To find James O'Brien hard going

[Alanis126]

I'm a regular LBC listener and tend to share most of his political views. But I find him increasingly unbearable. He is one of the most moralising holier-than-thou people I've ever heard. He seems to have this weird fixation with marriage and recently described his views as "slightly strong-arm" on the subject.. What the hell does that mean?? That he thinks he should be allowed to force unmarried couples or single people to marry? I just cannot bear him and I wondered if anyone else felt the same?

I’m a fan of JOB and Eddie Mair. Makes for good listening.

I like JOB - I can see that he could come across and condescending to anyone that doesn't like facts or thinks how they 'feel' about something should be given the same weight as reality.

Honestly think that if more interviewers, of whatever political persuasion, were able to discuss and get down to facts to the same degree we might not be where we are now.

I dislike Nick Ferrari - he has a condescending attitude but without the facts to back it up.

“unfortunately gave an example of EU Regs which meant fish and chips couldn't be sold in newspaper any more! He was like a dog with a bone and would not stop repeating it and laughing in a pitying kind of way. He is awful.“
I heard that one. She rang in as a Brexit supporter going on about making our own laws and sovereignty. He gave her plenty of time to come up with anything she couldn’t do now because of the EU and she finally came up with eating fish and chips out of newspaper and that was it. She was ridiculous and deserved to be laughed at.

If you phone to whinge about the EU but can't give concrete examples of what you are whinging about apart from fish and chips in newspaper, I think you ask for any response that you get.

She rang in as a Brexit supporter going on about making our own laws and sovereignty. He gave her plenty of time to come up with anything she couldn’t do now because of the EU and she finally came up with eating fish and chips out of newspaper and that was it. She was ridiculous and deserved to be laughed at.

Well, that’s his absolute stock in trade and has been for 3 years now. And if you’re on his side politically it’s all jolly good fun and contributes to one’s general sense of smug intellectual superiority over the Brexit-voting plebs.

The thing about a topic like sovereignty is that it’s something some people feel but can’t quite articulate. This is true of many Important things in life, and just because it cant be backed up with a long dreary list of “true facts”, it doesn’t make it unimportant or worthy of mockery.

The example you give here is a perfect demonstration of why JOB and his fanclub will never understand why some people voted Leave - and have no wish to do so. He could have tried to understand what she meant or why she felt so strongly about it, which is the way to a genuinely interesting discussion. But that would be a very different kind of conversation,
wouldn’t fit in at all with James’ modus operandi, and wouldn’t please the crowds who thoroughly enjoy the “kill”.

Daabren, do you mean the other way round - that it was Mogg who squirmed against what JOB said? Because I've listened to that interview and that is undoubtedly the case.

For instance, JOB suggested that the EU would change their minds about the terms of the agreement despite having stuck to their guns pretty consistently throughout, Mogg had no answer. Mogg then talked about Brexit resulting in cheaper food, clothing and footwear, but when challenged on that Mogg avoided it again. He purported to be relying on the forecasts of Patrick Minford for his belief that everything is going to be wonderful, but had clearly forgotten that Minford himself said that agriculture and industry would be decimated and refused to answer when that was put to him. Mogg tried to pretend that we could accept Australian standards for checking beef unilaterally whilst apparently having forgotten that they allow hormone-treated beef: when that was put to him, he tried to suggest that the EU don't allow it purely as a protectionist racket. It was truly a joy to hear how he struggles when he isn't being interviewed by the likes of Ferrari.

I'm also a remainer and I also find JOB unbearably smug and patronising. Give me Iain Dale any day - far more balanced, fair and well informed.

@jillyhilly- she specifically said there were lots of EU laws we would be free of. And when asked couldn’t name any. She was given plenty of time ( and she rang in, the station didn’t ring her) and still couldn’t.

He is essentially a putrid bubble of nauseating self-regard. I’m not altogether surprised that Betrand is a fan.

Farage and JOB made me switch over to Radio X .

He could have tried to understand what she meant or why she felt so strongly about it, which is the way to a genuinely interesting discussion

But isn't asking for examples of what she's concerned about a route into that discussion? The alternative is to say something like "I'm not aware of any examples of EU laws that harm us and that we need to be free of, but putting that to one side, tell me why you feel so strongly about the EU apart from that". I can guarantee that that conversation would have swung straight back to vague, amorphous complaints about restrictive EU laws that the caller still would not have been able to identify. There is undoubtedly a bigger discussion to be had about where such callers get their impressions from and why they accept assertions without evidence, but by definition they are not the people to have such discussions with.

He's a very knowledgeable guy, like a lot of people on the left.

Thanks for the laugh.

O'Brien is an arse with a super inflated ego,

Well you’re right Bertrand Russell in that it would definitely help the discussion to have a couple of laws to discuss if you’re going to ring in on that very subject! That is a bit bizarre to say the least.

But there are nuanced and interesting conversations to be had around simply exploring what someone thinks (about a topic such as sovereignty, for example) that would genuinely help people understand different perspectives.

This isn’t what JoB does. And I really wouldn’t care, except that he seems to think it’s what he does in his leftist “oh so tolerant” way. There’s a horrible hypocrisy to that and I think that’s what really gets under my skin: he is the very poster boy for the deep intolerance of the left. His cosying to transwomen, while happily throwing women under the bus, is the best example of this.

There is undoubtedly a bigger discussion to be had about where such callers get their impressions from and why they accept assertions without evidence, but by definition they are not the people to have such discussions with.

I disagree, and I find that JOB does sometimes go out of his way to ask callers where they get their views from.

The thing about a topic like sovereignty is that it’s something some people feel but can’t quite articulate. This is true of many Important things in life, and just because it cant be backed up with a long dreary list of “true facts”, it doesn’t make it unimportant or worthy of mockery.

Again, I disagree here. "Many of the important things in life" can be a bit intangible or unquantifiable. The classic example being the love for one's partner. But when pushed, I think most people might be able to explain why they love their partner, and give examples of loving things that they do - "they bring me breakfast in bed", "he's a great cook", 'he looks after me when I'm sick", etc.

I'll let you know. I'm going to an event later today and he is one of the speakers....

The thing is, the general population don't have access to a team of researchers to inform them on the ins and outs of Brexit and other topics like JOB does. He likes to act superior, but the very reason he's so on point with his facts and information is not due to his superior intellect, but due to having a plethora of information, data and stats at his fingertips, researched mainly by other people, that would only be available to normal people with hours and hours and hours of research. Rather than patronising them and trying to make them look like idiots he could have a completely different conversation with them and maybe some of them would come away a bit more educated on a subject and question their misconceptions. Instead they come away feeling foolish and angry and more set in their mindset. I guess that wouldn't make for good ratings though.

If his agenda is to come on the radio each day and prove how much clever and better informed he is than the majority of people, then he's doing a great job. If he actually really cares about Brexit and understanding why people actually voted leave and how to
get through to those people and give them a balanced view on the other side of the argument, he is failing miserably. I suspect it's the former rather than the latter though, judging by his smug superiority complex.

I really enjoyed David Lammy when he was on there as a guest presenter. He took different and sometimes slightly ridiculous and uninformed views in good humour and had a pleasant debate with the callers and in some cases they came away actually having learnt something and actually considering a different point of view.

Just read that Spectator article posted by @Neouf. It is pretty devastating. Our lovely caring liberal JOB gave a platform to Carl Beech, Tom Watson, Exaro etc long after responsible journalists and the police realised that there was no truth to their disgusting life-ruining allegations. Why? Because it was a way of going after the Tories.

It is no small thing that James O’Brien used a public platform to broadcast the most lurid lies about people. Nor is it right that everyone else should pretend that this is all done and dusted, yesterday’s news and then move on to something else. The mess revealed by the Carl Beech / Darren / Exaro / LBC / James O’Brien affair ought to be understood and learned from if the public is going to be able to have any trust in the media ever again.

Yes, interesting that the appearance of truth was more appealing than the actual truth.

He isn’t interested in debate, he’s only interested in voicing his own opinions. I’m a staunch remainer too so ‘on his side’ I guess but I cannot abide his sanctimonious and often patronising rhetoric. He does demean people, you can definitely hear his patronising sneering tone.

Now I’ve discovered he’s a Catholic I just think he’s a ginormous hypocrite.

I really enjoyed David Lammy when he was on there as a guest presenter.

I have to say I agree with this, and I usually loathe David Lammy. He was considerate, humorous and interested in everyone’s opinions. As you say, he wasn’t there to take anyone apart or prove his own intellectual superiority.

Guido Fawkes not a fan

order-order.com/people/james-obrien/

It's interesting all this stuff out there, just shows you can google anything and find something to back you up - I'm well aware my links are probably countered by pro JoB sites as well.

Guido Fawkes not a fan? Well, I'm astonished. Do you know the Pope is Catholic? Shocking but true.