this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
102 points (99.0% liked)

chapotraphouse

13533 readers
873 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] shitholeislander@hexbear.net 37 points 3 months ago (1 children)

almost every member of the british media class should be executed without a trial

every member of the british ~~media class~~ should be executed without a trial

[–] came_apart_at_Kmart@hexbear.net 29 points 3 months ago

I like how elegantly many of the covers satisfy the editorial need to pair "inflammatory racist headline" and "hot babe".

there's something there for every configuration of stupid white guy: racist, horny, racist+horny, horny+racist.

[–] MolotovHalfEmpty@hexbear.net 27 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Reminder that Starmer did a dodgy deal with right wing press to stop any potential press regulation in return for their support.

[–] Bart@hexbear.net 17 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Could you provide some sources? Sounds quite interesting but I'm unable to find anything.

[–] MolotovHalfEmpty@hexbear.net 18 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Starmer & Co have always been soft on trying to push media regulation, unlike Corbyn's admin and a number of the other smaller parties, but for quite some time they were still supporting a sort of soft opt-in approach: Example from Feb of this year

Then, when the election date was announced, suddenly all the media regulation policy proposals were absent from party materials and ministers wouldn't even answer questions on it: June exmaple

During the election campaign the Murdoch empire and others in the right wing press swang fully behind Labour for the first time since Blair. Everyone in media and politics circles were saying a deal was done to oppose any media regulation in exchange for their support.

Then in late July the iNewspaper (formerly Independent) officially ran the story that a deal had been agreed between senior Labour Party officials and at least Murdoch. That story is paywalled, but here's some more stories and analysis from the next day when the press started asking Labour if this was true and they repeatedly dodged the question and refused to deny it: 23rd July

[–] CarbonScored@hexbear.net 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Reminder that every PM does dodgy deals with right wing press. It is the policy of successive government to have meetings with newspaper owners and start negotiating behind closed doors.

[–] MolotovHalfEmpty@hexbear.net 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This is true.

What's less common is calling for regulation in the first place, then dropping that as a deal to get elected, and then immediately having to react to a wave of race riots and pogroms that were encouraged by and use the exact same language as the press you just did a deal with.

Like so many things with Labour, what's unique about it is its naked duplicity followed by steaming incompetence.

[–] CarbonScored@hexbear.net 4 points 3 months ago

Aye, all very true and depressing.

[–] BricsSlanger@hexbear.net 22 points 3 months ago

Rise of the racist right is useful to the liberal establishment

[–] Vampire@hexbear.net 22 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I'm against immigrationbecause I think Africans and Syrians should have peace and prosperity at home

[–] BricsSlanger@hexbear.net 24 points 3 months ago

I'm against the US orchestrated wars, sanctions, and economic vampirism which creates mass involuntary immigration.

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 5 points 3 months ago

Interesting how Giorgia Meloni was using this rhetoric, even going as far as to point out France's neocolonism. Of course, she didn't own up to Italy's role. But it's weird that they'll take up the anti-imperialist rhetoric to serve reactionary ends.

Bad bit. After the sins of colonialism europe has lost any right to restrict the movement of non europeans, non europeans still have that right. There should be no white people in Africa.

[–] shath@hexbear.net 22 points 3 months ago (1 children)

but then nobody would be incentivised to buy newspapers to invest in uh

papers rustling

extremely harmful editorialising? ok?

[–] Evilphd666@hexbear.net 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] shath@hexbear.net 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

in the same country as the staff of the BBC? i dont think thats a good idea

[–] Findom_DeLuise@hexbear.net 3 points 3 months ago

Bri*ish Batboy Corporation

[–] Evilphd666@hexbear.net 20 points 3 months ago

Coming to an amerikkka near you!

[–] SteamedHamberder@hexbear.net 14 points 3 months ago

Daily_mail.mp3

[–] dutchkimble@lemy.lol 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Notice how there's usually an attractive lady on the other side of the page

[–] lil_tank@hexbear.net 7 points 3 months ago

Can't have the racist-lorry-driver without the awooga

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 13 points 3 months ago

I want to read the one about dentists being natural born killers

[–] kristina@hexbear.net 8 points 3 months ago

needs nsfw tag

[–] lil_tank@hexbear.net 5 points 3 months ago

1984 is the best possible future for the UK