| Politics and the media currently 08:32 - Sep 19 with 2457 views | itfcjoe |
Some major things that have come out of state visit, and the AI investment is something that gives the UK massive growth potential even if it sadly means the only way to do so is just trying to get into America's slipstream over it.
But real, massive success stories, that will affect the country for the next dozen years in a good way; but all we hear about is 'free speech', Farage, flags etc |  |
| |  |
| Politics and the media currently on 08:35 - Sep 19 with 1838 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
Not a huge fan of Starmer, but the accusations about him constantly ‘talking the country down’ should really be aimed at the media (which amplifies the general feeling of malaise).
FWIW he’s also done a decent job of negotiating lower tariffs than the EU. |  | | |
| Politics and the media currently on 08:36 - Sep 19 with 1834 views | BloomBlue |
What about all the enery to drive the AI infrastructure, will Sizewell C be online in time? |  | | |
| Politics and the media currently on 08:42 - Sep 19 with 1781 views | vapour_trail |
I’ve heard loads about the AI deal, and next to nothing about free speech, flags or farage over the course of the trump visit so you must be consuming different media to me. |  |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 08:50 - Sep 19 with 1721 views | Herbivore |
The country and the media has collectively lost its head. |  |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 09:11 - Sep 19 with 1597 views | itfcjoe |
| Politics and the media currently on 08:50 - Sep 19 by Herbivore |
The country and the media has collectively lost its head. |
I watched that Trump/Starmer press conference live by SomethingBlue 18 Sep 19:44Starmer is on the whole a very good statesman indeed, much as the entire spectacle made me want to smash the TV in. As others have said the issue is mostly his handling of domestic matters/the voices he listens to when doing so. Though I would caveat by saying it's usually overlooked that most of the media were labelling his government a disaster within literally two weeks of him taking office – the course we are on now, and especially the narrative that exists around it, was entirely predetermined and will not move an inch until Farage is in.
| |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 09:17 - Sep 19 with 1551 views | giant_stow |
There's a nice cheerful piece on this by my man Ambrose: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/09/19/trumps-big-beautiful-tech-pact-w
"Those who argue that Britain’s net zero policies are destroying the economy – almost a common wisdom in the commentariat – might care to tell us why American hyperscalers are flocking to Britain to build the greatest concentration of energy-hungry data centres in Europe.
I have my criticisms of Labour’s clean power target of 2030. The rushed date renders the Government hostage to rent-seeking utilities, front-loads the cost, and is needlessly designed in such a way that it is pushing our domestic heavy industries to the wall.
But the US tech giants have deep pockets and are looking far over the horizon. Google, Microsoft, CoreWeave and Blackstone are making an entirely different judgment on the future costs and availability of electricity in Britain.
They have taken a deep look at the rapid rollout of wind, solar, interconnectors and battery capacity over the next five years, and they broadly like what they see." |  |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 09:38 - Sep 19 with 1464 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Politics and the media currently on 09:17 - Sep 19 by giant_stow |
There's a nice cheerful piece on this by my man Ambrose: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/09/19/trumps-big-beautiful-tech-pact-w
"Those who argue that Britain’s net zero policies are destroying the economy – almost a common wisdom in the commentariat – might care to tell us why American hyperscalers are flocking to Britain to build the greatest concentration of energy-hungry data centres in Europe.
I have my criticisms of Labour’s clean power target of 2030. The rushed date renders the Government hostage to rent-seeking utilities, front-loads the cost, and is needlessly designed in such a way that it is pushing our domestic heavy industries to the wall.
But the US tech giants have deep pockets and are looking far over the horizon. Google, Microsoft, CoreWeave and Blackstone are making an entirely different judgment on the future costs and availability of electricity in Britain.
They have taken a deep look at the rapid rollout of wind, solar, interconnectors and battery capacity over the next five years, and they broadly like what they see." |
My only scepticism around that is that we have some of the highest energy costs in Europe. And without a change to wholesale pricing system, no amount of green energy is going to change that. There’s a a lot of info around the investment in the Gov press realise, but little around what we’ve offered in return (I.e are there subsidies, light touch regs, or tax breaks). Maybe I’m being cynical, and it is definitely a win, I just thought it was a strange deal from the investors perspective given the cost of energy (unless it’s due to lower US tariffs in the UK than EU). | | | |
| Politics and the media currently on 09:43 - Sep 19 with 1431 views | giant_stow |
| Politics and the media currently on 09:38 - Sep 19 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
My only scepticism around that is that we have some of the highest energy costs in Europe. And without a change to wholesale pricing system, no amount of green energy is going to change that. There’s a a lot of info around the investment in the Gov press realise, but little around what we’ve offered in return (I.e are there subsidies, light touch regs, or tax breaks). Maybe I’m being cynical, and it is definitely a win, I just thought it was a strange deal from the investors perspective given the cost of energy (unless it’s due to lower US tariffs in the UK than EU). |
Fair enough SKM, I have a feeling from your past postings, this is your area, so I accept what you say. One question though: if green energy comes to dominate the UKs energy miox, won't that eventually force prices down or will they always be based on the most expensive source? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Politics and the media currently on 09:47 - Sep 19 with 1397 views | itfcjoe |
| Politics and the media currently on 09:38 - Sep 19 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
My only scepticism around that is that we have some of the highest energy costs in Europe. And without a change to wholesale pricing system, no amount of green energy is going to change that. There’s a a lot of info around the investment in the Gov press realise, but little around what we’ve offered in return (I.e are there subsidies, light touch regs, or tax breaks). Maybe I’m being cynical, and it is definitely a win, I just thought it was a strange deal from the investors perspective given the cost of energy (unless it’s due to lower US tariffs in the UK than EU). |
I think some of the concessions are to do with IP rights for AI | |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 09:54 - Sep 19 with 1351 views | Guthrum |
| Politics and the media currently on 09:38 - Sep 19 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
My only scepticism around that is that we have some of the highest energy costs in Europe. And without a change to wholesale pricing system, no amount of green energy is going to change that. There’s a a lot of info around the investment in the Gov press realise, but little around what we’ve offered in return (I.e are there subsidies, light touch regs, or tax breaks). Maybe I’m being cynical, and it is definitely a win, I just thought it was a strange deal from the investors perspective given the cost of energy (unless it’s due to lower US tariffs in the UK than EU). |
Having bases outside the USA (in a stable national ally with plentiful energy, good trading links, favourable investing environment and educated workforce) would give these companies a way to bypass the return fire from current tariff wars. Having the blessing of the volatile President is an added bonus.
Wouldn't take much to tweak energy prices, on an industrial level, if not for the domestic consumer*.
* With the latter, they may be waiting closer to an election before dropping that bon-bon. |  |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 11:21 - Sep 19 with 1105 views | bsw72 |
| Politics and the media currently on 08:50 - Sep 19 by Herbivore |
The country and the media has collectively lost its head. |
Not just this country, but globally; it's no longer news but propaganda being pushed and is concerning based upon history - and if anyone thinks that comparisons between some of the modern rhetoric today, and that which was used during the rise of fascism in Germany in the 1930s is extreme, they should better understand their history; noting that propaganda works not by presenting truth but by reshaping perception.
In the 1930s, nationalist movements; most infamously the Nazis; developed systematic techniques to secure power. Among these were:
- The “Big Lie”: repeating a falsehood until it became accepted as truth.
- Scapegoating: blaming minorities or outsiders for unemployment, crime, or cultural decline.
- Enemy caricatures: portraying groups as immoral, predatory, or corrupting influences.
- Appeals to unity: equating dissent with betrayal; and conformity with patriotism.
- Moral panic: casting themselves as protectors of women and children against supposedly predatory outsiders.
Sound familiar yet?
This last device was particularly powerful. By suggesting that minorities posed a danger to women, children, and the community, propaganda bypassed rational debate and appealed to primal instincts of fear and protection.
When we examine elements of the further right groups today in the UK (not even far right) today, the parallels are striking. Campaigns that call for “taking back control” or invoke “invasion” narratives around small boat crossings work in much the same way; immigration is framed not as a policy challenge but as an existential threat to culture, safety, and national identity. Groups like Britain First have explicitly used slogans about protecting “our women and children,” echoing the same moral panic strategies once used in the 1930s. Even the framing of asylum seekers as a “burden on taxpayers” or “drainers of resources” mirrors earlier scapegoating tactics designed to divide communities.
Crucially, the boundary between extremist and mainstream discourse is getting more and more blurred. While the mainstream parties may reject overt hostility, some have echoed fragments of the narrative through their use of language; references to “family values,” “protecting communities,” or “preserving culture” can unintentionally validate the underlying fear. Political debates over housing, healthcare, or policing are at times linked directly to immigration, reinforcing the idea that outsiders are to blame for systemic pressures while in truth the direct negative impact of immigration on these factors is far less than those caused by corporates and the wealthy.
The role of the media cannot be ignored. In an age of multi channel 24x7 feeds, the relentless pursuit of viewing figures, clicks, and engagement, sensationalist framing often amplifies the very rhetoric that fuels division. Add on this the echo chambers caused by social media algorithms further compounds the mainstream media.
A striking example is the focus on small boat crossings:
While those arriving by small boats represent only a small percentage of overall migration or arrivals (often cited as less than 2% of total migrant inflows), they dominate headlines and broadcast debates; for instance, in the year ending June 2025 there were about 43K small boat arrivals recorded in the UK, which is a large number in absolute terms but still far from the total migration numbers via all routes. Moreover small‐boat arrivals made up about 30-40% of all asylum applications in 2024, but many arriving through visa routes, legal migration, or other asylum routes remain less visible in the public or media eye.
This disproportionate coverage turns fear into spectacle, ensuring that moral panic remains at the forefront of national discussion.
The lesson is clear. Propaganda succeeds not only because extremists deploy it effectively, but also because fragments of its language filter into everyday politics and are reinforced by media headlines. When fear and division are wrapped in the language of patriotism or protection, and amplified by headlines chasing clicks, they gain a veneer of legitimacy.
History shows us that such narratives, left unchallenged, can fundamentally alter societies. Recognising and naming these rhetorical strategies, both at the extremes and in their diluted mainstream forms, is essential if we are to prevent fear from once again being weaponised into power.
Sorry if the above feels extreme, but the fact is that this country is in great danger of becoming lead by those who preach intolerance and hate, and I hope there is a voting majority who can see through the propaganda as we go through the elections in the coming months and years to prevent this. [Post edited 19 Sep 11:24]
|  | | |
| Politics and the media currently on 11:37 - Sep 19 with 1002 views | BlueNomad |
I put on some rubber gloves this morning and looked at the Daily M**l. What a disgusting rag it is. Today’s effort is to announce that Trump “showed he is the boss” and suggested we should use the military to stop illegal immigration, wind power is “a joke” etc. The letters page is something else!
I now feel dirty. |  | | |
| Politics and the media currently on 11:39 - Sep 19 with 995 views | Fixed_It |
| Politics and the media currently on 11:21 - Sep 19 by bsw72 |
Not just this country, but globally; it's no longer news but propaganda being pushed and is concerning based upon history - and if anyone thinks that comparisons between some of the modern rhetoric today, and that which was used during the rise of fascism in Germany in the 1930s is extreme, they should better understand their history; noting that propaganda works not by presenting truth but by reshaping perception.
In the 1930s, nationalist movements; most infamously the Nazis; developed systematic techniques to secure power. Among these were:
- The “Big Lie”: repeating a falsehood until it became accepted as truth.
- Scapegoating: blaming minorities or outsiders for unemployment, crime, or cultural decline.
- Enemy caricatures: portraying groups as immoral, predatory, or corrupting influences.
- Appeals to unity: equating dissent with betrayal; and conformity with patriotism.
- Moral panic: casting themselves as protectors of women and children against supposedly predatory outsiders.
Sound familiar yet?
This last device was particularly powerful. By suggesting that minorities posed a danger to women, children, and the community, propaganda bypassed rational debate and appealed to primal instincts of fear and protection.
When we examine elements of the further right groups today in the UK (not even far right) today, the parallels are striking. Campaigns that call for “taking back control” or invoke “invasion” narratives around small boat crossings work in much the same way; immigration is framed not as a policy challenge but as an existential threat to culture, safety, and national identity. Groups like Britain First have explicitly used slogans about protecting “our women and children,” echoing the same moral panic strategies once used in the 1930s. Even the framing of asylum seekers as a “burden on taxpayers” or “drainers of resources” mirrors earlier scapegoating tactics designed to divide communities.
Crucially, the boundary between extremist and mainstream discourse is getting more and more blurred. While the mainstream parties may reject overt hostility, some have echoed fragments of the narrative through their use of language; references to “family values,” “protecting communities,” or “preserving culture” can unintentionally validate the underlying fear. Political debates over housing, healthcare, or policing are at times linked directly to immigration, reinforcing the idea that outsiders are to blame for systemic pressures while in truth the direct negative impact of immigration on these factors is far less than those caused by corporates and the wealthy.
The role of the media cannot be ignored. In an age of multi channel 24x7 feeds, the relentless pursuit of viewing figures, clicks, and engagement, sensationalist framing often amplifies the very rhetoric that fuels division. Add on this the echo chambers caused by social media algorithms further compounds the mainstream media.
A striking example is the focus on small boat crossings:
While those arriving by small boats represent only a small percentage of overall migration or arrivals (often cited as less than 2% of total migrant inflows), they dominate headlines and broadcast debates; for instance, in the year ending June 2025 there were about 43K small boat arrivals recorded in the UK, which is a large number in absolute terms but still far from the total migration numbers via all routes. Moreover small‐boat arrivals made up about 30-40% of all asylum applications in 2024, but many arriving through visa routes, legal migration, or other asylum routes remain less visible in the public or media eye.
This disproportionate coverage turns fear into spectacle, ensuring that moral panic remains at the forefront of national discussion.
The lesson is clear. Propaganda succeeds not only because extremists deploy it effectively, but also because fragments of its language filter into everyday politics and are reinforced by media headlines. When fear and division are wrapped in the language of patriotism or protection, and amplified by headlines chasing clicks, they gain a veneer of legitimacy.
History shows us that such narratives, left unchallenged, can fundamentally alter societies. Recognising and naming these rhetorical strategies, both at the extremes and in their diluted mainstream forms, is essential if we are to prevent fear from once again being weaponised into power.
Sorry if the above feels extreme, but the fact is that this country is in great danger of becoming lead by those who preach intolerance and hate, and I hope there is a voting majority who can see through the propaganda as we go through the elections in the coming months and years to prevent this. [Post edited 19 Sep 11:24]
|
I recently visited Auschwitz on a trip to Poland. The parallels are abundantly clear, and a lot of the rhetoric in the media (and social media) is frightening. How can people not see this?! |  |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 11:49 - Sep 19 with 921 views | jayessess |
Think it's extremely unlikely we'll be looking at AI investment stuff as a success story in a dozen years time. |  |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 11:57 - Sep 19 with 853 views | jasondozzell |
I am afraid I don't agree.
We're just being offered up for huge corporations to pick what they want from the country's carcass.
We need to end outsourcing, tax wealth and invest in public works to create growth. Not selling out to a load of immoral US tech giants.
Someone has called Starmer statesmanlike here. It's desperate stuff.
The Labour right were always the very worst people at the very worst time. Anyone who watched the News Agents or The Rest is Politics podcasts and thought this was the adults getting back in the room were clueless I'm afraid. |  | | |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:01 - Sep 19 with 810 views | itfcjoe |
| Politics and the media currently on 11:49 - Sep 19 by jayessess |
Think it's extremely unlikely we'll be looking at AI investment stuff as a success story in a dozen years time. |
I think success story, in that AI is coming to replace our jobs whether we like it or not, so may as well try and have some growth/jobs as part of it.
If we don't get a handle on what AI will do, and is already doing to the world, and what a workforce plan etc looks like in that world we are going to be buggared either way | |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:02 - Sep 19 with 801 views | itfcjoe |
| Politics and the media currently on 11:57 - Sep 19 by jasondozzell |
I am afraid I don't agree.
We're just being offered up for huge corporations to pick what they want from the country's carcass.
We need to end outsourcing, tax wealth and invest in public works to create growth. Not selling out to a load of immoral US tech giants.
Someone has called Starmer statesmanlike here. It's desperate stuff.
The Labour right were always the very worst people at the very worst time. Anyone who watched the News Agents or The Rest is Politics podcasts and thought this was the adults getting back in the room were clueless I'm afraid. |
"the very worst people at the very worst time"
Just not in any way true on either side of it | |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:07 - Sep 19 with 767 views | jasondozzell |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:02 - Sep 19 by itfcjoe |
"the very worst people at the very worst time"
Just not in any way true on either side of it |
The commentariat and the very worst figures on the right of the Labour party fought like crazy for 10 years to elect this government. Do they seem like good people with good intentions for the country? | | | |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:11 - Sep 19 with 711 views | positivity |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:07 - Sep 19 by jasondozzell |
The commentariat and the very worst figures on the right of the Labour party fought like crazy for 10 years to elect this government. Do they seem like good people with good intentions for the country? |
you may not like labour or starmer, but are they the "very worst"?
you could have farage, badenoch, lowe, musk, yaxley-lennon preaching hate, even corbyn is running a sexist boys club. | |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:15 - Sep 19 with 675 views | itfcjoe |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:07 - Sep 19 by jasondozzell |
The commentariat and the very worst figures on the right of the Labour party fought like crazy for 10 years to elect this government. Do they seem like good people with good intentions for the country? |
Yes, within the parameters they have to work within.
Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves, Bridget Phillipson, Angela Rayner, Wes Streeting, Yvette Cooper etc all seem like good people who want the best for the UK.
They may not be achieving it yet, and have more to do which they will be judged on but they aren't shysters | |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:19 - Sep 19 with 632 views | jasondozzell |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:15 - Sep 19 by itfcjoe |
Yes, within the parameters they have to work within.
Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves, Bridget Phillipson, Angela Rayner, Wes Streeting, Yvette Cooper etc all seem like good people who want the best for the UK.
They may not be achieving it yet, and have more to do which they will be judged on but they aren't shysters |
Can't agree with that at all I'm afraid. Craven careerists who entered government without a plan and have no principles. They are going to deliver Farage as a r result and have destroyed the Labour party. | | | |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:25 - Sep 19 with 569 views | baxterbasics |
| Politics and the media currently on 11:49 - Sep 19 by jayessess |
Think it's extremely unlikely we'll be looking at AI investment stuff as a success story in a dozen years time. |
It's needed, but as Nick Clegg was explaining on the radio, it's being well overhyped.
It basically puts the entire UKs compute power on a par with one single data centre being built in the US by his former employer, Meta. So very small beans. |  |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:25 - Sep 19 with 564 views | jasondozzell |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:11 - Sep 19 by positivity |
you may not like labour or starmer, but are they the "very worst"?
you could have farage, badenoch, lowe, musk, yaxley-lennon preaching hate, even corbyn is running a sexist boys club. |
We're getting all those people precisely because of the Starmer project. They're not protecting us from the far right, they've legitimised them.
Flags, crackdowns and a vague idea that growth would just happen is all they ever had and it means Farage will be PM.
They have also materially supported a genocide, allowed terrible behaviour within the party, and punished the vulnerable.
To my mind, they are worst because of what they will deliver. | | | |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:27 - Sep 19 with 556 views | baxterbasics |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:19 - Sep 19 by jasondozzell |
Can't agree with that at all I'm afraid. Craven careerists who entered government without a plan and have no principles. They are going to deliver Farage as a r result and have destroyed the Labour party. |
I've heard this tune before though. Didn't Blair and New Labour already destroy the Labour party?
Then Boris and co destroyed the Conservatives. | |
| |
| Politics and the media currently on 12:29 - Sep 19 with 523 views | buoyant |
| Politics and the media currently on 11:21 - Sep 19 by bsw72 |
Not just this country, but globally; it's no longer news but propaganda being pushed and is concerning based upon history - and if anyone thinks that comparisons between some of the modern rhetoric today, and that which was used during the rise of fascism in Germany in the 1930s is extreme, they should better understand their history; noting that propaganda works not by presenting truth but by reshaping perception.
In the 1930s, nationalist movements; most infamously the Nazis; developed systematic techniques to secure power. Among these were:
- The “Big Lie”: repeating a falsehood until it became accepted as truth.
- Scapegoating: blaming minorities or outsiders for unemployment, crime, or cultural decline.
- Enemy caricatures: portraying groups as immoral, predatory, or corrupting influences.
- Appeals to unity: equating dissent with betrayal; and conformity with patriotism.
- Moral panic: casting themselves as protectors of women and children against supposedly predatory outsiders.
Sound familiar yet?
This last device was particularly powerful. By suggesting that minorities posed a danger to women, children, and the community, propaganda bypassed rational debate and appealed to primal instincts of fear and protection.
When we examine elements of the further right groups today in the UK (not even far right) today, the parallels are striking. Campaigns that call for “taking back control” or invoke “invasion” narratives around small boat crossings work in much the same way; immigration is framed not as a policy challenge but as an existential threat to culture, safety, and national identity. Groups like Britain First have explicitly used slogans about protecting “our women and children,” echoing the same moral panic strategies once used in the 1930s. Even the framing of asylum seekers as a “burden on taxpayers” or “drainers of resources” mirrors earlier scapegoating tactics designed to divide communities.
Crucially, the boundary between extremist and mainstream discourse is getting more and more blurred. While the mainstream parties may reject overt hostility, some have echoed fragments of the narrative through their use of language; references to “family values,” “protecting communities,” or “preserving culture” can unintentionally validate the underlying fear. Political debates over housing, healthcare, or policing are at times linked directly to immigration, reinforcing the idea that outsiders are to blame for systemic pressures while in truth the direct negative impact of immigration on these factors is far less than those caused by corporates and the wealthy.
The role of the media cannot be ignored. In an age of multi channel 24x7 feeds, the relentless pursuit of viewing figures, clicks, and engagement, sensationalist framing often amplifies the very rhetoric that fuels division. Add on this the echo chambers caused by social media algorithms further compounds the mainstream media.
A striking example is the focus on small boat crossings:
While those arriving by small boats represent only a small percentage of overall migration or arrivals (often cited as less than 2% of total migrant inflows), they dominate headlines and broadcast debates; for instance, in the year ending June 2025 there were about 43K small boat arrivals recorded in the UK, which is a large number in absolute terms but still far from the total migration numbers via all routes. Moreover small‐boat arrivals made up about 30-40% of all asylum applications in 2024, but many arriving through visa routes, legal migration, or other asylum routes remain less visible in the public or media eye.
This disproportionate coverage turns fear into spectacle, ensuring that moral panic remains at the forefront of national discussion.
The lesson is clear. Propaganda succeeds not only because extremists deploy it effectively, but also because fragments of its language filter into everyday politics and are reinforced by media headlines. When fear and division are wrapped in the language of patriotism or protection, and amplified by headlines chasing clicks, they gain a veneer of legitimacy.
History shows us that such narratives, left unchallenged, can fundamentally alter societies. Recognising and naming these rhetorical strategies, both at the extremes and in their diluted mainstream forms, is essential if we are to prevent fear from once again being weaponised into power.
Sorry if the above feels extreme, but the fact is that this country is in great danger of becoming lead by those who preach intolerance and hate, and I hope there is a voting majority who can see through the propaganda as we go through the elections in the coming months and years to prevent this. [Post edited 19 Sep 11:24]
|
Excellent post!
Thank you 🙏 |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
