View Full Version : Westminster running scared?
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/cinema-adverts-billboards-and-social-media-posts-among-uk-s-greatest-hits-campaign-aiming-to-boost-support-for-union-1-5087799
"Cinemagoers across Scotland are to be presented with adverts setting out the UK’s “greatest hits” of past and present achievements in a bid to boost support for the Union.
The campaign, which is expected to be supported by billboards, radio, print adverts and social media posts, will highlight successes that the four nations of the UK have achieved together – covering areas like sport, culture, humanitarian aid and green energy."
Or, as the Herald puts it "The Westminster Government are to launch a campaign aimed at bolstering support for the Union following a series of polls suggesting a narrow majority in support for Scottish independence."
Be interesting to see what Westminster thinks are the UK's "Better Together" achievements, particularly as nobody, since before the 2014 referendum has managed to come up with anyrhing we couldn't have done on our own if we wanted to and had the tools in our own hands to do it.
Anybody got any suggestions as to what they can put on the adverts?
I certainly won't be heading to the Cinema again for a long time...it'll cost the Scottish taxpayer enough to fund Boris's latest brainfart (as it WILL be apportioned to Scotland because it is being spent in Scotland), without dipping our hands into our pockets to get more UK OK propaganda shoved down our throats.
I shall continue to go to the cinema if and when I want to see the film on show as I don't go or not go based on the adverts.
Corky Smeek
10-Feb-20, 18:38
Didn't someone (Michael Gove, I think) also have the silly idea of trying to "strengthen the union" by putting "Made in Britain" plaques on anything in Scotland that that wasn't wholly funded by the SG. I don't think much came of it. Presumably Brexit got in the way.
The notion that any relationship can be strengthened by one party patronising and condescending the other is strange. I can see it changing minds, however. Just not in the way the UKG intends.
Yes, but then wasn't it a stunt to have the Scotland loves the EU projected on that European building, for which a rebuke was issued and a dim view taken and also, was done with the clear idea to mislead. No party can claim the moral high ground and I just wish that could be admitted and debate could be honest- but it is wishful thinking.
Shabbychic
11-Feb-20, 11:10
I shall continue to go to the cinema if and when I want to see the film on show as I don't go or not go based on the adverts.
Well, bully for you. This is not just an advert, but a propaganda campaign, and I for one will not be giving my money to any cinema planning to show them. Wonder how long they will keep it up if there are less "bums on seats"? There are times when folks need to stand up and say "NO". Remember also, the taxpayer will be paying for this, whether they like it or not!
Yes, but then wasn't it a stunt to have the Scotland loves the EU projected on that European building, for which a rebuke was issued and a dim view taken and also, was done with the clear idea to mislead. No party can claim the moral high ground and I just wish that could be admitted and debate could be honest- but it is wishful thinking.
Yes, it was a New Year "fun" stunt, and no rebuke was issued by anyone actually, and no actions were taken. Some folk are easily misled when they want to be. Wonder how many will retract/correct this story?
Corky Smeek
11-Feb-20, 11:34
Yes, but then wasn't it a stunt to have the Scotland loves the EU projected on that European building, for which a rebuke was issued and a dim view taken and also, was done with the clear idea to mislead. No party can claim the moral high ground and I just wish that could be admitted and debate could be honest- but it is wishful thinking.
Of course it was a stunt but a very short-lived one and not quite in the same league as this state-sponsored propaganda campaign. I also agree with Shabbychic that sometimes we just have to say "no". What the UKG is doing is not normal behaviour for a western democratic state and I feel sure that they would not be contemplating it if they weren't deeply worried.
On your final point, I think you must be less cynical than I am. I will happily admit that no party can claim the moral high ground. I just didn't think it needed saying quite so explicitly as I assumed everyone knew that claiming to occupy it was all part of this game called politics.
Goodfellers
11-Feb-20, 11:58
SNP - silly stunts
Say no more
I doubt that there will be many who don't go to the cinema because of it but each to their own.
In WW2, there was plenty of this going on in cinemas in a Western democratic country which was trying to stay that way and there has been more of it since that time as well.
Corky Smeek
11-Feb-20, 12:43
In WW2, there was plenty of this going on in cinemas in a Western democratic country which was trying to stay that way and there has been more of it since that time as well.
Wow. Please correct me if I am wrong but you seem to be suggesting that what the UKG is doing is justifiable because they are defending democracy. Maybe that's my misinterpretation of your words, and if I have done that then I apologise, but I'd really like some clarification.
Yes, you have misunderstood. It was just an illustration of how this has happened before, I meant in cinemas and similar since then such as the infamous 'Protect and Survive' (which was ridiculed).
To be honest, I do not understand what you are so exercised about as the averts will probably be ridiculed in Scotland anyway.
Corky Smeek
11-Feb-20, 13:16
Yes, you have misunderstood. It was just an illustration of how this has happened before, I meant in cinemas and similar since then such as the infamous 'Protect and Survive' (which was ridiculed).
Phew! I was a bit worried there.
I accept that this kind of thing has happened before but this particular instance has a different and very worrying edge to it. If you add in Downing Street's recent attempts to control which journalists (and therefore their newspapers, and TV/Radio stations, etc) got access to press briefings then I for one am pretty worried about where this might all lead.
I do not understand your viewpoint. I will look at the adverts and judge- so will everyone surely? It will stand or fall on that.
Of course Westminster is running scared...
“Cinemagoers across Scotland are to be presented with adverts setting out the UK’s greatest hits of past and present.” I doubt this propaganda will include the Highland Clearances, Cumberland’s attempted Genocide of the Highlanders, the Irish Famine, the Indian Famines, the Boar War concentration camps, the Amritsar massacre or the illegal wars since 1945.
Yes, you have misunderstood. It was just an illustration of how this has happened before, I meant in cinemas and similar since then such as the infamous 'Protect and Survive' (which was ridiculed).
I have no idea what kind of advertisements were shown during the war, but I'm darn sure, whatever they were, were shown in every part of the UK, not in just one..and I'm pretty sure "Protect and Survive" wasn't just shown in the part of the UK, most at risk of nuclear attack or accident, ie Scotland,..ergo this has not happened before.
Afaik, the last time there were cinema adverts targeted only at Scotland was in the first quarter of 2014, before the official campaign started, and cinemas were accepting adverts from both sides...until they started getting lots of complaints....probably complaints about the intrusion into what was meant to an evening divorced from reality and the rank lies in the one produced by Vote No Borders about the NHS/Great Ormond Street, and the idiotic one they dreamed up, in which there was a Scotsman, an Englishman and an Irishman who all got their passports stolen in Rio and only the Englishman and the Welshman got home safely because the UK has a consulate As a result, the cinemas decided to ban any independence related advertising altogether...but at least they would have been showing both sides of the argument if they had allowed it to continue.
I wonder if the same will be the case this time...because the UK Government has its magic money tree to fund their campaign, while the Scottish Government is not able to afford to do the same...in fact the Scottish Government may well even be allocated the cost of the advertising as money spent for Scotland by Westminster in order to increase our "deficit". We all know that the continual drip drip drip of propaganda with no method of counteracting it forms opinions.....and can you think of any other reason why Westminster is doing this...while at the same time refusing another referendum?
I'm sure that there will be plenty of people counteracting it throughout Scotland and no doubt we will hear a great deal about it when it happens.
Corky Smeek
11-Feb-20, 17:16
I'm sure that there will be plenty of people counteracting it throughout Scotland and no doubt we will hear a great deal about it when it happens.
Yes, I'm sure we will but all of it will be fed to us through the prism of unionism by a compliant MSM. You know, just like the Indy marches with 80k+ Yessers and 25 flag-waving unionists yet the images in the papers the next day look like the numbers were the other way round. Cue: chip on shoulder posts from you know who.
Goodfellers
12-Feb-20, 10:15
Yes, I'm sure we will but all of it will be fed to us through the prism of unionism by a compliant MSM. You know, just like the Indy marches with 80k+ Yessers and 25 flag-waving unionists yet the images in the papers the next day look like the numbers were the other way round. Cue: chip on shoulder posts from you know who.
Why not post some links to the correct figures if you dispute them?
Corky Smeek
12-Feb-20, 11:29
What?
I am talking about selective reporting.
MSM "Reality"
35139
Actual Reality
35140
Goodfellers
12-Feb-20, 13:33
What?
I am talking about selective reporting.
MSM "Reality"
35139
Actual Reality
35140
I think you are as guilty of selective reporting as anyone else. Google all under one banner + images. The majority of images from MSM are of the march. Even the BBC don't show your view of flag wavers, may not be the same event, but they (the BBC) show balanced reporting. Sad that you see negativity everywhere https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-49932819
Corky Smeek
12-Feb-20, 13:57
(the BBC) show balanced reporting.
Hahahahahahahahaha. You've fair cheered me up. How anyone can believe that is beyond me.
Here is another example.
35141
EDIT:- And while I'm at it, any negativity is more likely to come from the BritNat side. I am trying to encourage people to be positive about Scotland - see thread on press coverage of the QC.
Goodfellers
12-Feb-20, 14:24
Hahahahahahahahaha. You've fair cheered me up. How anyone can believe that is beyond me.
Here is another example.
35141
EDIT:- And while I'm at it, any negativity is more likely to come from the BritNat side. I am trying to encourage people to be positive about Scotland - see thread on press coverage of the QC.
Again, your comment only goes to prove my point about your biased postings. You only show pictures from papers that support your views. I suggested you google, which would show the vast majority of images do not fit your story, but clearly, that would shoot your theory down in flames.
Please keep posting your totally biased posts, they make great reading, and show you up for what you truly are. :D
Corky Smeek
12-Feb-20, 15:24
Please keep posting your totally biased posts, they make great reading, and show you up for what you truly are. :D
Rather autobiographical, I think.
Goodfellers
12-Feb-20, 17:29
The difference between us is, you find one picture that outrages you even though 99 tell the same story as you, as I pointed out re Google and the BBC.
I find your posts entertaining, mine make your blood pressure soar.
I'm reasonably happy, you seem not to be.
You truly are a 'glass half empty' person.
Corky Smeek
12-Feb-20, 17:34
The difference between us is, you find one picture that outrages you even though 99 tell the same story as you, as I pointed out re Google and the BBC.
I find your posts entertaining, mine make your blood pressure soar.
I'm reasonably happy, you seem not to be.
You truly are a 'glass half empty' person.
Nah! Enough is enough. There is no point in debating with someone who, at the first hint that they are losing the argument resorts to personal attacks. Playground stuff.
Goodfellers
12-Feb-20, 17:49
You really need to be more gracious in defeat.
Shabbychic
12-Feb-20, 17:49
Since you two are on the subject of the BBC, I came across this wee video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjcnqMEh1wY&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR3t7hqaz_XH1KrfVeu-outCqniWZvW7kBSZVWHY8hh10SL5oBzBTYORI6U) which shows two different takes on the same news story the other night, one from STV and the other from the BBC.
STV presented a straight to the point take on Nicola Sturgeon's trip to Brussels. On the other hand, the BBC do their usual. The BBC presenter wummin's face is a picture of joy, and "he" even throws a thumb over his shoulder at one point, and refers to Nicola Sturgeon as "her". They also throw in wee bits of innuendo, and just in case we forget, a wee mention of Derek Mackay.
Just watch it and you'll see the difference.
Goodfellers
12-Feb-20, 19:48
Having just watched both reports, I couldn't really see a problem with either (maybe that's my problem) The STV report was very short (about 2 mins) whereas the BBC report was about 5 mins, so had more 'analysis'. I agree the thumb over the shoulder and 'her' reference was not the most profesional but maybe that's just the reporters style.
Shabbychic
13-Feb-20, 03:15
Having just watched both reports, I couldn't really see a problem with either (maybe that's my problem) The STV report was very short (about 2 mins) whereas the BBC report was about 5 mins, so had more 'analysis'. I agree the thumb over the shoulder and 'her' reference was not the most profesional but maybe that's just the reporters style.
See, that's the thing with the BBC, they are very subtle in their presentations. This story was, first and foremost, about the First Minister's trip to Brussels. Now, whether you realise it or not, she has been to many meetings like this all over Europe, made speeches, and won a few awards, but the BBC seldom even mention them, never mind give a 5 minute report, Why? What was so special about this one?
Well, I don't know if you have noticed or not, but the UK media is in full attack mode at the moment, against the SNP. Every day they find something/someone new to have a go at. It's full steam ahead to take down and attempt to destroy the Scottish Government. They will stop at nothing to prevent another referendum, but just in case it actually happens, they are putting in the groundwork to demonise the SNP.
STV in this instance, covered the FM's trip, what it was about, and even brought up the issue of the little light show in Brussels, and made clear that no reports had been made to anyone. They told of her views on how the dropping of UK standards, for example, which will also affect Scotland, will make it more difficult to maintain access to, and returning to, the European market.
The BBC started off with Nicola's fears of dropping standards and rejoining the EU, but they very quickly got that out of the way. They then went quickly on to the light show in Brussels, but instead of reporting that no action was taken, they played a small clip from a press conference earlier in the day, where UK journalists were pressing the issue about the light show. Not once were they told that action, in this instance, had been taken, nor "raised any eyebrows", though they tried hard, but the little clip they did show, which was in response to a question, wasn't very clear about that. So anyone who didn't know it was a non-story, would, I believe, still be under the impression that action had been taken as had been widely reported in the British Press. Subtle?
Then they went straight onto Independence, including problems with having a border with England. I don't think that was what this trip was all about, as nothing has yet been finalised about how things will end up. (for some strange reasons, these issues were being brought up by the UK journalists....did they really have to go all the way to Brussels to ask her about this?)
This led straight onto how the SNP would get Independence, as Westminster were not going to "allow" another referendum, and how her opponents think she should just be "getting on with the day job", with wee digs at Health and Education.
And, finally, just to make sure we don't forget, a wee reminder about Derek Mackay. Let's face it, why would she go all the way to Brussels so she could talk about Derek Mackay? This was brought up there by the UK media once again.
So, although these news reports aren't really a big issue, in this instance, it is just an example of how BBC reporting isn't always as straight forward as it may seem, and how some may miss what they are actually doing. It may have been a longer report than STV, but very little of it was anything to do with what the trip was about.
orkneycadian
13-Feb-20, 08:30
And, finally, just to make sure we don't forget, a wee reminder about Derek Mackay. Let's face it, why would she go all the way to Brussels so she could talk about Derek Mackay? This was brought up there by the UK media once again.
You say it like it is something minor that should be forgotten about. Let's not forget that the last First Minister is awaiting trial for alleged sex offences, whilst the person hotly tipped to have been the next one had to resign after sending inappropriate texts. Its hardly a minor matter when both your predecessor and potential successor manage to mire themselves amongst such accusations.
Corky Smeek
13-Feb-20, 09:14
Talking of people mired in accusations
35148
Goodfellers
13-Feb-20, 09:48
Talking of people mired in accusations
35148
It's always worth putting links to stories/claims like this. You have already stated the msm and BBC cannot be trusted so I'm happy to read your source when you post. Many thanks
Corky Smeek
13-Feb-20, 10:18
It's always worth putting links to stories/claims like this. You have already stated the msm and BBC cannot be trusted so I'm happy to read your source when you post. Many thanks
Any prospect of an apology heading my way any time soon. Many thanks, in advance.
35149
Goodfellers
13-Feb-20, 10:26
Mr Gove and Johnson are not convicted class A dealers. They may/may not have tried drugs in the past, who knows. Do either of them have convictions?
On a different thread regarding the death penalty, many comments seem to say that prison/death penalty doesn't work. Maybe the threat of deportation might. I would deport them the moment they were convicted, why should UK tax payers pay to keep them in prison.
Corky Smeek
13-Feb-20, 10:39
Mr Gove and Johnson are not convicted class A dealers. They may/may not have tried drugs in the past, who knows. Do either of them have convictions?
On a different thread regarding the death penalty, many comments seem to say that prison/death penalty doesn't work. Maybe the threat of deportation might. I would deport them the moment they were convicted, why should UK tax payers pay to keep them in prison.
So, no apology then; just deflection. Still waiting in hope.
Goodfellers
13-Feb-20, 10:41
When i make a mistake on this board I correct it and will always do so.
Corky Smeek
13-Feb-20, 10:59
When i make a mistake on this board I correct it and will always do so.
Why don't you just admit that you thought you saw an opportunity to have a "go" at me and rushed into print without checking your facts first? When you are in a hole stop digging.
Goodfellers
13-Feb-20, 11:03
I have no idea which particular post you are on about. You post so much that I find laughable, it could be any one of them.
I told you before, the only reason I don't block you is for your entertainment value. Keep it up.
Corky Smeek
13-Feb-20, 11:13
Oh, for the love of God can we please stop all this stupid willy-waving. How about I just admit that yours is bigger than mine and we can get back to discussing important stuff.
Goodfellers
13-Feb-20, 12:18
Sounds good to me!
Good Oh! I thought you two had actually decided to do this earlier in the week but it soon deteriorated! No Easter egg for either of you if you do not behave yourselves now.
Goodfellers
13-Feb-20, 12:48
Good Oh! I thought you two had actually decided to do this earlier in the week but it soon deteriorated! No Easter egg for either of you if you do not behave yourselves now.
I'm afraid it's going to be like the Israeli/Palestinian ceasefires. Looks good on paper, but never lasts.
I'll really try and reign myself in, but it's hard, so hard.
Corky Smeek
14-Feb-20, 15:51
To be honest, I do not understand what you are so exercised about as the averts will probably be ridiculed in Scotland anyway.
You were correct all along.
https://twitter.com/i/status/1228261998422642688
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.