Too many fake current affairs posts on MN

[inthetrenches1]

I’ve never started a post before (I don’t think?), I’m an on-off lurker for a while, but what’s become apparent is the number of posts on MN that have clearly been posted by political parties opposing the government. It’s just another tactic used these days like creating online petitions and fake polls about issues/fake issues to get sectors of society riled up about things they were never worried about before.

Misinformation filtering into society is at an all-time high. You can see them a mile away on here. Next time you see a “I’ve seen a poll saying Reform are more popular than Labour” just remember it’s probably a lackey of Farage and Tice’s, with seven mobile phones and three laptops, thirty different fake profiles on the go, gleefully making up these baseless posts on here and on social media.

If you want to leave a comment feel free, I only came here to post, I probably won’t be reading the replies

I agree with you OP go over to the Education Board and you will find lots of threads proclaiming the end of the world due to the 20% VAT increase on school fees. It reminds me of the Covid threads. Disagree and you are shouted down..no discussion. Same on the Politics Board, AIBU and Chat - surprised they haven’t found a way onto style and beauty and Christmas

Yes, when links are provided after demands you get the derisory “oh I don’t find any of those sources reliable” - honestly why bother

Works both ways. “Oh, the Grauniad” is a favourite.

The Guardian only gets doubted - by me anyway - when it’s held up, expressly or by implication, as a better source than any other ‘broadsheet’. It’s no better and no worse than the Times, Sunday Times or Telegraph.

Exactly and the rest

I completely agree with you about The Times and Sunday Times. I read the Telegraph every day because my bloke’s a subscriber and it really couldn’t be more partisan if it tried.

Like the Guardian then

👍

But the Guardian is hardly even-handed! It’s Labour’s in-house organ for the most part (that’s not an insult to it, it’s just an editorial position and is true of the Telegraph and Tories too). It does run stories unsympathetic to Labour, yes, but then so do the Times, ST and Telegraph about the Tories.

Fucking hell, this is equivalent to a toddler tantrum where they don’t like what’s being said “Lalalalalala sticks fingers in ears, I can’t hear youuuu”

I’m gonna start a thread to get my very important thoughts out and I don’t care if you dispute what I say because I’m not gonna read it anyway so there! But if enough people say nice agreeable things I may deign to pop back on! lmfao “they don’t like it up em”

It’s inevitable that a new government will be talked about especially when it’s one that was long-awaited. Yet rapidly descended into the most unpopular within the first six months due to their lies and hypocrisy.

The Guardian is pretty critical of the current government. Check out Marina Hyde’s latest column, it’s excoriating.

Just a reminder that YouGov was founded by Nadhim Zahawi, former Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer, Chairman, and various other Tory roles. He who ‘forgot’ to pay millions to HMRC.

I see the words ‘Results of a Yougov poll’ and I take them with the world’s biggest pinch of salt

You're not allowed to question sources apparently.

Of course you are, I’m just not going to make it easy for firmly biased posters who wouldn’t be convinced no matter what evidence is provided. That you keep returning to this just makes you sound irritated because that is your preferred style of discussion and you cannot use this tactic any longer. We all trust different sources, if it’s true you’ll find it wherever you look. What is the point of post after post snarking and displacing the meat of the discussion with arguments over whether a source is reliable or not? That will never be agreed upon 🤷🏼‍♀️

Exactly this. “I don’t like the evidence so I’m just going to pretend I don’t trust the source” - or multiple sources. it’s the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears.

Ok let's all post links to the Daily Fail, shall we?

Or shall we try to find the truth about stats and stories?

I try very hard not to use media sources for this very reason. Statistics are readily available from the various bodies that exist to provide evidence for government decisions. Only the irredeemably partisan would argue with that.

Like YouGov which according to a PP is also not reliable as pro-Tory?

Zahawi sold his stake in YouGov quite a long time ago now - under it's current stewardship it seems a more balanced outfit in most peoples view and fairly well respected and widely quoted

No source is going to be entirely neutral but clearly some sources are better than others

I don't think Yougov was ever particularly partisan; it usually only asks voting intention. Maybe how well you think a politician is doing. (Keir obviously always gets a fat zero from me automatically so I'm not sure how useful my answers are...).

I have named-changed a couple of times as I had revealed a bit too much on other threads. Is this something that's not approved of? I don't know?

I don't think there are many bots on here and as to paid people, surely a thread will only gain traction if it's on a topic that engages people in the first place so I don't see the issue. Plenty of posters happy to argue their corner robustly no matter what colour their politics;.no need to accuse those with opposing views of nefarious behavior.

There have been times when the MN collective gets too carried away with Left leaning ideas. Brexit I seem to remember huge confidence in remaining in EU. That was wrong, we narrowly Left. The certainty that Boris would not be elected and he won 80 majority.
It doesn't need Bots to show that there is as wide a range of opinion as IRL.

The only poster I can think of who I can say definitely comments to promote their favoured party is one who is notorious for their use of copy and paste and providing links.

@Blossomtoes loads of posters comment on here to promote their favoured party. Even if a poster misspells the prime minister’s name, this grave error will be pointed out within a few minutes.
There is even a long-runnning thread devoted to praising our dear leader.

You took that completely out of context. It was a conversation above backing up what you say with evidence. I seem to remember adding that I respect that poster for the robustness of her contributions, even though I disagree with just about everything she posts. It was a compliment. Shame you didn’t use the quote function.

"Evidence" often just seems to be a link to an often biased newspaper which repeats what the poster says and can easily be looked up by anyone. It's also a tactic often deployed by the people who demand the "evidence" but then don't supply any themselves. If I want to check a post I look it up myself. Demanding "evidence" rather than dealing with an argument or checking something yourself is lazy. That's just in my opinion though. We aren't here writing opinion pieces for the Telegraph (which is of course always correct in all things). We are just here for a chat, surely.

That’s why I said I avoid media links as much as possible. 🤷‍♀️

I agree with the OP that this is happening. It's pretty obvious. Mumsnet as mouthpiece for the right, these days.