Nigelb said:

SeanT said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

SeanT said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Whilst it does seem the Times is the one to alter the image, I think Mr. Observer's reaction at first glance is reasonable (although clearly needs amending given that, for whatever reason, the Times have lightened it).

No, it's a stupid reaction. Anyone with a brain would know that the Sun picture eds are most unlikely to be hateful race baiters fuelled by Brexit loathing of Ms Miller.

But Southam desperately WANTED to believe this, so he leapt to a ludicrous conclusion.

It shows that there are credulous nitwits on all sides of this debate. Brexit is sending people bonkers.

I remember some people claimed that the sun and daily mail only photoed the one or two child migrants who looked a bit old, until it was revealed it was Getty who took the images and all looked similarly not a child.

Yep. Exactly the same mental process.

To be fair, it's not surprising that people are skeptical about press photos these days:

http://petapixel.com/2016/10/26/world-press-photo-debut-new-photo-contest-no-rules/
The prestigious World Press Photo contest has been tarnished in recent years by findings of inappropriate staging and digital manipulation of photos. So, the organizers have come up with a solution: there will soon be a new separate contest that does away with all the rules.

World Press Photo announced today that starting in October 2017, there will be a brand new contest for “creative documentary photography” (the official name has yet to be finalized).

Unlike the organization’s traditional contest for photojournalists, which disqualified 20% of finalists last year and subsequently implemented a Code of Ethics, the new contest won’t be bound by journalism ethics.

“This contest will be for professional visual storytellers who, in wanting to communicate about actual people, events or issues, deploy creative techniques in constructing, processing and presenting images,” World Press Photo says. “This contest will not have rules limiting how images are produced, and will not have categories.”…

Who can forget this:
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1363800/images/n-FARAGE-MOUSTACHE-628x314.jpg
or this:
http://i.huffpost.com/gen/1382184/thumbs/o-FARAGE-570.jpg?6

Mr. glw, oh, aye. Sky wet themselves, if memory serves, over a 0.1% increase in inflation.

Not quite Hannibal Ad Portas.

weejonnie said:

The last desperate throw of the dice by the Republicans.

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/11/04/erik-prince-nypd-ready-make-arrests-weiner-case/

The rumours over the FBI "investigation" into the Clinton Foundation are eye popping. Suggestion of rogue right wing agents trying to create a case out of "Clinton's Cash" book by Breitbart's Editor-at-Large.

Djoko loses first set.......

SeanT said:

JosiasJessop said:

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

On that picture, the following (emailed to me by a friend) is highly relevant:

https://twitter.com/BenCawthra/status/794510535807090693

I was right, and it was obvious I was right. Yet the mad Remainers WANTED to believe so very very much.

There's quite a few people on Twitter now who could face a successful libel action from the Sun.

Sean, I realise that a soft Devonian cream-tea boy such as yourself finds such things hard to understand, but I was a remain voter, and I pointed out that piccies of her in Google Images showed her having a wide range of skin tones, and that it was a non-story.

It's not a remain versus leave thing. It's a people-want-to-believe-anything-that-matches-their-prejudices thing, and that's something we all fall into at times.

BTW, she has a lovely smile in the Times photo.

But we agree. That's my point. Brexit is sending Britain bonkers, and even previously sensible people (like Southam) are leaping to absurd conclusions if what they read confirms their prejudices (as you say).

This is happening on BOTH sides, it's not just the Leavers who are "paranoid".

I feel a fucking idiot, frankly. Even as I retweeted those things I heard in my head printing and reproduction and contrasting and technicalities. I should have realised. I guess I did want it to be true. That is bad.

Alistair said:

weejonnie said:

The last desperate throw of the dice by the Republicans.

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/11/04/erik-prince-nypd-ready-make-arrests-weiner-case/

The rumours over the FBI "investigation" into the Clinton Foundation are eye popping. Suggestion of rogue right wing agents trying to create a case out of "Clinton's Cash" book by Breitbart's Editor-at-Large.

Remember that previous equally ridiculous vast right wing conspiracy about Bill Clinton being involved with some teenage intern.

Oh my, Mrs May's majority is getting even smaller

https://twitter.com/BelTel/status/794562158692564993

MattW said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Pulpstar said:

Speaking of libel, could the judges sue the Daily Mail (In particular) ?

Can judges even sue ?

Only central, local government, trade unions and political parties cannot sue for libel, IIRC.

Whether they would of course... not sure what libel there actually is in the DM story.

Can private or public businesses sue for libel?

I am reminded of Professor Richard Murphy who settled after he said some unwise things about Lord Ashcroft, and now seems to spend his time saying unwise things about commercial organisations rather than people.

Making a technically correct judgement (Whatever you think of it) leads to a headline of "Enemy of the people" ?

MonikerDiCanio said:

Alistair said:

weejonnie said:

The last desperate throw of the dice by the Republicans.

http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/11/04/erik-prince-nypd-ready-make-arrests-weiner-case/

The rumours over the FBI "investigation" into the Clinton Foundation are eye popping. Suggestion of rogue right wing agents trying to create a case out of "Clinton's Cash" book by Breitbart's Editor-at-Large.

Remember that previous equally ridiculous vast right wing conspiracy about Bill Clinton being involved with some teenage intern.

Teenage? Why let facts get in the way.....

TheScreamingEagles said:

Oh my, Mrs May's majority is getting even smaller

https://twitter.com/BelTel/status/794562158692564993

Hurrah

Marty the Brit, about time.

SouthamObserver said:

I feel a fucking idiot, frankly. Even as I retweeted those things I heard in my head printing and reproduction and contrasting and technicalities. I should have realised. I guess I did want it to be true. That is bad.

Fair play to you for having the good sense not to keep digging, and the decency to admit your rare mistakes.

If I actually clicked post on some of the stuff I write then I'd be perpetually correcting things and saying sorry. Nowadays when I'm seeing red I usually manage to stop myself before it's too late.

glw said:

Black_Rook said:

At this rate it might soar all the way up to 2%!

Which is exactly where, according to the BoE's own target, it is meant to be.

Doom, gloom, disaster.

Yesterday's hyperventilating BBC news was that "inflation will TRIPLE!" To 2.7% a mere 0.7% above target, and historically still quite a low level.

This morning's hyperventilating BBC news was discussing the terrible inevitable rise in base rates, as they come off the tiny all-time low of 0.25%.

Sometimes news people really do make a mountain out of a molehill.

I can't quite make up my mind which of the following is the most likely explanation:

1. The BBC is full of soft lefties and continuity remainers, desperate to hype up anything which can be spun as evidence of impending doom, however feeble.

2. "Panic panic panic" has better entertainment value than "nothing much going on today."

3. 24 hour news is unduly influenced by the reporting of minutiae, both because such things are talked up into being more important than they actually are by commentators looking to justify their existence, and because a continuous supply of filler material is needed for broadcast schedules and websites.

Probably a combination of all three.

SouthamObserver said:

SeanT said:

JosiasJessop said:

SeanT said:

AlastairMeeks said:

On that picture, the following (emailed to me by a friend) is highly relevant:

https://twitter.com/BenCawthra/status/794510535807090693

I was right, and it was obvious I was right. Yet the mad Remainers WANTED to believe so very very much.

There's quite a few people on Twitter now who could face a successful libel action from the Sun.

Sean, I realise that a soft Devonian cream-tea boy such as yourself finds such things hard to understand, but I was a remain voter, and I pointed out that piccies of her in Google Images showed her having a wide range of skin tones, and that it was a non-story.

It's not a remain versus leave thing. It's a people-want-to-believe-anything-that-matches-their-prejudices thing, and that's something we all fall into at times.

BTW, she has a lovely smile in the Times photo.

But we agree. That's my point. Brexit is sending Britain bonkers, and even previously sensible people (like Southam) are leaping to absurd conclusions if what they read confirms their prejudices (as you say).

This is happening on BOTH sides, it's not just the Leavers who are "paranoid".

I feel a fucking idiot, frankly. Even as I retweeted those things I heard in my head printing and reproduction and contrasting and technicalities. I should have realised. I guess I did want it to be true. That is bad.

Stop the self incrimination SO....... I loved your quip about they may as well put a bone through her nose...that was very funny.....

NEW THREAD

Has Starmer stated that labour's policy on Brexit is to leave the single market.

If so big change in policy

Moses_ said:

BBC Breaking news

New York authorities have made it known they have been " made aware" of s threat of terrorist attack around time of election.


Someone said one terrorist attack might do it for Trump ....what about a threat?

Hasn't the dearth of recent terrorist attacks been explained away by the Trump loonballs/honest, disenfranchised workingfolk as Isis wanting Hils to win? If 'something' happens they'll have a bit of explaining to do.

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/794581888455282689

Ah - but presumably Sinn Fein MPs will have to swear allegiance to Her Maj before they can assume their seats? Awkward!