How do you think the election has been represented?

Printable View

09-05-2010, 07:37 PM
ben

How do you think the election has been represented?

I got no clue I didnt watch it etc.
09-05-2010, 07:49 PM
Jordy

Probably been represented by votes on ballot papers causing a hung parliament?
09-05-2010, 07:52 PM
ben

in the media
09-05-2010, 07:55 PM
Jordy

Ohh well I'd say terrible for Labour. The Daily Mirror was the only daily paper supporting them in the end. Liberal Democrats made a few gains it seems, some papers jumped for the gap in the market, namely The Guardian and The Independent. The Times & The Sun went with the populist option of the Tories seeing as they were heading the polls, once again they accurately predicted who would get the most votes. The Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph seemed to give a bit more support to UKIP than they have in previous elections and have appeared more to the right than the quite liberal-conservative David Cameron.

I also thought the BBC was very impressive, while they are always a little biased to the party in power (Labour), as soon as the Conservatives got the most votes I noticed quite a neutral approach by the BBC, and this was within hours of it happening. Their coverage was incredible I thought, I managed to watch it for 10 hours straight without dozing off (10pm-8am). Election studio was very good and I thought the BBC Election Debate was the best, David Dimbleby is a good presenter, the debate was on economics and the discussion between the leaders was high quality.
09-05-2010, 08:29 PM
benj1

thanks mate
got banned for some reason was gonna +rep
09-05-2010, 08:32 PM
Robbie

how has it been represented? same as every other year. papers and tv channels support different parties so theres always some propaganda. however as jordy said i think the bbc did quite well to remain neutral seeing as they are biased towards the left
09-05-2010, 08:35 PM
Catzsy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordy

Ohh well I'd say terrible for Labour. The Daily Mirror was the only daily paper supporting them in the end. Liberal Democrats made a few gains it seems, some papers jumped for the gap in the market, namely The Guardian and The Independent. The Times & The Sun went with the populist option of the Tories seeing as they were heading the polls, once again they accurately predicted who would get the most votes. The Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph seemed to give a bit more support to UKIP than they have in previous elections and have appeared more to the right than the quite liberal-conservative David Cameron.

I also thought the BBC was very impressive, while they are always a little biased to the party in power (Labour), as soon as the Conservatives got the most votes I noticed quite a neutral approach by the BBC, and this was within hours of it happening. Their coverage was incredible I thought, I managed to watch it for 10 hours straight without dozing off (10pm-8am). Election studio was very good and I thought the BBC Election Debate was the best, David Dimbleby is a good presenter, the debate was on economics and the discussion between the leaders was high quality.

I thought the Broadcast coverage was much better than the newspaper coverage. It was terrible for Brown and Labour. Perhaps now they will not be so loyal to a man that most of the country has agreed was not the right man to be Prime Minister. I still think they have some excellent members of the team but personally hope they do not strike a deal as they need time to regroup and elect another leader. Also It would be interesting to see how the others cope in such dificult conditions that were not 100% the fault of the labour party.
09-05-2010, 08:52 PM
Jordy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catzsy

I thought the Broadcast coverage was much better than the newspaper coverage. It was terrible for Brown and Labour. Perhaps now they will not be so loyal to a man that most of the country has agreed was not the right man to be Prime Minister. I still think they have some excellent members of the team but personally hope they do not strike a deal as they need time to regroup and elect another leader. Also It would be interesting to see how the others cope in such dificult conditions that were not 100% the fault of the labour party.

I've finally remembered your not a fan of Gordon Brown but the party leader we should really be talking about resigning is Gordon Brown not David Cameron. Whatever the coalition is, Gordon Brown's position is untenable. I can't see David Cameron going in any rush as the Tories seem to of done well, he didn't do enough to get into power but he has taken more seats than any party since the 1930s I think it is? Labour were unpopular but the swings needed for him to get into power were ridiculous and he almost managed it. I don't think he'll be going in a rush.

Edit: Just realised you're probably on about Gordon Brown, in that case I agree :P
09-05-2010, 08:55 PM
Catzsy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordy

I've finally remembered your not a fan of Gordon Brown but the party leader we should really be talking about resigning is Gordon Brown not David Cameron. Whatever the coalition is, Gordon Brown's position is untenable. I can't see David Cameron going in any rush as the Tories seem to of done well, he didn't do enough to get into power but he has taken more seats than any party since the 1930s I think it is? Labour were unpopular but the swings needed for him to get into power were ridiculous and he almost managed it. I don't think he'll be going in a rush.

Edit: Just realised you're probably on about Gordon Brown, in that case I agree :P

Yes I mean Gordon Brown ! :P :D