Jeremy Corbyn's Labour win Oldham byelection increasing vote share to a massive 62.27% Watch the media report it as a 'reduced majority' to try to make it look negative!

[theunfairersex]

The Labour Party have just won the Oldham byelection with a hugely increased vote share, although total votes were down due to a lower turnout which is normal for a byelection.

The mainstream media just cannot bear to report anything about Mr Corbyn positively so it will bound to be reported as a 'reduced majority.'

Ask yourself why they might need to do this!?

[YokoUhOh]

The BBC announced it as both 'a decreased majority' and 'a bigger share of the vote'. Make up your minds!

[DoctorTwo]

Of course they report negatively, they've got to keep up their 'Corbyn is unelectable' narrative. Unfortunately for them more and more of us take no notice of them.

[EnaSharplesHairnet]

I admit that I was wrong, JC clearly is the Messiah!

Watching BBC last night they said increased vote share on a lower turnout which is fair I think.
It was a short, miserable December day.

The Labour candidate was very strong local man (who said he had backed Liz Kendall.)_

[angemorange]

A bit of good news in an otherwise depressing week :)

[BMW6]

BBC this morning reported the win as an increased majority. Even the Daily Mail has reported increase in vote share since the GE......

Conspiracy fail, Op!

[Tiredemma]

BBc reported it as a 'comfortable' win

[PausingFlatly]

Oh I saw the BBC report late last night: headline was definitely "decreased majority" (and I didn't have time to read it all, so that's what I went to sleep believing).

Looks like they've changed their tune since.

[chantico]

I was a bit pissed off when the media describe it as the "first" real test of his leadership. Are they airbrushing out the challenges of the Syria vote?

[PausingFlatly]

(This was the website.)

[EnaSharplesHairnet]

Pausing by "read it" I presume it was on-line?

I think the BBC website comes across as operated by one man and his dog.

[EnaSharplesHairnet]

Sorry I missed the obvious update. Coffee alert for me!

[EnaSharplesHairnet]

For accuracy I look at Reuters.

[worldgonecrazy]

The Mail spun it as a majority "despite the Corbyn effect"

... and yesterday evening the media were predicting a majority that might be reduced to a thousand . . . .

[EnaSharplesHairnet]

Looking at the figures the Conservative vote dropped a lot. Maybe that was the McMahon effect?
The Corbyn effect may be the swing from the Greens.
Who knows?

[theunfairersex]

Not at all a conspiracy fail. The very first headline on BBC online after the announcement was actually....

'Labour win Oldham with reduced majority.'

However, this had changed by this morning, so maybe someone in the editorial team responded quickly enough to complaints of bias.

Try checking some other media and see the way it's reported.

Daily Mail report said.....

'Jeremy Corbyn's beleaguered Labour win Oldham with 62%

What a funny way to be beleaguered

The Telegraph said.....

'The lower turn out means Labour's majority increased from 34 to 39 per cent'

.......as a rule, anyone that follows these sorts of things knows that lower turn out would normally mean a reduced majority for an incumbent.

Radio 5 last night, said......

'Corbyn wins with decreased majority'

and then quickly followed with...

'So, I suppose now it is on to the next problem for the Labour party.

There has also been some research done on media bias in the run up to the poll which shows an absolute overwhelming bias against Labour and Corbyn.

Looks like the good people of Oldham were too intelligent to swallow all the propaganda.

Good luck to them!

[EnaSharplesHairnet]

I think a lot of people can't "see" numbers or talk about them accurately.

[EnaSharplesHairnet]

The Telegraph example is just written by a numerical illiterate.

[theunfairersex]

Just to clarify, he wasn't an incumbent (Jim McMahon) but the Labour Party were in incumbency.

[theunfairersex]

"I think a lot of people can't "see" numbers or talk about them accurately"

Absolutely agree with that.

Most people will just hear what they think they hear, hence the news organizations using very specific phrases to confuse people.

[EnaSharplesHairnet]

You are assuming the scriptwriter on FiveLive or whATEVER knows what they are talking about!

iF I have any real life knowledge of a situation I am usually surprised at the ineptness of the reporting.