Half of UK adults still get their news from newspaper brands; BBC One most important - Ofcom

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

There are a lot of people who self report that they get their news by glancing at newspaper headlines while buying cheap cider?

I get the point behind what Errkal is presumably trying to say, as Karl said, there is a serious problem with lack of political engagement in working class communities. But that he paints this as people "glancing at headlines as they're buying white lightning," only serves to perpetuate stereotypes about feckless layabouts, whose disinterest in politics is a result of their own poor life choices, rather than the consequence of a system that is designed to try and keep people disengaged. It's talk designed to belittle poor communities who are disengaged, and paint them as people who don't want to help themselves, so why should we help them anyway?

They don’t need to self report, those people exist. I know several of them.

The reasons for it are thanks to decades of right wing policies and the left wing ignoring them. But those people exist.

It’s not a representation of the whole of the working class, they are a tiny part of it, but those people are around.

And they not only exist but they usually have pretty far right views that they’ve picked up from those Mail, Sun and Express headlines. Everything is the fault of immigrants, all politicians are the same, Nigel will save us and Corbyn is a lefty lightweight who will let in hoards of Muslim rapists.

Those people should be helped, but don’t go expecting them to vote for it.

It's not about whether people like that exist. It's about sweeping, belittling statements, that do nothing but write people off. What benefit is there in speculating that a good chunk of people who get their news from newspapers are feckless alcoholics?

There’s zero benefit.

But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

There are a lot of people who self report that they get their news by glancing at newspaper headlines while buying cheap cider?

I get the point behind what Errkal is presumably trying to say, as Karl said, there is a serious problem with lack of political engagement in working class communities. But that he paints this as people "glancing at headlines as they're buying white lightning," only serves to perpetuate stereotypes about feckless layabouts, whose disinterest in politics is a result of their own poor life choices, rather than the consequence of a system that is designed to try and keep people disengaged. It's talk designed to belittle poor communities who are disengaged, and paint them as people who don't want to help themselves, so why should we help them anyway?

They don’t need to self report, those people exist. I know several of them.

The reasons for it are thanks to decades of right wing policies and the left wing ignoring them. But those people exist.

It’s not a representation of the whole of the working class, they are a tiny part of it, but those people are around.

And they not only exist but they usually have pretty far right views that they’ve picked up from those Mail, Sun and Express headlines. Everything is the fault of immigrants, all politicians are the same, Nigel will save us and Corbyn is a lefty lightweight who will let in hoards of Muslim rapists.

Those people should be helped, but don’t go expecting them to vote for it.

It's not about whether people like that exist. It's about sweeping, belittling statements, that do nothing but write people off. What benefit is there in speculating that a good chunk of people who get their news from newspapers are feckless alcoholics?

There’s zero benefit.

But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

Except it blatantly isn't true, is it?

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

There are a lot of people who self report that they get their news by glancing at newspaper headlines while buying cheap cider?

I get the point behind what Errkal is presumably trying to say, as Karl said, there is a serious problem with lack of political engagement in working class communities. But that he paints this as people "glancing at headlines as they're buying white lightning," only serves to perpetuate stereotypes about feckless layabouts, whose disinterest in politics is a result of their own poor life choices, rather than the consequence of a system that is designed to try and keep people disengaged. It's talk designed to belittle poor communities who are disengaged, and paint them as people who don't want to help themselves, so why should we help them anyway?

They don’t need to self report, those people exist. I know several of them.

The reasons for it are thanks to decades of right wing policies and the left wing ignoring them. But those people exist.

It’s not a representation of the whole of the working class, they are a tiny part of it, but those people are around.

And they not only exist but they usually have pretty far right views that they’ve picked up from those Mail, Sun and Express headlines. Everything is the fault of immigrants, all politicians are the same, Nigel will save us and Corbyn is a lefty lightweight who will let in hoards of Muslim rapists.

Those people should be helped, but don’t go expecting them to vote for it.

It's not about whether people like that exist. It's about sweeping, belittling statements, that do nothing but write people off. What benefit is there in speculating that a good chunk of people who get their news from newspapers are feckless alcoholics?

There’s zero benefit.

But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

Except it blatantly isn't true, is it?

I literally know people that are feckless alcoholics who get their news (if at all) from tabloid headlines.

So yes, it is blatantly true.

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

There are a lot of people who self report that they get their news by glancing at newspaper headlines while buying cheap cider?

I get the point behind what Errkal is presumably trying to say, as Karl said, there is a serious problem with lack of political engagement in working class communities. But that he paints this as people "glancing at headlines as they're buying white lightning," only serves to perpetuate stereotypes about feckless layabouts, whose disinterest in politics is a result of their own poor life choices, rather than the consequence of a system that is designed to try and keep people disengaged. It's talk designed to belittle poor communities who are disengaged, and paint them as people who don't want to help themselves, so why should we help them anyway?

They don’t need to self report, those people exist. I know several of them.

The reasons for it are thanks to decades of right wing policies and the left wing ignoring them. But those people exist.

It’s not a representation of the whole of the working class, they are a tiny part of it, but those people are around.

And they not only exist but they usually have pretty far right views that they’ve picked up from those Mail, Sun and Express headlines. Everything is the fault of immigrants, all politicians are the same, Nigel will save us and Corbyn is a lefty lightweight who will let in hoards of Muslim rapists.

Those people should be helped, but don’t go expecting them to vote for it.

It's not about whether people like that exist. It's about sweeping, belittling statements, that do nothing but write people off. What benefit is there in speculating that a good chunk of people who get their news from newspapers are feckless alcoholics?

There’s zero benefit.

But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

Except it blatantly isn't true, is it?

I literally know people that are feckless alcoholics who get their news (if at all) from tabloid headlines.

So yes, it is blatantly true.

So because you know a number of people like this, they must make up a "good chunk" of people who get news from newspapers? You don't think this is just wild extrapolation based on your own anecdotal experience?

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

There are a lot of people who self report that they get their news by glancing at newspaper headlines while buying cheap cider?

I get the point behind what Errkal is presumably trying to say, as Karl said, there is a serious problem with lack of political engagement in working class communities. But that he paints this as people "glancing at headlines as they're buying white lightning," only serves to perpetuate stereotypes about feckless layabouts, whose disinterest in politics is a result of their own poor life choices, rather than the consequence of a system that is designed to try and keep people disengaged. It's talk designed to belittle poor communities who are disengaged, and paint them as people who don't want to help themselves, so why should we help them anyway?

They don’t need to self report, those people exist. I know several of them.

The reasons for it are thanks to decades of right wing policies and the left wing ignoring them. But those people exist.

It’s not a representation of the whole of the working class, they are a tiny part of it, but those people are around.

And they not only exist but they usually have pretty far right views that they’ve picked up from those Mail, Sun and Express headlines. Everything is the fault of immigrants, all politicians are the same, Nigel will save us and Corbyn is a lefty lightweight who will let in hoards of Muslim rapists.

Those people should be helped, but don’t go expecting them to vote for it.

It's not about whether people like that exist. It's about sweeping, belittling statements, that do nothing but write people off. What benefit is there in speculating that a good chunk of people who get their news from newspapers are feckless alcoholics?

There’s zero benefit.

But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

Except it blatantly isn't true, is it?

I literally know people that are feckless alcoholics who get their news (if at all) from tabloid headlines.

So yes, it is blatantly true.

So because you know a number of people like this, they must make up a "good chunk" of people who get news from newspapers? You don't think this is just wild extrapolation based on your own anecdotal experience?

You think I just happen to know people like that and that they don’t exist anywhere else in the country?

Ok.

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Moggy wrote:

Knoyleo wrote:

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

This is sneeringly classist from someone who has claimed to be politically left leaning.

Or is this one of your "ironic" posting like a right wing reactionary, posts?

To be fair to Errkal, his post isn’t inaccurate. There are a lot of people like that.

There are a lot of people who self report that they get their news by glancing at newspaper headlines while buying cheap cider?

I get the point behind what Errkal is presumably trying to say, as Karl said, there is a serious problem with lack of political engagement in working class communities. But that he paints this as people "glancing at headlines as they're buying white lightning," only serves to perpetuate stereotypes about feckless layabouts, whose disinterest in politics is a result of their own poor life choices, rather than the consequence of a system that is designed to try and keep people disengaged. It's talk designed to belittle poor communities who are disengaged, and paint them as people who don't want to help themselves, so why should we help them anyway?

They don’t need to self report, those people exist. I know several of them.

The reasons for it are thanks to decades of right wing policies and the left wing ignoring them. But those people exist.

It’s not a representation of the whole of the working class, they are a tiny part of it, but those people are around.

And they not only exist but they usually have pretty far right views that they’ve picked up from those Mail, Sun and Express headlines. Everything is the fault of immigrants, all politicians are the same, Nigel will save us and Corbyn is a lefty lightweight who will let in hoards of Muslim rapists.

Those people should be helped, but don’t go expecting them to vote for it.

It's not about whether people like that exist. It's about sweeping, belittling statements, that do nothing but write people off. What benefit is there in speculating that a good chunk of people who get their news from newspapers are feckless alcoholics?

There’s zero benefit.

But that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

Except it blatantly isn't true, is it?

I literally know people that are feckless alcoholics who get their news (if at all) from tabloid headlines.

So yes, it is blatantly true.

So because you know a number of people like this, they must make up a "good chunk" of people who get news from newspapers? You don't think this is just wild extrapolation based on your own anecdotal experience?

You think I just happen to know people like that and that they don’t exist anywhere else in the country?

Ok.

Yes, I genuinely think alcoholism only exists in the area immediately around your house, that's definitely what I'm saying.

Oblomov Boblomov wrote:We're not allowed to insult poor people on here Moggy, for FFS get with it.

Errkal wrote:

Moggy wrote:
I am surprised that the numbers are still that high for newspapers, I can't remember the last time I even read one.

When you look at opinions of the general public I think that surprise drops off.

I suspect a good chunk of the people “that get their news from the papers” are literally reading the headline as they pick up their 12 litres of white lightning and forming all their opinions from that.

Qikz wrote:The BBC is strawberry floating shite. They bring people on to discuss things we know are imperically incorrect for the sake of impartiality.

They bought someone on to discuss the strawberry floating flat earth theory for instance. strawberry float off.

Abacus wrote:Facebook, Twitter, Instagram? Is this just news for people that can't read?

Peter Crisp wrote:I honestly don't understand how people can see facebook as a viable source for news.
It's like expecting decent journalism from a trip down the pub and talking to random drunks.

Lotus wrote: and overly PC nonsense. It's also difficult to navigate and find things once they've gone from the front page.

I also get a bit of news from the Guardian. I tend to visit the website most days, partly for the news, but partly to see what they're hand-wringing about, and what they're on their high horse about. It's good for a laugh in that respect.