take her 26 minutes to respond to Crerar's tweet but more than an hour to check the truth of what she had been told by her source?

What makes it worse is that at no point since then does she acknowledge, even when challenged by Pippa Crerar, that the story had never said he had been spoken to by police - so that the sources denial she reported wasn't anything of the kind. She is even reporting this non-denial denial at the moment (edit: even though what it says is directly contradicted by what Durham Police told her yesterday night):

 

[Tubey]

in fact, if people want to see what Laura did so wrong in near real time then take a look at these tweets:





The first one was sent at 8.27pm. The second, which suggests she had actually checked the sources story, was sent at 9.38pm. Why did it take her 26 minutes to respond to Crerar's tweet but more than an hour to check the truth of what she had been told by her source?

What makes it worse is that at no point since then does she acknowledge, even when challenged by Pippa Crerar, that the story had never said he had been spoken to by police - so that the sources denial she reported wasn't anything of the kind. She is even reporting this non-denial denial at the moment (edit: even though what it says is directly contradicted by what Durham Police told her yesterday night):

The intent isn't to analyse what the statements are, they are simply redistributed without an opinion.

 

[Connor]

Here's an example of how the left dilute outrage to the point of unimportance.



All she's done is a bland "sources say" tweet, saying pretty much verbatim what she was told. It isn't "investigative journalism" - it doesn't need to be; it's just informative.

However, she's trending nationally with people outraged at her.

So instead of being laser focused on one issue, now it's an excuse to be outraged at everything possible.

I'm telling you an uncomfortable fact - all the end result is is white noise.

It's not a bland tweet at all. Nor is it informative in any way shape or form.

She's quickly disputing a report from a fellow journalist with a line from a source. That isn't the work of a journalist, its the work of a PR manager or a press officer.

 

[tsubaki]

The intent isn't to analyse what the statements are, they are simply redistributed without an opinion.

not in any way the actions of a journalist though, are they?

 

[Caolam]

If Laura Kuenssberg is to be pilloried for her tweets then much bigger fish should also be held to account for what they have said or retweeted.
Besides the story is about Cunnings and whether there is on set of rules for the rule makers and one for the rest. There are NHS workers living apart from their families so that they can work and their families can be safe.

 

[tsubaki]

It's not a bland tweet at all. Nor is it informative in any way shape or form.

She's quickly disputing a report from a fellow journalist with a line from a source. That isn't the work of a journalist, its the work of a PR manager or a press officer.

the excellent Zelo Street blog has drawn attention to how she responded to a report from another fellow journalist recently:

 

[davek]

Keunᛋᛋberg:

She's another one that should end up in the Hague.

- Trial
- Sentence
- Noose

 

[Connor]

the excellent Zelo Street blog has drawn attention to how she responded to a report from another fellow journalist recently:

That was wild.

She has admitted to not being too bothered with actual journalism, but the drama of it all is great. She becomes the story too many times, breaking the first rule every journalist - myself included - is taught.

She will end up with a nice cushy communications job in about 18 months/2 years time.

 

[orly]

That was wild.

She has admitted to not being too bothered with actual journalism, but the drama of it all is great. She becomes the story too many times, breaking the first rule every journalist - myself included - is taught.

She will end up with a nice cushy communications job in about 18 months/2 years time.

Yes I think so. I don't think she can be reasonably expect to be in the BBC job for another year.

 

[Connor]

Yes I think so. I don't think she can be reasonably expect to be in the BBC job for another year.

She shouldn't have survived the Corbyn 'shoot to kill' fiasco, but, alas.

 

[Tubey]

If Laura Kuenssberg is to be pilloried for her tweets then much bigger fish should also be held to account for what they have said or retweeted.
Besides the story is about Cunnings and whether there is on set of rules for the rule makers and one for the rest. There are NHS workers living apart from their families so that they can work and their families can be safe.

There's no agenda against other journalists though, despite them doing the exact same thing.

Kuenssberg gets the hard left in this country riled up when she so much as types a word. There's no rationale behind the criticism, as seen in this thread - no matter what she says she'll get criticised for it.

 

[Connor]

There's no agenda against other journalists though, despite them doing the exact same thing.

Kuenssberg gets the hard left in this country riled up when she so much as types a word. There's no rationale behind the criticism, as seen in this thread - no matter what she says she'll get criticised for it.

I take it that you've conveniently ignored the fume towards Peston carrying the Tories water through this all then.

And the use of 'hard left' is really stupid. Kunessberg is getting flack from everyone – Lib Dems, Greens, etc.

 

[Tubey]

I take it that you've conveniently ignored the fume towards Peston carrying the Tories water through this all then.

And the use of 'hard left' is really stupid. Kunessberg is getting flack from everyone – Lib Dems, Greens, etc.

Owen Jones is 10x worse than either of those the other way and there's no comment.

Because it doesn't suit the agenda.

Absolutely no tweet of Kuenssberg has been anything other than just stating what she's been told or redistributing another journalist. There's no Tory propaganda - she's just doing her job.

She's not very good at it but that's a different issue.

 

[Huyton Layne]

Scumbag talking about politicizing whilst defending a political ally for breaking the law.