pink_triangle

I was talking more about people getting triggered on social media where they are in my view just taking the bait set. I remember in the past people getting massively triggered by Katie Hopkins and falling for the bait. If I went into a pub with GB News on I don’t think I would leave in principle. I would like to say I would ignore, but the part of me that likes to disagree would probably make me listen!

I actually think the left getting triggered by GBNews on social media actually has the opposite effect by raising their profile and allowing them to build an image as an anti left crusader. The day the likes of Wooton, Lawrence Fox, Calvin Robinson will feel beaten is the day people just ignore them.

I think the law has gone that way because of some ill advised moves from students on the left to stop speakers they disagree with. I don’t see the legislation as having much teeth and more of a culture war thing. I believe however the left should be leading on this issue and relishing the opportunity to take on those with opposing views.

I don’t think many people go randomly looking for news and end up on GBNews and suddenly start hating immigrants, Meghan and suddenly start caring how you define a woman. I think the people who watch are generally people who just want their own echo chamber. No problem either if Jez, Mayor Driscoll and Owen Jones set up their own lefty news channel. I’m not sure echo chambers (on either side ) are healthy, but not sure I would legislate to stop them. One of my favourite patients is a big GBNews fan, I just move the conversation to other things and we get on fine.

You could get one person making a complain with great merit and hundreds making a complain with less merit as part of a coordinated complaint. Agree you can’t judge purely on numbers.

Do you think getting rid of it makes the conspiracy theories go away, I think it just sends them to a different platform. I think they are preaching to the converted more than brainwashing people.

Just stick the sport on!

I have heard lefty students openly talking about trying to cancel people . I think it’s the wrong approach, you disagree with someone’s views on immigration, trans rights etc then challenge them. I want the left wing politicians to gain experience doing this from a young age, not being kept away from opposition views.

I would consider myself left wing, but at times worry about some of the cancel culture/no platforming that seems to have crept into left wing politics in recent years. I don’t have a huge issue with GB News and choose to ignore it most of the time. I have seen a few clips where they have had a token lefty going against the presenter and 2 guests and have generally been impressed with how they have argued as a minority. I work a lot with young students and am amazed how intelligent, curious and analytical they are. I worry about the idea of sheltering from people who disagree. I want them to hear arguments they disagree and challenge them.

I think it’s slightly bad, but won’t have any impact on the metrics they care about. Won’t cost sponsorship, fans or players. I think people will quickly move on.

It’s pretty clear they wanted him back, I always thought that was difficult. I guess they could have messed it up more by announcing it. They may feel floating the idea was worth it, not convinced there will be significant reputation damage to the club now.

I don’t think that’s it. I think it’s a negotiated statement that has been agreed between the Man Utd lawyers and Greenwood’s legal team. It’s probably worth doing to move on.

It’s a statement written by lawyers who will have spent hours to make sure the wording covers them in the best way possible.

The best team England beat were ranked 10th in the world. I think if they had been on the other half of the draw they could have lost earlier to 3 or 4 teams. I just felt it was a flat performance and their best players didn’t turn up. As you say they were without players, but so were Spain. In some ways it reminded me of the 2006 World Cup where the France squad effectively managed themselves.

You just felt the tournament was there for England to win, the draw opened up, USA eliminated early. Then just like the men’s team they lost against the first decent team they played against. You look at the age profile of their squad and think they should be contenders in 4 years time.

The idea of releasing the news via a pre recorded video is pure cowardice. The idea that they are considering their duty of care to the player is also laughable. If he was a squad player with little commercial value, he would already be out of the door. I struggle to see why the investigation has taken so long. Unless Greenwood has a good excuse for the photos and audio, it seems quite clear cut to me.

It reminds me of the last Euros when the draw opened up for Englands men team and in my view they completely bottled it. You just feel the womens team (and manager) are not going to do the same.

While the opposition is split that’s bound to happen. If they want to beat Trump in the primary they need to settle on one opponent.

Nope happy with Ryan and Rob at Wrexham so far.

I always thought the worst outcome for Man Utd was to announce they were bringing him back and then having to u turn. Haven’t not yet reached that point I suppose they could have handled it worse. However it’s bad and it seems to be stuck with them wanting to bring him back, but not being able to think of a way to push it through. To me the audio and the photo is always going to be the sticking point. Others accused of similar can always take the “my word against yours “ approach, that doesn’t exist in this case.

Don’t they get round FFP by putting them all on ridiculous long contracts?

At the same time rich people shouldn’t be presumed guilty just because they have rich lawyers. I have no doubt many rich people get away with stuff, but moving to a presumption of guilt also has its flaws.

It seems strange he wouldn’t have publicly come out if it wasn’t real. Even if allowed to play for Man U the recording will significantly impact on his commercial appeal.

To me there are two different discussions here. When talking about guilt from a legal perspective it is right that he is not in jail as there has been no criminal conviction. I think when talking about Mendy Zahidf seems to support a presumption of guilt which I feel would be a dangerous route to go down from a legal perspective. Then there is a conversation if the words/actions put him into disrepute that he shouldn’t play for the club. My view is the club supporting him is justifying violence against women and sexual assault so this should disqualify, plenty of clubs worldwide who wouldn’t care how you treat a woman where he can go.

I wait for the announcement from Man Utd how he will be made to attend a training session to learn about how not to abuse women.