Brown Broadcasting Corporation defends Budget con

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by lsquared, Mar 22, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. John Humphrys spent most of an interview with George Osborne defending the Budget and the Chancellor. Brown himself is on at 0810, let us listen to Humphrys's snivelling brown-nosing then!

    Osborne descibed the budget as a 'Stealth Budget' - spot on.

    I suppose it is ok on Humphrys's salary to be a 'champagne socialist'.

    I reckon that Brown believes that the poorer, less educated people will not see or realise that the removal of the 10% rate will hit them hard. Mind you with the lack of education provided in the last ten years by this failed and dishonest administration, he could be right.
     
  2. Good morning Isquared,

    I heard it that interview and I must say that in advocacy, it is very easy to gain the impression that an interviewer is partisan when what he is actually doing is testing the evidence for a contention advanced by an interviewee.

    If [A], a journalist, interviews , the latter holding one political stance, while [A] a journalist adopts the same stance, then it is unlikely in the extreme that anything at all will be 'teased out' in interview since both will be consensus ad idem.

    It is the interviewer's job, in the absence of [C], who might adopt a different political stance to that of , to stand in locum to [C] and adopt an adversarial line of questioning in order to test the contention advanced by . It is basic adverserial advocacy and should not be confused with a partisan view on the part of the journalist and I can well understand how it could be taken that way.

    Regards and best wishes to you.

    Iolis
     
  3. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator



    Iolis,

    You are practising for the Bar aren't you? :thumright:

    I accept your point but would point out it is not the job of the [A] to overly simplify s points and attempt to isolate a statement that may be factually true but is also wholly inaccurate when taken out of context on [C]s behalf. That is the job of a lawyer!

    It is a [A] job to portray the information accurately and understandably in its totality to the populous rather than acting as a politicians lapdog to best portray a (in this case [C]s) view, especially as [C] is on to make his own arguments far more accurately than [A] could do shortly afterwards.

    Humphries does have a tendency to go for the dramatic these days. Listening to him this morning I was annoyed at his going after the minor point (to score points) rather than debating the rather wider issue (the overall level of taxation in general).

    I'm going to miss the Brown interview so look forward to more ranting later!

    On this mornings offering so far, I must side with ISquared.
     


  4. You didn't miss much... and I gave up when he repeated the mantra "this is the most radical tax reform for 20 years" for the third time! What most commentators appear to have missed is that nearly all of the changes will not take effect until Apr 2008 - and some of the changes will not happen until 2010, which gives plenty of time for them to be adjusted!

    The other impact of this Budget is that some of the lower income groups will be disadvantaged by the removal of the 10% limit, and other fiddles. I note the Budget Report identifies a considerable number of people earning less than the national average who suffer tax rates of 60% and more! Some incentive to get off their arrses and work....!

    Litotes
     
  5. Up here in the Frozen North the Beeb has really slammed the budget, so perhaps it is down to individuals rather than corporate Beeb policy. Last night a labor politician was figuratively pinned against the studio wall over claims that Brown had actually given money away.

    Peter
     
  6. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    The 'Today' piece sounded exactly as if it were the Government and the Opposition arguing about the Budget, rather than the Opposition and a supposedly neutral broadcaster. The one clear fact is that, whichever way you cut it, overall tax take is set to increase as a result of this budget, everything else is spin.

    Again, I am left to wonder how I can stop paying my licence fee to support these twats - any (legal) ideas gratefully received!