Race report: 'UK not deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities'

Tony Edwards said:
But they did reject it as soon as it came out. The weird thing is even Boris sort of tried to distance himself from it.
Click to expand...

Link to any of commissioners rejecting it immediately?

There was a lot of noise from charities, organisations and individuals, including some who were consulted or cited, but that's not members of the commission

They certainly didn't do so here, for example.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-commission-on-race-and-ethnic-disparities-statement
 
At what point can we start stating that Guardian opinion articles are as bad as DM opinion articles.

Samuel Kasumu, No 10’s most senior black special adviser, who resigned from his post on the day the report was published, aghast at its final findings.
Click to expand...

Nosheen Iqbal writing for the Observer, for the Guardian, circle jerks Guardian articles as a source then instead of the safety of implications went for fiction to fit the agenda.
 
Dolph said:
Link to any of commissioners rejecting it immediately?

There was a lot of noise from charities, organisations and individuals, including some who were consulted or cited, but that's not members of the commission

They certainly didn't do so here, for example.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-commission-on-race-and-ethnic-disparities-statement
Click to expand...
To be fair you said
I'd have expected the experts to whistleblow on this immediately if they genuinely thought this, not nearly a month later.
Click to expand...
And there are many that did. Some even said despite being named they hadnt even contributed.
 
Tony Edwards said:
To be fair you said And there are many that did. Some even said despite being named they hadnt even contributed.
Click to expand...

I'd hoped you'd actually read the link, but to be fair I probably should have been more specific.

The link is explicitly about people on the commission (some anonymously)now rejecting it, several weeks after publication.
 
Dolph said:
Exactly, that's the reason why I have doubts about the motivations and credibility of doing it now.
Click to expand...
Maybe thats the reason they felt they couldnt come out earlier?

Every single person or organisation that has spoken against it has been vilified. Anyway lets wait and see how this developes before we really get to make any real conclusions.
 
Well I watched the last 1h interview posted in this thread, lets give this one a go also.

After all, aren't you a massive douchebag if you argue about a report you don't read and ignore a massive interview with a report commissioner involved in writing it.
 
Hotwired said:
At what point can we start stating that Guardian opinion articles are as bad as DM opinion articles.
Click to expand...
The Guardian is run through a trust specifically designed and established to ensure integrity and independence.

The Daily Mail is owned by the same aristocratic family of fascists who founded it with the stated intention of feeding its readers their "daily hate".

So the answer to your question depends on whether you're capable of any sort of vaguely honest assessment.
 
Hotwired said:
Well I watched the last 1h interview posted in this thread, lets give this one a go also.

After all, aren't you a massive douchebag if you argue about a report you don't read and ignore a massive interview with a report commissioner involved in writing it.
Click to expand...
LOL

Arent you a massive douchebag if you ignore what other experts in these fields have to say?
 
garnett said:
The Guardian is run through a trust specifically designed and established to ensure integrity and independence.

The Daily Mail is owned by the same aristocratic family of fascists who founded it with the stated intention of feeding its readers their "daily hate".

So the answer to your question depends on whether you're capable of any sort of vaguely honest assessment.
Click to expand...
The Guardian has a very clear agenda. Anyone capable of making a vaguely honest assessment can see what that agenda (and bias) is.

I'm not saying the DM is better, btw.

They are both publications with an agenda and a clearly defined target audience. I wouldn't expect either to report on anything without injecting their particular bias.
 
Hotwired said:
That doesn't exclude slanting its opinion stories to an angle, as the DM does in its opinion pieces and as I picked up, that writer was being economical with the facts despite linking the source being used.
Click to expand...
The problem suffered by many on here is an hilarious inability to recognise they're so far right, everything looks leftwing to them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom