All this false equivalence stuff is almost as boring as the constant recourse to calling people snowflakes when you've run out of ideas, or have nothing meaningful to say in relation to the issue at hand; it's become a standard tactic of the RW nutjob, to delegitimise a person rather than engage with the argument.

For clarity - there was no editing out, or in, of audience reactions to other leaders - so it's a moot point; there was however, editing out of laughter at Johnson's response - which is unacceptable from the state funded broadcaster, particularly during the purdah.

By God you're blinkered. The laughter wasn't 'replaced' at all. Very simply, they edited that particular moment out to save time and avoid repetition, as Boris repeated himself. The first time he spoke, there was some laughter, the second time he spoke, there was applause.

You actually think they stripped out the audience audio and replaced it with applause?





I've told you before, don't believe everything you read on ter.

Quote ="wrencat1873"It seems that the BBC is now admitting a mistake on their editing of Johnson: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-50546115 Humble pie Cronus & Sal ? Despite being accused of paranoia and snowflake tendencies, sometimes, it's right to call these people out and we shouldn't have to provoke media outlets like the BBC into being balanced and honest. The worrying thin is that even a fool like me could spot this but, how many more are there. We all know about the "doctored" wreath laying at the cenotaph because "someone" doesn't know up from down but, how many more and when will the BBC love in with Johnson cease.'" I haven't commented on this at all?

Quote ="wrencat1873"It seems that the BBC is now admitting a mistake on their editing of Johnson: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-50546115 Humble pie Cronus & Sal ? Despite being accused of paranoia and snowflake tendencies, sometimes, it's right to call these people out and we shouldn't have to provoke media outlets like the BBC into being balanced and honest. The worrying thin is that even a fool like me could spot this but, how many more are there. We all know about the "doctored" wreath laying at the cenotaph because "someone" doesn't know up from down but, how many more and when will the BBC love in with Johnson cease.'" I haven't commented on this at all?

The point is that there is no point in showing that particular clip without including the laughter, it's akin to watching match of the day but, not showing the goals.
If you cant understand the issue, you really do deserve Farage and Johnson shaping your future, good luck

Oh I understand it, but it's only relevant if it supports your agenda. I think the audience laughing at Corbyn and Swinson is equally relevant; Corbyn for constantly switching stance until he's suddenly 'neutral', and Swinson for blatantly rejecting the 17.4m without a hint of shame.

But it really isn't that big of an issue. I want to hear what they say and see how they act, not hear what a few people in the audience think. You're putting your "big moment" on probably 4 or 5 people having a chuckle for about a second. You want to hear that laughter because it validates your views.

Still haven't answered the question; were the moments of laughter and scorn directed at Corbyn, Swinson, Sturgeon and Farage included in the "controversial" 1.00 news bulletin? 4th time of trying.

Did this not answer you sufficiently: "The other (many) moments of laughter from the debate on Friday, have not been edited out and replaced with applause when clip were shown for a second time."

It's all that your getting and I'm sorry that you missed the first clip

Did this not answer you sufficiently: "The other (many) moments of laughter from the debate on Friday, have not been edited out and replaced with applause when clip were shown for a second time."

It's all that your getting and I'm sorry that you missed the first clip

It loses something without the laughter but, you may not have spotted the difference

No - it's only relevant if it happened; and in this case, the clip they showed was deliberately misrepresented, because they showed Johnson's strong words, but edited out the context of a room full of people laughing in scorn. If they'd shown clips of the other leaders words leading up to laughter, but edited out the laughter, you might have the faintest trace of a point.

And this is the state broadcaster by the way, who also 'accidentally' used old footage of Johnson at the cenotaph, which conveniently airbrushed out his embarrassing gaffe and showed him in a more positive light; the same event btw that last year, saw Corbyn vilified for his choice of coat, gleefully replayed over and over again, by the same state broadcaster.

You can explain away this stuff all you like - and it may wash in your own echo chamber - but it's self-evidently and clearly wrong; positively Orwellian in fact:

"The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

The big issues:
- what are your intentions for the Trident nuclear deterrent?
- are you looking to us out the EU, deal or no deal?
- what are your tax threshold intentions?
- what is your long-term welfare state strategy?
- how will you address the issue of homelessness?

The Left, "BUT...BUT...THEY EDITED THE LIVE VERSION OF LEADER'S QT AND SOME PEOPLE DIDN'T SEE ONE SECOND OF A FEW PEOPLE LAUGHING AND THAT WAS THE BIG MOMENT I WANTED EVERYONE TO SEEEEE"



That is exactly what you sound like.

I hope they don't edit Andrew Neil from tonight - Corbyn didn't actually answer one question - oh he did on the WASPI - a mix of government reserves and borrowing and then admitted the government reserves were a fraction of what would be required. He couldn't answer what % of the total income tax was paid by the top 1% and he wanted to suggest that removing the married tax allowance was some way of equalising society!! Less said about anti-Semitism the better

For the first time he looked out of his depth - a shocking performance.

That was just astounding. Corbyn way out of his depth, evasive as ever, clearly rattled and utterly unconvincing. Eye-rolling & huffing throughout. If Prince Andrew was a car crash, that was an M6 pile-up into both carriageways.

He simply can't hide his loyalties. Wouldn't apologise for antisemitism, wouldn't give the go-ahead to kill an ISIS leader. We all know he's refused to condemn the IRA killings before. Won't answer questions, gets his tax sums wrong. Thinks £60 billion can be found for WASPI 'just because it needs doing'.

Neil always jumps in a lot but he does his best to cut off pointless soundbites and push hard for answers. He does it with everyone. That's why he's good at his job.

Yes, Corbyn eventually answered on WASPI - but by my count he was asked SEVENTEEN times before getting some form of wishy-washy answer.

Great post BUT, if you cant trust a word coming out of the Prime Ministers mouth, it's all irrelevant.
Johnson has lied at every opportunity, ranging form exaggeration to down right lies.

I know that YOU cant or are not prepared to see this but it doesn't change his "style". He is a political chancer hence his "switch" a year or so before the referendum from Pro European to Brexitier.

You can go for all of your sarcastic comments and "snowflake" "insults" but it doesn't change Johnson and people laughing on the question of trust, something which most people should have somewhere near the top of their list of attributes, for who they wish to vote for, IS fairly important.

It's no wonder he's bottled another debate and I hope that he is indeed "empty chaired"
The leader of the country "pulled" from debate to prevent any gaffes.

No mention of the time machine at the Cenotaph then

All irrelevant guys



Corbyn stops a hard right wing fascist Brexit.

End of.

Well, if Corbyn's performance tonight is any measure, he's well advised to avoid debates.

I'm absolutely aware of Johnson's character and past, and it's far from squeaky clean ( is anyone?) - but I'm prepared to give him a chance. He's committed to seeing Brexit through and - frankly - he's a million times better than the other truly miserable excuses for "leaders".


Nope because I couldn't care less. Genuinely don't give a sht. Honestly, right now I care more whether I can be d having another drink before bed. Just as I don't actually give a toss about the "conspiracy" of Johnson's "missing" second of laughter, as I've said before several times. It's all utterly irrelevant. You love it simply because it validates your views and later on you can cry to anyone who will put up with you that it's all a conspiracy.

Don’t get too carried away because Johnson turn is still to come and I expect the interviewer will have a lot of ammunition to upset him. You can tell when he is lying his mouth is open.

Hope that you slept well ?
However, where do you stand on the primary TV channel "air brushing" out the Prime Ministers mistakes - you didn't manage to answer that one.
Inserting footage from 3 years ago to cover his mistake, although small in itself, shouldn't be happening in a UK democracy.

The fact that you cant be d to answer would suggest that you condone this type of thing

Lovely thanks.



If you read it again I did answer. You've even quoted it. I simply don't care. I don't care about the "missing second" either (as I've said from the start), but I find the outrage, wailing and conspiracy theories from the left hilarious.

It's such a nothing issue. Have you even watched it? Would you have known it was upside down? I've just watched it again and unless someone points it out you'd never know. I honestly wouldn't care even if Corbyn had done it.

Of course I'm aware that's not your primary point - you think there's a conspiracy. But, bear in mind all other broadcasters, all other bulletins, all social media outlets and indeed the live footage used the correct version, what would be the point in a 'deliberate' edit? Also bear in mind it had already broken online - in the press and on social media - it was already out there so again what would be the point?

You're just so utterly convinced there's a BBC conspiracy you get suckered in by the fake outrage in the press and on social media. And it validates your views. Fact is, it was a cock-up, it's been explained in detail by the production team and that'll do for me. Move on to something actually important.

Sorry Mr Cronus but, I had moved on from the missing laughter at Mr Johnson, which, I am now convinced never happened


The more deliberate change was with this years laying of the wreath by Mr Johnson.
The live footage shows him laying the wreath upside down but, the re-runs go back in time (3 years) to show him laying the wreath correctly.

Was this to protect the dignity of those who have fallen or, to protect "our leader" and just who made that decision ?
+

I've replied on the cenotaph 'incident', twice. Once last night and just now. Come on lad.

I'll have to read your posts more carefully in future


Pat of it had been air brushed out on my PC - it has some additional security to protect me from any form of extremism (parental controls or something like that

).
FWIW, Boris has had the usual honeymoon period with the media, which is the norm - just to stop the natives from getting too restless.
However, on a more serious note, the bloke is never going to change from being a "maverick" politician and as long as someone keeps on sweeping up behind him, he may be ok.
Personally, as I've said many times, I'm more annoyed that the Tories can boast about spending pledges that return us to where we were 10 years ago, before the cuts that they imposed.
It's like having your car impounded and then having to be grateful when someone passes you the keys.

If only Labour had "promoted" the other Miliband, we may never have arrived here and we are still left with staying in the EU or sucking up ever closer to the USA and the latter is a worse option than leaving the EU.

So Channel 4 added subtitles claiming Johnson said the word 'people of colour' rather than 'people of talent'.

Deliberate? Conspiracy? Mistake?



[i"Unacceptable from a publicly owned broadcaster...shouldn't happen...self-evidently and clearly wrong; positively Orwellian in fact"[/i...etc...the outraged left are suspiciously quiet on this matter.



[size=75I actually don't care but anything that makes C4 news squirm is good by me.[/size

Don't expect to hear anything from the left wing echo chamber on here. Never known such a myopic bunch. And don't forget only the conservatives tell lies... Corbyn and the rest of his ilk are as pure as driven snow.
Don't know why you bother Cronus... right wing all bad, left wing all good. Never mind that we'd be destitute if Corbyn actually got to implement his crackpot policies just like the poor sods in Venezuela.

To quote Crony, stop being such a snowflake.

Please explain how I'm a snowflake. I'm not taking offence at anything or professing faux outrage. Just stated a couple of facts as I see it.

To be fair if he spoke with a northern accent there is no way it would've been 'misheard'. Phonetically I imagine upper class types pronounce it as kalah, which can be mishead from talent if the audio is dodgy.