- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
Marvellous put-down.The HIGNFY Twitter Account said:
It is a pity that OFCOM rules forced the BBC's hand, the show would probably have been hilarious
BBC pulls HIGNFY with ½ hour's notice.
- Thread starter stockhausen
- Start date
It is a pity that OFCOM rules forced the BBC's hand, the show would probably have been hilarious
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 30,051
Yet they are allowed to have Farage spouting nonsense on Question Time...
And still the panel for QT was 2 to 3 in favour of Remain, and that was a good day for QT!
And by the way he was the only one spouting the truth on QT while Soubury was the one shouting nonsense and mis-quoting facts and bare faced lying live on air. The audience saw right through her
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 4,988
- Location
- South Wirral
We tuned in to watch this last night and were more than a little peed off to see a repeat of Mrs Browns Boys on instead. On the face of it this is ridiculous and claiming something about tainting an election she's not standing for that is happening over two weeks away is complete bull poop. I suspect there is something else involved and no-one is talking. If they are telling the truth then I will be extremely happy to not see any politicians on my screen until 10:01pm on 23rd May.
EDIT: So on reading the BBC news story we'd have missed it anyway due to turning channel too late
I'd hardly call going up against Hislop and Merton as "unopposed". Any politician going on HIGNFY needs a thick skin and sense of humour.
EDIT: So on reading the BBC news story we'd have missed it anyway due to turning channel too late
I'd hardly call going up against Hislop and Merton as "unopposed". Any politician going on HIGNFY needs a thick skin and sense of humour.
Last edited:
I think the issue with HIGNFY compared to QT is that Heidi Allen would have been 'politically unopposed' on the panel, whereas QT was 'balanced' between different points of view.
There's a thread on Reddit about this and someone who was in the audience did an AMA. Doesn't sound like Allen said anything that would have caused any controversy but I suppose they have to follow the rules.
I'm not going to get into the debate of BBC impartiality or whether QT was balanced (is it ever). While I can understand the issue, surely it's something that could have been predicted and mitigated by booking a different guest?
There's a thread on Reddit about this and someone who was in the audience did an AMA. Doesn't sound like Allen said anything that would have caused any controversy but I suppose they have to follow the rules.
I'm not going to get into the debate of BBC impartiality or whether QT was balanced (is it ever). While I can understand the issue, surely it's something that could have been predicted and mitigated by booking a different guest?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,766
- Location
- Welling, London
What a stupid thing to say. That’s because there were people from different parties debating on Question Time, not one sole politician.
I’m getting so tired of people saying Farage should not be given airtime, he deserves as much as anyone else, he is the leader of a political party fighting in an upcoming election.
He deserves as much air time as any other leader of a political party with no policies, no manifesto, no councillors, no MPs and no MEPs…
Considering he has had:
- More appearances on QT than any other individual this century.
- More appearances on QT than any other recent political party leader in total.
- More appearances on QT (other than Caroline Lucas) than any other recent political party leader since he left UKIP (including the various UKIP leaders combined).
- More appearances on QT as an average per year than any other recent political party leader.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,549
- Location
- La France
I’m sorry, did I miss the introduction of a new law requiring politicians to tell the absolute truth at all times? PMQs is going to be fun!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 1 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 53,766
- Location
- Welling, London
Considering sitting next to him was Amber Rudd, who forced to resign over misleading parliament.
He deserves as much air time as any other leader of a political party with no policies, no manifesto, no councillors, no MPs and no MEPs…
Considering he has had:
I would say maybe, just maybe, he's getting more than his fair share of airtime on QT.
- More appearances on QT than any other individual this century.
- More appearances on QT than any other recent political party leader in total.
- More appearances on QT (other than Caroline Lucas) than any other recent political party leader since he left UKIP (including the various UKIP leaders).
- More appearances on QT as an average per year than any other recent political party leader.
He was the leader of UKIP which had all of those things, he was also an MEP, then he was one the leading people pushing for Brexit, now he's leading the Brexit party which is 30 points ahead in polling ahead of the European elections. There's also a distinct lack of main stream Politicians who actually support Brexit, so if you want someone to oppose the Remain side you're not spoiled for choice.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2017
- Posts
- 9,722
- Location
- Beds
I'm confused by the comparison between a political discussion via panel and... A comedy quiz show for entertainment with guest competitors.
HIGNFY doesn't need political balance and no one is "unopposed" because it's not a political debate.
HIGNFY doesn't need political balance and no one is "unopposed" because it's not a political debate.
Too right.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2018
- Posts
- 13,316
Sorry to be pedantic, but 30 points ahead of who? I think you mean standing at 30 points.
There is also a very good reason there is a distinct lack of main stream Politicians who actually support Brexit.
Sorry to be pedantic, but 30 points ahead of who? I think you mean standing at 30 points.
There is also a very good reason there is a distinct lack of main stream Politicians who actually support Brexit.
Nah you're right, I just remembered incorrectly something I'd heard earlier in the week, I should've checked that before posting.
This sounds to me like when the BBC bring on a flat-earther/anti-vaxxer/climate-change denier to debate a scientist or expert in the name of 'balance'. The problem is that you then legitimise the fringe view.
In fact, I would argue that Brexit is a case study in the above.
The vast majority of the population didn't give a toss about 'The EU' until Farage started appearing on our screens. There was a small Euroskeptic wing of the Tory party and an even smaller number of anti-EU Labour members (like Corbyn) and that was about it. As far as 'the people' went, there were much bigger things to worry about. Now it's practically an identity-defining issue (for both sides).
You might think that if you don't live in one of the many small working class towns or poorer areas that saw a lot of immigration from the EU, I don't personally have much of an issue with EU immigration and haven't been personally affected, but a lot of people from these areas do and that's why he has so much support.
You're conflating science with political views... someone believing in a flat earth is just plain wrong, someone holding an opinion on Brexit one way or the other is expressing a political opinion. Someone expressing an opinion on Brexit might well make factually incorrect claims and those can of course be exposed but the political position of being for or against with respect to say the referendum question etc.. is one that requires balance. Belief in a flat earth on the other hand isn't something that requires balance.
Yeah surprised Irish_Tom did that to be fair, I know people on the Remain side don't think leaving is a good idea but to compare it to "a flat-earther/anti-vaxxer/climate-change denier" is pretty silly. There are legitimate arguments on both sides.
All politicians spout nonsense on question time.
