|
Post by Tim on May 26, 2020 11:14:43 GMT
I haven't really bothered with this beyond the headlines but I find it disappointing.
I've read a bit about Cummings and once you get past his attitude he seems to have some reasonable views, certainly not in line with the more right wing frothing of some small but loud parts of the Tory party. It looks/looked like some of the policies he was promoting when Boris became PM were quite socially thoughtful.
He seems to have made a thing about him being an outsider, etc but all that has been spectacularly shot down because in the space of 10 months of being the PMs chief adviser he's fallen into the age old political trap of 'do what I say, not what I do'. His approach to dealing with the apparent mistake has been piss poor.
I don't care whether anyone thinks they would've done the same thing with kids. Government advice has been not to travel if avoidable and if you need to keep it local and also keep young kids away from their grandparents.
I'm sure a wealthy couple living in London with a child could've found a solution rather closer to home.
It's not a party political issue in my eyes, I know they're all at it, rather how can the guy have any credibility in future as an adviser? If some harmful new policy comes up next week/month/year (which is guaranteed as we try to use more austerity or similar recover from the economic situation that's been created) and its got his name anywhere near it how are the general public meant to respond to it? They'll simply say it won't apply to him so why should it apply to them.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 26, 2020 11:15:05 GMT
Not sure I am when you listen (as I did) to what he said. He basically inferred none too subtly that the government couldn't function without his guidance. I'm not be hypocritical either because frankly I entirely sympathise with him for doing what he did, although I do think it was unwise optics for a man in his position. But I can and will strongly criticise his reaction to being criticised, because that sucked big time and unnecessarily put lots of people's backs up. And attacking the media for "fake news" when frankly little of it was fake bothers me deeply, because it speaks to a fundamental disregard for the truth. I'm no lover of the media, but equally I don't want to live in a world where the news is little more than toeing the government's official line, however egregious. The problem is now, more than any time in their history, newspapers broadcast media are relying on sales, clicks and ratings to keep their revenues from dwindling at an even faster pace. Newspapers can't report the news anymore, they have to write news stories that appeal to their target market. Same goes for the broadcast media. There is no point in a newspaper writing the truth if it alienates its readership and sales decline further. My brother has a right bee in his bonnet about Cummings being an unelected special advisor and regularly re-tweets the nonsense Alistair Campbell put out - conveniently forgetting Campbell was an unelected special advisor to Tony Blair (one of 80 - 39 at one time) and de-facto Deputy Prime Minister (he was on the interviewing panel that appointed Blair to Labour leader and demanded that quid pro quo). Special advisors have been around since the Wilson government of the 60s (and before that during wartimes) but, as Michael has mentioned, perhaps Cummings being seen as the architect behind Vote Leave has marked him out for special attention. None of that really addresses either of my points though does it?
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on May 26, 2020 11:34:49 GMT
The problem is now, more than any time in their history, newspapers broadcast media are relying on sales, clicks and ratings to keep their revenues from dwindling at an even faster pace. Newspapers can't report the news anymore, they have to write news stories that appeal to their target market. Same goes for the broadcast media. There is no point in a newspaper writing the truth if it alienates its readership and sales decline further. My brother has a right bee in his bonnet about Cummings being an unelected special advisor and regularly re-tweets the nonsense Alistair Campbell put out - conveniently forgetting Campbell was an unelected special advisor to Tony Blair (one of 80 - 39 at one time) and de-facto Deputy Prime Minister (he was on the interviewing panel that appointed Blair to Labour leader and demanded that quid pro quo). Special advisors have been around since the Wilson government of the 60s (and before that during wartimes) but, as Michael has mentioned, perhaps Cummings being seen as the architect behind Vote Leave has marked him out for special attention. None of that really addresses either of my points though does it? People will infer what they want to based on their pre-formed opinions. I just saw a guy pointing out he had an important job to do. Please see preceding sentence. When criticized you can either consider it valid, or reject it and defend your position. If he genuinely believes he has done nothing wrong then he should defend himself. I want to live in a world where the truth is reported. Hope that clarifies my position.
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 26, 2020 11:35:33 GMT
From what I'm seeing through other channels the public are increasingly pissed off with the wall to wall news coverage of this issue so I'd be wary of thinking Cummings has played this badly and more likely to think he now sees an opportunity to highlight the behaviour of the media in relation to the pandemic. That the six top stories on the BBC news app are about DC is somewhat embarrassing from the national broadcaster during a global pandemic.
|
|
|
Post by johnc on May 26, 2020 11:44:21 GMT
From what I'm seeing through other channels the public are increasingly pissed off with the wall to wall news coverage of this issue so I'd be wary of thinking Cummings has played this badly and more likely to think he now sees an opportunity to highlight the behaviour of the media in relation to the pandemic. That the six top stories on the BBC news app are about DC is somewhat embarrassing from the national broadcaster during a global pandemic. I turned the TV off at breakfast this morning because that was all they could talk about.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on May 26, 2020 11:56:36 GMT
That the six top stories on the BBC news app are about DC is somewhat embarrassing from the national broadcaster during a global pandemic. Isn't that driven by what people are actually looking at though?
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 26, 2020 11:56:49 GMT
None of that really addresses either of my points though does it? I want to live in a world where the truth is reported. Which is exactly what I said. And all I pointed out, assessing what he said entirely objectively, was that Cummings, a master manipulator of the media, chose to go on a rant about fake news, when it seems little of it was actually fake news. This wasn't aimed at the media. It was aimed at the viewing public in order to provide the government's supporters with what they want to hear, and will swallow with no measure of objectivity whatsoever. That's just depressing. That's not a Tory thing by the way. All political parties have their supporters for whom their chosen party and its representatives are sacred and beyond criticism. I have great difficulty with such people, who strike me as the worst sort of sheep. In that, I suspect Dominic Cummings and I are entirely aligned.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2020 12:12:25 GMT
Well, I did start this thread by pointing out the crass behaviour of the media/press. There have been many attempts made to curb their conduct and they have always gone on about freedom of the press and they cannot or will not control themselves so someone else will have to.
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 26, 2020 12:12:26 GMT
That the six top stories on the BBC news app are about DC is somewhat embarrassing from the national broadcaster during a global pandemic. Isn't that driven by what people are actually looking at though? I should have been more clear, the top stories as curated by the BBC were all on Cummings. There were at least a further three as I scrolled through the feed earlier.
|
|
|
Post by PG on May 26, 2020 12:18:07 GMT
People will infer what they want to based on their pre-formed opinions... This is pretty much where we are (for an awful lot of people) with this and pretty much any issue that comes along it seems. And that is because as soon as any issue comes along, rather than laying out all the pros and cons and admitting that it is bloody hard to form a definite opinion as everything in life is really shades of grey, politicians and the media get the trenching tools and the barbed wire out and take up their decided position. Never to be swayed from it.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 26, 2020 12:28:13 GMT
I thought we'd all been quite reasonable on here actually.
|
|
|
Post by PG on May 26, 2020 12:43:53 GMT
I thought we'd all been quite reasonable on here actually. I was referring more to the usual suspects - the lobby groups, the nutter wing on each extreme of any issue, the politicos, the press. If the government take position A, then it is almost impossible for the opposition to do anything but take position B and for the press and media to fall in behind in their pre-ordained positions. The DC story is a prime example. Bloke does stupid thing. Probably lawful, but hey, it's all a bit grey and vague depending on how you interpret stuff. Can't apologise as that will lead to resignation calls as much as doing the wrong thing and not apologising. So sticks it out. Cue media and political frenzy - everyone has an axe to grind and all they do is grind it. Classic case - I did see a comment elsewhere (from an anti-DC source) that even if what DC did was OK, then he and the government are just as much at fault for not pulicising properly that it was OK to move kids for care reasons in emergencies. Boris and DC are still dickheads etc. Talk about pots and kettles. No thought that the press are just as much guilty of not bothering to properly understand the rules (or seek clarification) and explain them and report that properly.
|
|
|
Post by garry on May 26, 2020 14:40:21 GMT
I thought we'd all been quite reasonable on here actually. For what it’s worth I really enjoy the range of opinions and debate on here. Many online forums are either not interested in topics outside of the core interest of the forum or are so politically biased that they’re just an echo chamber for one viewpoint. There’s a broader range of views on here that make the debate interesting.
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on May 26, 2020 14:45:16 GMT
I find the fascination people have in this story the most odd. Does anyone really give a monkeys? Plenty worse things are happening out there. All I see is pompous bloke takes family for a drive up north because he though that the best thing to do for his family at that time. You don't go visiting the in-laws if you don't have to! This Barnard castle thing is a little naughty but hardly a sacking offense is it. I honestly wouldn't last 5 minutes in the government and the weaselly people we now have running the country is of our own creation as we can't possibly have 'normal' folks running the funny farm as nearly everyones got skeletons in the cupboard. Maybe but as was said on BBC radio this morning, very many of us abandoned trips to see our mums on Mothers Day, many people have foregone going to see a dying close relative and have not gone to the funeral because Boris said so, yet Cummings has turned a blind eye and carried on as if he was above taking note and obeying.
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 26, 2020 14:49:19 GMT
Maybe but as was said on BBC radio this morning, very many of us abandoned trips to see our mums on Mothers Day, many people have foregone going to see a dying close relative and have not gone to the funeral because Boris said so, yet Cummings has turned a blind eye and carried on as if he was above taking note and obeying. Is protecting your child from harm in the same category as not visiting your mother on Mothers day?
|
|
|
Post by ChrisM on May 26, 2020 14:55:41 GMT
^ Well, it was reported that they were staying in London and relocated to Durham. Where were they staying in London? If it counted as "home" rather than being in a hotel, for example, then they should have stayed there and not travelled, particularly if they thought that they had the virus.
I have not yet forgotten that our family had to cancel our lunch with mum, both my daughters were to have travelled from their respective homes to see her (elder one with her 2 youngsters) and my wife & I were going from our home, yet we all had to call our plans off and eat at our respective homes. I do hope that we will all be able to reconvene some time in the not-too-distant future, but at the moment it is hard to say when that is likely to happen..... most possibly not this year
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 26, 2020 15:00:52 GMT
Maybe but as was said on BBC radio this morning, very many of us abandoned trips to see our mums on Mothers Day, many people have foregone going to see a dying close relative and have not gone to the funeral because Boris said so, yet Cummings has turned a blind eye and carried on as if he was above taking note and obeying. Is protecting your child from harm in the same category as not visiting your mother on Mothers day? No, but not visiting a dying parent or child probably is.
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 26, 2020 15:01:44 GMT
A few things have now been reported not all of which are true. He and his family have isolated closer to help in order than their 4 year old child could be cared for should they both be taken ill. That seems to be like exercising personal judgement to make the best of a situation. It's actually quite a lot different to having to cancel a meal.
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 26, 2020 15:03:40 GMT
Is protecting your child from harm in the same category as not visiting your mother on Mothers day? No, but not visiting a dying parent or child probably is. No it isn't. One is an example of protection from harm the other is becoming exposed to a risk of potential harm.
|
|
|
Post by garry on May 26, 2020 15:08:03 GMT
Maybe but as was said on BBC radio this morning, very many of us abandoned trips to see our mums on Mothers Day, many people have foregone going to see a dying close relative and have not gone to the funeral because Boris said so, yet Cummings has turned a blind eye and carried on as if he was above taking note and obeying. Is protecting your child from harm in the same category as not visiting your mother on Mothers day? I’ve got a much closer example. My sister was feeling ill in mid April. She’s single with two kids and her only local support are my elderly parents. I had a rental house that was empty near me and there’s enough fitter younger people in my family ( her nieces and nephews, all older teenagers) that we could have worked something out. I wanted her to come over. I even offered to drive and fetch her but she was so worried about breaking the law that she wouldn’t do it and was so concerned that she’d be potentially killing one of her nieces or nephews.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 26, 2020 15:10:48 GMT
A few things have now been reported not all of which are true. He and his family have isolated closer to help in order than their 4 year old child could be cared for should they both be taken ill. Yes, but some friends of ours drove to their cottage in Norfolk for precisely the same reason of being close to her family for assistance with childcare, only for the police to turn up within the hour of them arriving and give them 15 minutes to pack up and drive back to London, after somebody in the village reported them. And theirs is hardly an isolated case. The media (them again) has been full of outraged reports about dastardly Londoners breaking rules and going to their country retreats or back to their families. So it's not like the media has attacked Cummings for something that it hasn't in fact attacked all London-based families for doing. And it does smack of one rule for the rulers and another rule for the ruled.
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 26, 2020 15:15:29 GMT
Is protecting your child from harm in the same category as not visiting your mother on Mothers day? I’ve got a much closer example. My sister was feeling ill in mid April. She’s single with two kids and her only local support are my elderly parents. I had a rental house that was empty near me and there’s enough fitter younger people in my family ( her nieces and nephews, all older teenagers) that we could have worked something out. I wanted her to come over. I even offered to drive and fetch her but she was so worried about breaking the law that she wouldn’t do it and was so concerned that she’d be potentially killing one of her nieces or nephews. Then she wouldn't have been breaking the law as she would have been acting in the interest of her children's well-being. My sister in-law gave birth last week, we thought she was going to be readmitted this week and so she was in the situation where her other two children would need care. We were ready to go down and help and if challenged we'd argue our corner but I highly doubt we'd need too as it's common sense.
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on May 26, 2020 15:16:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by michael on May 26, 2020 15:18:15 GMT
A few things have now been reported not all of which are true. He and his family have isolated closer to help in order than their 4 year old child could be cared for should they both be taken ill. Yes, but some friends of ours drove to their cottage in Norfolk for precisely the same reason of being close to her family for assistance with childcare, only for the police to turn up within the hour of them arriving and give them 15 minutes to pack up and drive back to London, after somebody in the village reported them. And theirs is hardly an isolated case. The media (them again) has been full of outraged reports about dastardly Londoners breaking rules and going to their country retreats or back to their families. So it's not like the media has attacked Cummings for something that it hasn't in fact attacked all London-based families for doing. And it does smack of one rule for the rulers and another rule for the ruled. North Yorkshire police have also behaved in a shocking manner, plenty have. This is in addition to the sanctimonious arseholes who are reporting people for an infringement left, right and centre because that's the worst thing about all this - we've turned into a society that excels at telling other people what to do.
|
|
|
Post by PetrolEd on May 26, 2020 17:02:21 GMT
A few things have now been reported not all of which are true. He and his family have isolated closer to help in order than their 4 year old child could be cared for should they both be taken ill. Yes, but some friends of ours drove to their cottage in Norfolk for precisely the same reason of being close to her family for assistance with childcare, only for the police to turn up within the hour of them arriving and give them 15 minutes to pack up and drive back to London, after somebody in the village reported them. And theirs is hardly an isolated case. The media (them again) has been full of outraged reports about dastardly Londoners breaking rules and going to their country retreats or back to their families. So it's not like the media has attacked Cummings for something that it hasn't in fact attacked all London-based families for doing. And it does smack of one rule for the rulers and another rule for the ruled. That sounds ridiculous. At that stage I'd have asked to be arrested as I wasn't going anywhere. Tell me he didn't just turn home. Gordon Ramsey has been all over the media having moved down to Cornwall and some of the locals are in a huff about it but thats more down to disliking rich Londoners then anything else. As far as I'm aware he's still there. Having looked at the posher parts of London the whole place has become vacated.
|
|
|
Post by Big Blue on May 26, 2020 17:57:33 GMT
The owner of the business my friend manages also high-tailed off to his house in the West Country. As she drives a bright blue Range Rover and his daily driver is an Orange McLaren I don’t think they were concerned about discretion.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Sacamano v2.0 on May 26, 2020 18:01:01 GMT
Yes, but some friends of ours drove to their cottage in Norfolk for precisely the same reason of being close to her family for assistance with childcare, only for the police to turn up within the hour of them arriving and give them 15 minutes to pack up and drive back to London, after somebody in the village reported them. And theirs is hardly an isolated case. The media (them again) has been full of outraged reports about dastardly Londoners breaking rules and going to their country retreats or back to their families. So it's not like the media has attacked Cummings for something that it hasn't in fact attacked all London-based families for doing. And it does smack of one rule for the rulers and another rule for the ruled. North Yorkshire police have also behaved in a shocking manner, plenty have. This is in addition to the sanctimonious arseholes who are reporting people for an infringement left, right and centre because that's the worst thing about all this - we've turned into a society that excels at telling other people what to do. I used to wonder how the Stasi in East Germany got half its citizens to spy and report on the other half. Turns out it’s not difficult and we’re no different to the East Germans.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 26, 2020 20:21:40 GMT
Well indeed.
As regards Londoners vacating the place, it's still pretty full. After all, most people cannot afford a second home on top of having bought an overpriced London home. And in fact, only one of our immediate neighbours has left for the countryside, and I know of one other family in the development who went to a family property in Norfolk. The rest have stayed put. We are also lucky as this development has a lot of private outside green space by London standards.
|
|
|
Post by PG on May 27, 2020 7:04:46 GMT
I used to wonder how the Stasi in East Germany got half its citizens to spy and report on the other half. Turns out it’s not difficult and we’re no different to the East Germans. +1. It has been pretty shocking how quickly people become like that.
|
|
|
Post by racingteatray on May 27, 2020 8:35:04 GMT
I read this piece in the Spectator over breakfast and thought it was on the money. Particularly the point about understanding that perception is sometimes being more important than truth. That's advice my father drilled into us all children, along with an admonishment to never assume or presume anything. www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-dominic-cummings-must-go
|
|