Paul Dacre to be head of OFCOM?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Looking like it.

Looking like the ex-Editor of the right wing propaganda rag The Mail is going to be head of the body charged with enforcing standards in the media.

You really could not make this up.

In May, the selection panel which was considering applications rejected Dacre as unfit to hold the post. So Johnson's Govt has dissolved that panel, and recruited a new one. Two of the three panel members are a close friend and the brother in law of the Tory ex-No10 spin doctor Robbie Gibb. And rumours are that Dacre is going to be appointed.

It's like putting Harold Shipman in charge of a NHS safety watchdog.

PS. And before anyone dives in with the usual political bias accusations, or the "all the papers are the same" b*llocks, I KNOW from personal experience how that t**t Dacre and his team deliberately misled and deceived his readership when they wrote an article about my company's work years ago. He's a liar and a deceiver and putting him in charge of OFCOM is obscene.

[drfchound]

Ah, so personal bias shows it’s head then.

[selby]

  Well Billy you will just have to accept your opinion, right or wrong. carries no weight whatsoever with this guys reputation, I guess in the intervening years he has left you behind.
  I wonder if he remembers you with any fondness?

[SydneyRover]

I don't think he will make any changes to anything you read selby

[selby]

 I  suppose your right Syd, I don't think Billy will.

[SydneyRover]

Who's Billy will?

[idler]

Ah, so personal bias shows it’s head then.

Personal bias or experience of how the man operates though hound.
If a shop or tradesman lets me down or does a bad job I tell everyone that I know to avoid them.
This not only takes money away from them but saves friends and relatives from having the same problems that I suffered.
That’s personal experience and any bias against them is down to their actions.

[Filo]

Ah, so personal bias shows it’s head then.

How ironic

[BillyStubbsTears]

Ah, so personal bias shows it’s head then.

How ironic

This is precisely the reason I put Hound on "ignore". The knee jerk assumption of bad faith. It's exhausting to deal with and far better just to ignore.

For the record, it's sod all to do with personal bias. It's about seeing first hand how a Kitson like Dacre saw it as his job to mislead and deceive his readers.

My company was part of a consortium with others from 8 EU countries that developed a new product. It got media attention. We put out a press release. Newspapers all over the world faithfully used the press release text. The Mail was the one and only that snipped some of the info. They cut the sentences that said it was a pan-EU collaboration. They cut the sentence that said the European Commission had provided funding. The resulting article gave them clear impression that it was a UK only piece of work.

That was deliberately done to mislead and deceive Mail readers. And if he did that on such a trivial matter, where wouldn't he do it?

He did it because Dacre had f**k all interest in the truth. He had a political angle to push. He should never get within a million miles of OFCOM, unless he's being prosecuted by them.

[Pancho Regan]

Ah, so personal bias shows it’s head then.

I think you're better than a comment like that hound.

[drfchound]

Ah, so personal bias shows it’s head then.

How ironic

This is precisely the reason I put Hound on "ignore". The knee jerk assumption of bad faith. It's exhausting to deal with and far better just to ignore.

For the record, it's sod all to do with personal bias. It's about seeing first hand how a Kitson like Dacre saw it as his job to mislead and deceive his readers.

My company was part of a consortium with others from 8 EU countries that developed a new product. It got media attention. We put out a press release. Newspapers all over the world faithfully used the press release text. The Mail was the one and only that snipped some of the info. They cut the sentences that said it was a pan-EU collaboration. They cut the sentence that said the European Commission had provided funding. The resulting article gave them clear impression that it was a UK only piece of work.

That was deliberately done to mislead and deceive Mail readers. And if he did that on such a trivial matter, where wouldn't he do it?

He did it because Dacre had f**k all interest in the truth. He had a political angle to push. He should never get within a million miles of OFCOM, unless he's being prosecuted by them.

If you recall correctly bst, I asked you to put me on ignore, for the benefit of both of us.
You regularly trolled my posts and came back with smart arse  comments at most things I contributed on here.
I made my remark about personal bias because that is exactly what your OP was based on, not what you opened up with.
I have no problem with people posting bad reviews about businesses or services but you had tried to disguise it under a different banner.

[drfchound]

Ah, so personal bias shows it’s head then.

How ironic

How unusual for you to jump in to support your leader.

[idler]

hound it would take the sting out of this if you replied with why you think Dacre would be the best man for the job.
That would gain you far more respect than your last comment did.
Does me agreeing on a topic with BST make me a looney leftie?
The next day I might agree with your comment does that then swing me completely over to being a far right fascist?
It’s obvious that you don’t like BST but just give an opinion of why you don’t like his argument or opinion. It would also make for a far better forum.

[drfchound]

Idler, I appreciate that you are fair with most of what you post.
To be honest I have no opinion at all on Paul Dacre or what he writes and therefore have no opinion on your politics.
I make no secret that I have issues with some of what bst writes because of his political bias, which isn’t too difficult to see is it.
Likewise I think it is fair to say that he has a dislike for some of the things I post.
When I first started posting on here I used to respect a lot of what he wrote but over time I think he has become more and more difficult to respect because of his outlandish attitude to almost everything Brexit and his anti government stance.
I have also noticed that considerably more people now challenge his posts and that he isn’t as good as I had originally thought.
I now take many of his posts with a pinch of salt and just wait for people to come along and put him right on some things.
It does get a bit tedious to open up the vsc to find yet another thread started by him berating anything that doesn’t fit his rhetoric.
Apologies if you don’t agree with me.

[idler]

No need for apologies hound. I read just about every thread on here but do duck out of some as they seem to go around in circles.
The thing was BST wrote over three paragraphs explaining why he didn’t think that Dacre wasn’t fit for this post. Your reply would have carried far more weight if you had said exactly why you disagree with his opinion. You then write one line branding Pancho as a follower of BST. rather than explaining why wrote what he was referring to.
My politics are leaning to the left but wanting the best outcome for the country whoever is in charge.
 Did I want Corbin in charge? No
Do I think that the Tori’s are doing a good job? No.
Should the government start sorting themselves out then I am flexible enough to appreciate it but that seems a long way off as they lurch from crisis to crisis regarding the standard of their leadership and a good number of their MPs.
Am I happy with Labour? No but there seems to be far fewer making lots of money over and above their wage.

[Filo]

Ah, so personal bias shows it’s head then.

How ironic

How unusual for you to jump in to support your leader.

Not supporting anyone, just commenting on your constant sniping without substance, it’s boring, make it interesting and counter his opinion

[drfchound]

No need for apologies hound. I read just about every thread on here but do duck out of some as they seem to go around in circles.
The thing was BST wrote over three paragraphs explaining why he didn’t think that Dacre wasn’t fit for this post. Your reply would have carried far more weight if you had said exactly why you disagree with his opinion. You then write one line branding Pancho as a follower of BST. rather than explaining why wrote what he was referring to.
My politics are leaning to the left but wanting the best outcome for the country whoever is in charge.
 Did I want Corbin in charge? No
Do I think that the Tori’s are doing a good job? No.
Should the government start sorting themselves out then I am flexible enough to appreciate it but that seems a long way off as they lurch from crisis to crisis regarding the standard of their leadership and a good number of their MPs.
Am I happy with Labour? No but there seems to be far fewer making lots of money over and above their wage.

Just a point to correct you on idler, it was Filo to whom I addressed my post (as a follower of bst) not Pancho.
I consider Pancho to be a fair poster.
Also, for the record, and to repeat myself from many previous posts, I am not a Tory supporter and I agree that they have royalty cocked up many times.
I haven’t seen anything from any other Party to suggest that they might do any better though.
Labour are, in my opinion, a spent force and in disarray, lots of in house falling out and showing no signs of being a government of the future.
Also, I am on the same side as bst with regards to brexit.
We both voted to remain.
I just get sick to the teeth of hearing about it.
We have left the EU so we have to accept and get in with things.

[belton rover]

Ah, so personal bias shows it’s head then.

How ironic

This is precisely the reason I put Hound on "ignore". The knee jerk assumption of bad faith. It's exhausting to deal with and far better just to ignore.

For the record, it's sod all to do with personal bias. It's about seeing first hand how a Kitson like Dacre saw it as his job to mislead and deceive his readers.

My company was part of a consortium with others from 8 EU countries that developed a new product. It got media attention. We put out a press release. Newspapers all over the world faithfully used the press release text. The Mail was the one and only that snipped some of the info. They cut the sentences that said it was a pan-EU collaboration. They cut the sentence that said the European Commission had provided funding. The resulting article gave them clear impression that it was a UK only piece of work.

That was deliberately done to mislead and deceive Mail readers. And if he did that on such a trivial matter, where wouldn't he do it?

He did it because Dacre had f**k all interest in the truth. He had a political angle to push. He should never get within a million miles of OFCOM, unless he's being prosecuted by them.

If you recall correctly bst, I asked you to put me on ignore, for the benefit of both of us.
You regularly trolled my posts and came back with smart arse  comments at most things I contributed on here.
I made my remark about personal bias because that is exactly what your OP was based on, not what you opened up with.
I have no problem with people posting bad reviews about businesses or services but you had tried to disguise it under a different banner.

He does tend to forget why puts people on ignore, and later come up with a nonsense excuse for it.

[idler]

No need for apologies hound. I read just about every thread on here but do duck out of some as they seem to go around in circles.
The thing was BST wrote over three paragraphs explaining why he didn’t think that Dacre wasn’t fit for this post. Your reply would have carried far more weight if you had said exactly why you disagree with his opinion. You then write one line branding Pancho as a follower of BST. rather than explaining why wrote what he was referring to.
My politics are leaning to the left but wanting the best outcome for the country whoever is in charge.
 Did I want Corbin in charge? No
Do I think that the Tori’s are doing a good job? No.
Should the government start sorting themselves out then I am flexible enough to appreciate it but that seems a long way off as they lurch from crisis to crisis regarding the standard of their leadership and a good number of their MPs.
Am I happy with Labour? No but there seems to be far fewer making lots of money over and above their wage.

Just a point to correct you on idler, it was Filo to whom I addressed my post (as a follower of bst) not Pancho.
I consider Pancho to be a fair poster.
Also, for the record, and to repeat myself from many previous posts, I am not a Tory supporter and I agree that they have royalty cocked up many times.
I haven’t seen anything from any other Party to suggest that they might do any better though.
Labour are, in my opinion, a spent force and in disarray, lots of in house falling out and showing no signs of being a government of the future.
Also, I am on the same side as bst with regards to brexit.
We both voted to remain.
I just get sick to the teeth of hearing about it.
We have left the EU so we have to accept and get in with things.

Apologies hound. I thought that you were responding to Pancho who I thought made a fair point.
As far as Brexit goes I reluctantly voted leave not wanting to be part of a Federal Europe.
I did expect though a sane process of negotiation and a Norway like deal. Definitely not the whole thing being hijacked by the far right and the deal we ended up with.
I have no axe to grind with anybody in this forum and enjoy a healthy debate. We all support the same team if we differ on politics.
There have been far worse things happen to me over the last 12 months to compare with what is posted on here.
Have a good week-end.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Get in! He's pulled out of applying for the job, with a typical rant at the "left wing establishment."

He can rant at whomsoever he wants, just as long as he f**ks right off into well-earned obscurity.