AIBU to wonder why this Dutch EU referendum is not getting wider publicity in our news?

[SpringingIntoAction]

The Dutch are voting today on closer EU / Ukraine relationship.

Given the problems that currently exist within Ukraine, and the fact that Putin would not welcome a closer relationship between the EU and Ukraine, I would have expected this to attract more media interest.

www.nytimes.com/2016/04/06/world/europe/dutch-referendum-could-cause-trouble-for-europe.html?_r=0

It is being largely ignored by the press as a no vote is likely and it doesn't suit the pro EU press. It's being played down in the Netherlands too.

The Exit Poll shows:

64% NO

36% YES

To closer EU relationship with Ukraine

Turnout 29%

Referendum may be declared invalid if turnout is below 30%

All figures above subject to 3% +/- margin of error.

EU said before the referendum that a No vote could provoke a constitutional crisi.

mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0UN0HR20160109

Latest News:

Exit poll turnout revised upwards.

Now stands at 32% still with Margin of Error of 3%

So NO vote victory looking more likely

Carl Bildt, former Swedush PM has just tweeted:

Agreement EU/Ukraine already approved by 29 democratic EU parliaments. Those voting No in Netherlands today are 0,006% of electorate in EU

The '29 democratic EU parliaments' includes the European Parliament.

The EU / Ukraine deal will go ahead as the Dutch referendum is not binding, even if the turnout is 30%

The other 94% of EU citizens did not get the opportunity to express their opinion

#DutchReferendum after 10.9% declared:

FOR 36.8
AGAINST 62.5

Turnout 32.7%

""the fact that Putin would not welcome a closer relationship between the EU and Ukraine"

Yes because we should pander to Putin's wants shouldn't we.

I'm not saying that we should allow the Ukraine in, but lets not give that as a reason.

Also this: " It is being largely ignored by the press as a no vote is likely and it doesn't suit the pro EU press"

The Guardian and the Mirror are pro Euro.

The Sun, The Mail, The Express, The Telegraph and the Times are brexit, so the press is overwhelmingly brexit AND right wing.

You forgot BBC and sky-both pro EU.

Excellent news that the Dutch people have rejected what amounts to the EU expansion plans.

The BBC is neuatral, in fact studies find that people who are left wing think it has right wing bias and vice versa, the BBC has no agenda. If anything it is more Eurosceptic than the opposite as shown by this study:

www.newstatesman.com/broadcast/2013/08/hard-evidence-how-biased-bbc

As a Murdoch vehicle I would be very surprised if Sky was pro EU, seeing as the rest of the stable is not.

Lurked, you're surely aware of the millions the BBC receives from the EU. Is biased in favour of the EU, very much so.

Anna

BBC has received £2M from the EU in the last 3 years

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12059280/BBC-has-received-2m-in-EU-funding-in-run-up-to-referendum-fueling-accusations-of-bias.html

Just saying

Yet the academic studies says not so, if it was "biased" it would be in breach of its remit. Paul Dacre gets EU money, does that make the Mail baised toward Europe?

Note when I put into google EU money to the BBC its the Telegraph which launches this story with one about £2 million, in terms of the BBC budget this is nothing and not enough to "sway" coverage. However the Telegraph's interests are very much in portraying the BBC as pro left and anti right/anti business.

It is interesting how the right wing, who control the mainstream and much of the media, are continually painting themselves as outsiders/the underdog to a percieved liberal bias, when in fact it is quite the other way around.

£2m doesn't pay for a weeks worth of Eastenders never mind sway the reporting of a whole organisation, whose journalists PRIDE themselves on impartiality.

I didn't say the BBC was biased.

I just pointed out that the EU has given the BBC £2 million in the last 3 years.

That wasn't in response to you though Springing, I was pointing out that the previous poster who talked about "millions from the EU to the BBC" swaying influence is probably wrong.

£1 million a year over 3 years is a drop in the ocean for the BBC.

It's not the amount, it's the principle.

The BBC should not be taking money from the EU.

Taking money from people or organisations could be seen to compromise your independence.

That's why we object when our politicians take cash for questions etc.

98.5% of votes counted, this is how NL voted. #referendum
YES: 38.2%
NO: 61%
turnout: 32.1%

The No to closer EU relationship with Ukraine won the vote in the Netherlands

Remember that. The EU stirring the hornets nest

Don't be surprised if Putin stings.

Yet all of our political parties recieve EU funding too.

Lots of organisations get EU funding, its being blown out of proprtion by other media outlets.

In fact, a little bit of digging shows that the BBC has recieved aboiut 20 million in EU funding since 2008. To help fund many projects with broadcasters in LEDCs etc, now when you get EU funding it is ring fenced and must be used for the project in which it is stated.

Its overblown.

It's not overblown

It's not ring-fenced either.

It's not even 'EU money'. It's money taken from the tax-payers in the member states and handed to organisations badged as 'EU money'

I want the taxes that my Government levies on me to be spent by my Government and not sent to Brussels to allow them to skim off their cut, before sending it back to this country and other countries badged as 'EU money'.