FOLLOW BOREME
 
TAGS
<< Back to listing
James O'Brien - Why leavers now want a no deal Brexit

James O'Brien - Why leavers now want a no deal Brexit

(2:01)

You can comment as a guest, but registering gives you added benefits

Add your comment
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

James O'Brien is a thick idiot.

Original comment

James O'Brien is a thick idiot.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

I wouldn't say he's an idiot. I used to like his radio shows until he went full-remainer (you never go full-re****). And not because he's anti-Brexit, because it's all he talks about now.

I think when you expose yourself to one-sided media exclusively (I'm talking about the onslaught of anti-Brexit media, reports etc. that appeared after the referendum) it makes you a bit extremist. It puts you in a permanent destabilised emotional state which leads to viewing different opinions as baseless or the result of propaganda.

It's a phenomenon that the internet has greatly amplified. We filter information according to biases and with online communities such as r/unitedkingdom being heavily gamed (by those that don't have access to widespread print publications which are themselves heavily gamed so to speak) the amplification has an effect on our perception of out-groups in particular. And hence you get invalid assertions such as leavers are all idiots, or remainders are all traitors.

Original comment

I wouldn't say he's an idiot. I used to like his radio shows until he went full-remainer (you never go full-re****). And not because he's anti-Brexit, because it's all he talks about now.

I think when you expose yourself to one-sided media exclusively (I'm talking about the onslaught of anti-Brexit media, reports etc. that appeared after the referendum) it makes you a bit extremist. It puts you in a permanent destabilised emotional state which leads to viewing different opinions as baseless or the result of propaganda.

It's a phenomenon that the internet has greatly amplified. We filter information according to biases and with online communities such as r/unitedkingdom being heavily gamed (by those that don't have access to widespread print publications which are themselves heavily gamed so to speak) the amplification has an effect on our perception of out-groups in particular. And hence you get invalid assertions such as leavers are all idiots, or remainders are all traitors.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

I really hope you see the hypocrisy in these two sentences:
"When you expose yourself to one-sided media exclusively... it makes you a bit extremist."  "It... leads to viewing different opinions as... the result of propaganda ."

Still, very interesting that you see that as the one-sided media being Anti-Brexit.  That reflects the strong cognitive bias that comes from following the media from a single stream.  If you analyse all streams, it provides a different story.  A study by Oxford revealed that out of 928 articles over 2 test days that focused on Brexit, 45% were in favour of leaving compared with only 27% in favour of staying in the EU.  The Daily Mail  and Daily Telegraph (2 of 3 of the most popular papers in the UK) are both overwhelming pro-Brexit, along with the Daily Express, Daily Star, and The Sun.

Original comment

I really hope you see the hypocrisy in these two sentences:
"When you expose yourself to one-sided media exclusively... it makes you a bit extremist."  "It... leads to viewing different opinions as... the result of propaganda ."

Still, very interesting that you see that as the one-sided media being Anti-Brexit.  That reflects the strong cognitive bias that comes from following the media from a single stream.  If you analyse all streams, it provides a different story.  A study by Oxford revealed that out of 928 articles over 2 test days that focused on Brexit, 45% were in favour of leaving compared with only 27% in favour of staying in the EU.  The Daily Mail  and Daily Telegraph (2 of 3 of the most popular papers in the UK) are both overwhelming pro-Brexit, along with the Daily Express, Daily Star, and The Sun.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

Here we go again (covert aggression detected).

You're right, I don't see the hypocrisy in those two sentences.

Could you re-read my post and clarify what you're saying? In particular, is the Oxford study you're citing pre or post referendum?

Original comment

Here we go again (covert aggression detected).

You're right, I don't see the hypocrisy in those two sentences.

Could you re-read my post and clarify what you're saying? In particular, is the Oxford study you're citing pre or post referendum?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

It's a pity that any challenge from an outgroup is perceived as 'covert aggression'.  There is a prevalent emotional state which leads to viewing different opinions as baseless, or mere symptoms of psychological issues or personality disorders.  It prevents the individual from having to engage with an argument, and provides an easy way to discredit dissenting voices without conceptualising the issues at stake.

No, I figured you wouldn't see the hypocrisy.  Never mind.  That was a step too far.

Could you re-read my post because I made it pretty clear.  If there is a one-sided media onslaught, it has been in favour of Brexit.

The Oxford study was during the referendum campaign.  A pretty critical period.  Perhaps you'd like to use that fact to discredit it, because its conclusion doesn't suit your bias.  If so, no worries - tell me which of the papers I listed do you think has shifted its allegiance.  

Interestingly, a YouGov survey from February this year echoes the same conclusion with near perfect accuracy, and if anything it suggests the bias is actually even stronger than initially thought.  

So those are two sources for you beyond hearsay that suggest a significant Anti-Brexit bias in the media.  I appreciate the data-sets are inconvenient to the point you wish to make, so I'm happy to review your independent surveys and studies that suggest the opposite.  

I look forward to seeing your sources.

Original comment

It's a pity that any challenge from an outgroup is perceived as 'covert aggression'.  There is a prevalent emotional state which leads to viewing different opinions as baseless, or mere symptoms of psychological issues or personality disorders.  It prevents the individual from having to engage with an argument, and provides an easy way to discredit dissenting voices without conceptualising the issues at stake.

No, I figured you wouldn't see the hypocrisy.  Never mind.  That was a step too far.

Could you re-read my post because I made it pretty clear.  If there is a one-sided media onslaught, it has been in favour of Brexit.

The Oxford study was during the referendum campaign.  A pretty critical period.  Perhaps you'd like to use that fact to discredit it, because its conclusion doesn't suit your bias.  If so, no worries - tell me which of the papers I listed do you think has shifted its allegiance.  

Interestingly, a YouGov survey from February this year echoes the same conclusion with near perfect accuracy, and if anything it suggests the bias is actually even stronger than initially thought.  

So those are two sources for you beyond hearsay that suggest a significant Anti-Brexit bias in the media.  I appreciate the data-sets are inconvenient to the point you wish to make, so I'm happy to review your independent surveys and studies that suggest the opposite.  

I look forward to seeing your sources.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

My accusation of covert aggression was related to your style of writing not what position you've taken.

OK, so the Oxford study was of media leading up to the referendum, thats what I was asking. I was talking about media post referendum. That's why I asked yo to re-read my post. And I had already read your post multiple times before I replied because I wasn't sure I understood it correctly due to your covertly aggressive style.

"There is a prevalent emotional state which leads to viewing different opinions as baseless, or mere symptoms of psychological issues or personality disorders." - you've just rehashed what I was saying, why have you done that?

The point I was making is that the effect of one-side media coming through feeds in large quantiles every day, and especially the troll-like comments that always accompany them, creates a destabilised emotion state.

This conversation is going nowhere like all conversations with you. But it is a good example of what I was talking about.

Let me ask you this - how many anti-Brexit headlines do you see on a daily basis?

Original comment

My accusation of covert aggression was related to your style of writing not what position you've taken.

OK, so the Oxford study was of media leading up to the referendum, thats what I was asking. I was talking about media post referendum. That's why I asked yo to re-read my post. And I had already read your post multiple times before I replied because I wasn't sure I understood it correctly due to your covertly aggressive style.

"There is a prevalent emotional state which leads to viewing different opinions as baseless, or mere symptoms of psychological issues or personality disorders." - you've just rehashed what I was saying, why have you done that?

The point I was making is that the effect of one-side media coming through feeds in large quantiles every day, and especially the troll-like comments that always accompany them, creates a destabilised emotion state.

This conversation is going nowhere like all conversations with you. But it is a good example of what I was talking about.

Let me ask you this - how many anti-Brexit headlines do you see on a daily basis?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

I rehash your comments to try and make you aware that you provide the perfect example of exactly the kind of behaviours you complain about.  You are your own worst enemy.  You contradict yourself in almost every comment.

I won't labour the point, but you talk about aggression on the same site where you've come out with all manner of abuse.  You believe that being extremist can be a result of exposure to one-sided propaganda, but you also say that believing certain positions (such as extremism) are "the result of propaganda" is in itself the result of a negative emotional state.  I could go on, but you wouldn't address it.

Thank you for that admission, but trying to use the style of my writing ("covert aggression") or Wikipedia psychology ("narcissism") to attack people you disagree with, rather than addressing their position, is not a intellectual or meaningful strategy.  That's the sort of behaviour we see on social media and I've seen you do that with others on here.

Yes, you were talking about post-referendum.  I provided you with a source that gave a thorough assessment of the bias during the referendum, and asked what makes you think the bias has changed.  Still no answer.  Since then, I have also added another survey from this year that suggests the bias is actually stronger than it was during the campaign.

So once more... please give me the independent studies or sources that suggest that there currently is, or has ever been, a one-sided media onslaught of Anti-Brexit propaganda.  I'm not really interested in the number of headlines I personally see.  After-all, that would be a very ineffective, subjective and anecdotal way of trying to gauge media bias, don't you think?  Or is that the sort of thing that constitutes evidence to you?

You're right, this conversation will go nowhere.  Until you compare what you're complaining about, with your own behaviour, and learn to back up your claims rather than regurgitating tropes on social media sites, then no meaningful discussion can ever take place with you.

Original comment

I rehash your comments to try and make you aware that you provide the perfect example of exactly the kind of behaviours you complain about.  You are your own worst enemy.  You contradict yourself in almost every comment.

I won't labour the point, but you talk about aggression on the same site where you've come out with all manner of abuse.  You believe that being extremist can be a result of exposure to one-sided propaganda, but you also say that believing certain positions (such as extremism) are "the result of propaganda" is in itself the result of a negative emotional state.  I could go on, but you wouldn't address it.

Thank you for that admission, but trying to use the style of my writing ("covert aggression") or Wikipedia psychology ("narcissism") to attack people you disagree with, rather than addressing their position, is not a intellectual or meaningful strategy.  That's the sort of behaviour we see on social media and I've seen you do that with others on here.

Yes, you were talking about post-referendum.  I provided you with a source that gave a thorough assessment of the bias during the referendum, and asked what makes you think the bias has changed.  Still no answer.  Since then, I have also added another survey from this year that suggests the bias is actually stronger than it was during the campaign.

So once more... please give me the independent studies or sources that suggest that there currently is, or has ever been, a one-sided media onslaught of Anti-Brexit propaganda.  I'm not really interested in the number of headlines I personally see.  After-all, that would be a very ineffective, subjective and anecdotal way of trying to gauge media bias, don't you think?  Or is that the sort of thing that constitutes evidence to you?

You're right, this conversation will go nowhere.  Until you compare what you're complaining about, with your own behaviour, and learn to back up your claims rather than regurgitating tropes on social media sites, then no meaningful discussion can ever take place with you.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

"I won't labour the point, but you talk about aggression on the same site where you've come out with all manner of abuse." - you mean reacting overtly aggressive in response to convert aggression? I'm sure you're very aware of how that works. And you know that I know why. LOL.

"You believe that being extremist can be a result of exposure to one-sided propaganda" - true - "but you also say that believing certain positions (such as extremism)" - extremism isn't a position - " are 'the result of propaganda' is in itself the result of a negative emotional state. " - I didn't say that but also true. You are trying to not understand. Who does that? Again, you know that I know why. LOL.

"So once more... please give me the independent studies or sources that suggest that there currently is, or has ever been, a one-sided media onslaught of Anti-Brexit propaganda." - just look at r/unitedkingdom pro-Brexit doesn't exist. That's not to say there isn't pro-Brexit media elsewhere, but it is concentrated in that particular subreddit. No studies necessary.

"Until you compare what you're complaining about, with your own behaviour, and learn to back up your claims rather than regurgitating tropes on social media sites, then no meaningful discussion can ever take place with you." - let me rehash that like you did earlier:

"Until you stop deliberately misinterpreting what others say and deliberately provoking emotional reactions as a tactic in order to avoid engaging in any kind of honest discussion it's best to assume that you're dangerous and should be avoid at all costs"

Goodbye nutjob.

Original comment

"I won't labour the point, but you talk about aggression on the same site where you've come out with all manner of abuse." - you mean reacting overtly aggressive in response to convert aggression? I'm sure you're very aware of how that works. And you know that I know why. LOL.

"You believe that being extremist can be a result of exposure to one-sided propaganda" - true - "but you also say that believing certain positions (such as extremism)" - extremism isn't a position - " are 'the result of propaganda' is in itself the result of a negative emotional state. " - I didn't say that but also true. You are trying to not understand. Who does that? Again, you know that I know why. LOL.

"So once more... please give me the independent studies or sources that suggest that there currently is, or has ever been, a one-sided media onslaught of Anti-Brexit propaganda." - just look at r/unitedkingdom pro-Brexit doesn't exist. That's not to say there isn't pro-Brexit media elsewhere, but it is concentrated in that particular subreddit. No studies necessary.

"Until you compare what you're complaining about, with your own behaviour, and learn to back up your claims rather than regurgitating tropes on social media sites, then no meaningful discussion can ever take place with you." - let me rehash that like you did earlier:

"Until you stop deliberately misinterpreting what others say and deliberately provoking emotional reactions as a tactic in order to avoid engaging in any kind of honest discussion it's best to assume that you're dangerous and should be avoid at all costs"

Goodbye nutjob.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

Aha, so you're admitting that you become overtly aggressive.  Great, now take that knowledge, and work to regulate your emotions, or stay away from sources that do that to you.

Extremism isn't a position, but a type of position, and one that you think is a result of propaganda.  But you also think that claiming any position is just the result of propaganda, is actually the result of an emotional state.  I understand perfectly well - it's basically an admission within 2 sentences that you are a case in point.  You assume dissenters are victims to propaganda ("one sided media onslaught") because as you put it, you have a permanent emotional state.

What a surprise.  Unable to provide an independent source for your claims of an "onslaught of anti-Brexit media."  

As for Reddit, are you joking?  You're ignoring two comprehensive independent studies of media, in favour of a Reddit page?  Wow.  Seriously, stay off social media.  It is damaging you.  An absolutely perfect example of how people that spend too much time on social media, end up believing that the online world mirrors the real world, and stop looking into empirical data.  "LOL" indeed!

Remember when you said you were starting a conversation in order to get an emotional response?  Well, fascinatingly you've just admitted that it is a "tactic in order to avoid engaging in any kind of honest discussion".  Another frank confession.  Again, you are your own worst enemy.  

Basically, I don't have to argue with you... I just present your own words back to you and confront you with your own principles.  I don't agree that it makes you dangerous though.  Just a little sheltered, confused, and emotionally troubled.  You're more a risk to yourself than to anyone else.

By the way, this will keep happening in your life until you take control, and claim ownership for you behaviour.  If you don't like one-sided media, look at all media (for example in aggregated studies).  If you don't like aggression, don't be aggressive.  If you think social media warps you, stay off social media.  If you don't like people who provoke emotional responses, don't try to provoke emotional responses.  Write down all the rules you think people should live by, and live by them.  Physician, heal thyself.

Til the next time.

Original comment

Aha, so you're admitting that you become overtly aggressive.  Great, now take that knowledge, and work to regulate your emotions, or stay away from sources that do that to you.

Extremism isn't a position, but a type of position, and one that you think is a result of propaganda.  But you also think that claiming any position is just the result of propaganda, is actually the result of an emotional state.  I understand perfectly well - it's basically an admission within 2 sentences that you are a case in point.  You assume dissenters are victims to propaganda ("one sided media onslaught") because as you put it, you have a permanent emotional state.

What a surprise.  Unable to provide an independent source for your claims of an "onslaught of anti-Brexit media."  

As for Reddit, are you joking?  You're ignoring two comprehensive independent studies of media, in favour of a Reddit page?  Wow.  Seriously, stay off social media.  It is damaging you.  An absolutely perfect example of how people that spend too much time on social media, end up believing that the online world mirrors the real world, and stop looking into empirical data.  "LOL" indeed!

Remember when you said you were starting a conversation in order to get an emotional response?  Well, fascinatingly you've just admitted that it is a "tactic in order to avoid engaging in any kind of honest discussion".  Another frank confession.  Again, you are your own worst enemy.  

Basically, I don't have to argue with you... I just present your own words back to you and confront you with your own principles.  I don't agree that it makes you dangerous though.  Just a little sheltered, confused, and emotionally troubled.  You're more a risk to yourself than to anyone else.

By the way, this will keep happening in your life until you take control, and claim ownership for you behaviour.  If you don't like one-sided media, look at all media (for example in aggregated studies).  If you don't like aggression, don't be aggressive.  If you think social media warps you, stay off social media.  If you don't like people who provoke emotional responses, don't try to provoke emotional responses.  Write down all the rules you think people should live by, and live by them.  Physician, heal thyself.

Til the next time.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

Well obviously I'm not trying to convince you. That isn't possible. You are omniscient and know everything even though you consistently fail to engage with... well, anything anyone says.

Is it a tactic for add revenue? Because if it is you should know I used an add blocker.

BTW, what happened to the Homer Simpson being sarcastic act. Can I request to speak to that personality?

I hope many people have read this thread. I think it stands for itself. I hope they are thinking, 'what the hell is this guy talking about'?

If they are I'd like to add: this psycho is bringing up aspects of discussions we had 10 years ago. Let that sink in!

For the last time, bye nutjob. 

Original comment

Well obviously I'm not trying to convince you. That isn't possible. You are omniscient and know everything even though you consistently fail to engage with... well, anything anyone says.

Is it a tactic for add revenue? Because if it is you should know I used an add blocker.

BTW, what happened to the Homer Simpson being sarcastic act. Can I request to speak to that personality?

I hope many people have read this thread. I think it stands for itself. I hope they are thinking, 'what the hell is this guy talking about'?

If they are I'd like to add: this psycho is bringing up aspects of discussions we had 10 years ago. Let that sink in!

For the last time, bye nutjob. 

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

Same poster as above. One more thing.

How many people have encountered nutjobs like the other poster in this thread?

Did it convince you that people like this are intolerable and did it tainted your perception of whatever out-group they were acting as?

That's the point.

Original comment

Same poster as above. One more thing.

How many people have encountered nutjobs like the other poster in this thread?

Did it convince you that people like this are intolerable and did it tainted your perception of whatever out-group they were acting as?

That's the point.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

Aww Pup.  You didn't even last 3 hours that time before coming back, and then having said bye (again) for the last time, you managed a whole 22 minutes!  It's flattering I suppose, but you really must work on your self-control, particularly as regards social media like this.  Remember, take ownership of your behaviours or these episodes will keep occuring.  And the drinking doesn't help...  I think it "did tainted your perception".

10 years ago?  Are you sure?  Are you just a little paranoid?  You're anonymous.  And who would go back over previous comments?  Only a psychoputz right? 

You're right, you're not trying to convince me because you don't actually have a point.  You just want to project your own foibles onto others, and then use the insults that have been levelled at you in the past to try and offend.  I'm not offended, but retarded nutjobs, psychos, putzes, insane pricks - really a thorough lesson in how to use abuse to try to belittle critics instead of engaging with... well, anything anyone says.  

I'm sorry you've taken such an aversion to your own advice.  With this tantrum of a reaction, perhaps it wasn't such good advice after-all.  

Also, very alarmed to hear I might be besmirching the good name of whatever "out-groups" you have labelled me with.  It is my life's mission to protect the reputation of the communists, and god forbid anyone thinks ill of the Marxists.

So having accepted that this site is a "hive-mind", you now think you have sympathetic viewers waiting silently in the wings, nodding their approval?  OK, whatever helps you sleep.

Very sad to hear you use an 'add-blocker'.  I wonder whether Google monitor things like bounce rate, session duration, and overall number of hits to determine the authority of a webpage.  Well perhaps all those sympathetic viewers you believe in are clicking to view your comments.  We all like to support BoreMe in every little way we can.

Best of luck and sincere thanks. 

See you soon.

xx

Original comment

Aww Pup.  You didn't even last 3 hours that time before coming back, and then having said bye (again) for the last time, you managed a whole 22 minutes!  It's flattering I suppose, but you really must work on your self-control, particularly as regards social media like this.  Remember, take ownership of your behaviours or these episodes will keep occuring.  And the drinking doesn't help...  I think it "did tainted your perception".

10 years ago?  Are you sure?  Are you just a little paranoid?  You're anonymous.  And who would go back over previous comments?  Only a psychoputz right? 

You're right, you're not trying to convince me because you don't actually have a point.  You just want to project your own foibles onto others, and then use the insults that have been levelled at you in the past to try and offend.  I'm not offended, but retarded nutjobs, psychos, putzes, insane pricks - really a thorough lesson in how to use abuse to try to belittle critics instead of engaging with... well, anything anyone says.  

I'm sorry you've taken such an aversion to your own advice.  With this tantrum of a reaction, perhaps it wasn't such good advice after-all.  

Also, very alarmed to hear I might be besmirching the good name of whatever "out-groups" you have labelled me with.  It is my life's mission to protect the reputation of the communists, and god forbid anyone thinks ill of the Marxists.

So having accepted that this site is a "hive-mind", you now think you have sympathetic viewers waiting silently in the wings, nodding their approval?  OK, whatever helps you sleep.

Very sad to hear you use an 'add-blocker'.  I wonder whether Google monitor things like bounce rate, session duration, and overall number of hits to determine the authority of a webpage.  Well perhaps all those sympathetic viewers you believe in are clicking to view your comments.  We all like to support BoreMe in every little way we can.

Best of luck and sincere thanks. 

See you soon.

xx

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (130 days ago)

"sincere" - I don't think you know what that means.

Original comment

"sincere" - I don't think you know what that means.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (130 days ago)

"for the last time" - I don't think you know what that means.

Original comment

"for the last time" - I don't think you know what that means.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (130 days ago)

^ last word.

Original comment

^ last word.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (130 days ago)
Latest comment:

Thanks for your insightful observation, Einstien.

Original comment
Latest comment:

Thanks for your insightful observation, Einstien.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

You make no argument.

Original comment

You make no argument.

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
Guest: (131 days ago)

Why do you have to make an argument to express an opinion?

Original comment

Why do you have to make an argument to express an opinion?

Add your reply
Submit as guest (your name)

Copy code captcha


Submit as member (username / password)

CANCEL
RELATED POSTS
James O'Brien - Why leavers now want a no deal Brexit
James O'Brien - Why leavers now want a no deal Brexit
I do not like green eggs and ham
I do not like green eggs and ham
Newsnight - The fate of the British sandwich post-Brexit
Newsnight - The fate of the British sandwich post-Brexit
5 Minutes to Explain - Hard Brexit
5 Minutes to Explain - Hard Brexit
James O'Brien - Expert explains what trading on WTO rules actually means
James O'Brien - Expert explains what trading on WTO rules actually means