LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Telegraph is surprisingly neutral tbh. It highlights that the UK has dodged a recession, unlike the Eurozone, but also that the UK is the only G7 economy with GDP below its Q4 2023 level.Jezyboy said:Tbf I presume the telegraphs reporting will be similarly cherry-picky.
I'm not sure the Torygraph is particularly pro the current leadership at the moment. I think the Editors are still in mourning over Truss's demise.0 -
I think 0.2% is at best not good news.Stevo_666 said:
I'm not, it's the t-shirt wannabes that do that every time there's some bad news.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.0 -
I read an article in the Telegraph yesterday which made me wonder what the point of it was. Do the Telegraph and the Guardian simply exist to tell their readers that they are right?Jezyboy said:Tbf I presume the telegraphs reporting will be similarly cherry-picky.
0 -
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)2 -
wallace_and_gromit said:
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)
Sure. "Not as bad as we thought" is the headline I think.0 -
From my rather quirky perspective, I think the real issues emerging from the UK's GDP progression are:First.Aspect said:wallace_and_gromit said:
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)
Sure. "Not as bad as we thought" is the headline I think.
1 - Why is the forecasting so poor at the moment?
2 - What hope is there when the reporting of such economic matters in even the heavyweight media is superficial at best and positively biased at worst?
0 -
I like Sky's take:
"GDP exceeded modest expectations in June and for the second quarter as a whole, but perhaps the best that can be said of the economy at the halfway point in the year is that things could be worse."0 -
The warm weather in June is cited as a reason for over performance. I wait to see if July over performs and this is attributed to the cool weather.0
-
What heavyweight media? It feels like a dying industry held up merely by clickbait.wallace_and_gromit said:
From my rather quirky perspective, I think the real issues emerging from the UK's GDP progression are:First.Aspect said:wallace_and_gromit said:
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)
Sure. "Not as bad as we thought" is the headline I think.
1 - Why is the forecasting so poor at the moment?
2 - What hope is there when the reporting of such economic matters in even the heavyweight media is superficial at best and positively biased at worst?
The forecasting question is interesting. Is it just that forecasting -0.2 and getting +0.2 feels like a terrible result compared to forecasting +3.5 and getting +4, is it that forecasts are now reported on in greater detail, or is it something completely different.
0 -
I think changeable weather is good for promoting spending as folk make unplanned purchases of warm / cold / wet gear etc. out of season.kingstongraham said:The warm weather in June is cited as a reason for over performance. I wait to see if July over performs and this is attributed to the cool weather.
0 -
Good points, both.Jezyboy said:
What heavyweight media? It feels like a dying industry held up merely by clickbait.wallace_and_gromit said:
From my rather quirky perspective, I think the real issues emerging from the UK's GDP progression are:First.Aspect said:wallace_and_gromit said:
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)
Sure. "Not as bad as we thought" is the headline I think.
1 - Why is the forecasting so poor at the moment?
2 - What hope is there when the reporting of such economic matters in even the heavyweight media is superficial at best and positively biased at worst?
The forecasting question is interesting. Is it just that forecasting -0.2 and getting +0.2 feels like a terrible result compared to forecasting +3.5 and getting +4, is it that forecasts are now reported on in greater detail, or is it something completely different.
I was being somewhat ironic with the use of the word "heavyweight". The Guardian isn't so bad, but the Torygraph definitely reads nowadays as though its aim is to tell readers what they want to read, rather than report the news objectively.
To my mind, there's a somewhat alarming trend in the world generally towards everything being about generating hits / clicks / other measures of coverage rather than producing results. A couple of example from sport:
1 - In the aftermath of England losing the first Ashes test from an eminently loss-avoiding position, the Barmy Army took to Twitter to put down the Bazball sceptics by reference to the highest ever numbers in terms of activity on the Barmies' various social media platforms, concluding that Bazball is therefore an unambiguous success. Anyone in the comments pointing out that England actually lost got the kind of treatment you'd expect of someone promoting dumping sewage in rivers etc.
2 - Somewhat more obscurely, I had an interesting exchange with a guy on Twitter who runs Adam Peaty's commercial operations and is an ex top level swimmer himself. He was pushing the line that the only reason he watched a particular session at the recent World Swimming Champs was to watch the final involving a swimmer who had been endlessly bigging himself up on social media, predicting a gold medal and world record.
I asked the guy if the medley relay finals (always worth a watch, particular when the US are looking for redemption after a mauling in the medal table from the Aussies) or the potential for World Records in finals where the record had been beaten in the semi finals might have also piqued his interest. He was adamant that it was only the self-promotion that had drawn him in. Ironically, self-promoting swimmer finished 4th, barely in camera shot, but what's falling flat on your face in competition compared to lots of social media "hits"?0 -
Would you mind asking him why Peatty is ignored (relatively speaking) compared to others such as Tom Daly or even Mo Farah?wallace_and_gromit said:
Good points, both.Jezyboy said:
What heavyweight media? It feels like a dying industry held up merely by clickbait.wallace_and_gromit said:
From my rather quirky perspective, I think the real issues emerging from the UK's GDP progression are:First.Aspect said:wallace_and_gromit said:
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)
Sure. "Not as bad as we thought" is the headline I think.
1 - Why is the forecasting so poor at the moment?
2 - What hope is there when the reporting of such economic matters in even the heavyweight media is superficial at best and positively biased at worst?
The forecasting question is interesting. Is it just that forecasting -0.2 and getting +0.2 feels like a terrible result compared to forecasting +3.5 and getting +4, is it that forecasts are now reported on in greater detail, or is it something completely different.
I was being somewhat ironic with the use of the word "heavyweight". The Guardian isn't so bad, but the Torygraph definitely reads nowadays as though its aim is to tell readers what they want to read, rather than report the news objectively.
To my mind, there's a somewhat alarming trend in the world generally towards everything being about generating hits / clicks / other measures of coverage rather than producing results. A couple of example from sport:
1 - In the aftermath of England losing the first Ashes test from an eminently loss-avoiding position, the Barmy Army took to Twitter to put down the Bazball sceptics by reference to the highest ever numbers in terms of activity on the Barmies' various social media platforms, concluding that Bazball is therefore an unambiguous success. Anyone in the comments pointing out that England actually lost got the kind of treatment you'd expect of someone promoting dumping sewage in rivers etc.
2 - Somewhat more obscurely, I had an interesting exchange with a guy on Twitter who runs Adam Peaty's commercial operations and is an ex top level swimmer himself. He was pushing the line that the only reason he watched a particular session at the recent World Swimming Champs was to watch the final involving a swimmer who had been endlessly bigging himself up on social media, predicting a gold medal and world record.
I asked the guy if the medley relay finals (always worth a watch, particular when the US are looking for redemption after a mauling in the medal table from the Aussies) or the potential for World Records in finals where the record had been beaten in the semi finals might have also piqued his interest. He was adamant that it was only the self-promotion that had drawn him in. Ironically, self-promoting swimmer finished 4th, barely in camera shot, but what's falling flat on your face in competition compared to lots of social media "hits"?
Maybe put it to him that the media ignore one of our true world beaters because they think he is addled by drugs0 -
It was exchange in passing, as one sometimes has on Twitter. I doubt very much he'd respond to a DM!surrey_commuter said:
Would you mind asking him why Peatty is ignored (relatively speaking) compared to others such as Tom Daly or even Mo Farah?wallace_and_gromit said:
Good points, both.Jezyboy said:
What heavyweight media? It feels like a dying industry held up merely by clickbait.wallace_and_gromit said:
From my rather quirky perspective, I think the real issues emerging from the UK's GDP progression are:First.Aspect said:wallace_and_gromit said:
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)
Sure. "Not as bad as we thought" is the headline I think.
1 - Why is the forecasting so poor at the moment?
2 - What hope is there when the reporting of such economic matters in even the heavyweight media is superficial at best and positively biased at worst?
The forecasting question is interesting. Is it just that forecasting -0.2 and getting +0.2 feels like a terrible result compared to forecasting +3.5 and getting +4, is it that forecasts are now reported on in greater detail, or is it something completely different.
I was being somewhat ironic with the use of the word "heavyweight". The Guardian isn't so bad, but the Torygraph definitely reads nowadays as though its aim is to tell readers what they want to read, rather than report the news objectively.
To my mind, there's a somewhat alarming trend in the world generally towards everything being about generating hits / clicks / other measures of coverage rather than producing results. A couple of example from sport:
1 - In the aftermath of England losing the first Ashes test from an eminently loss-avoiding position, the Barmy Army took to Twitter to put down the Bazball sceptics by reference to the highest ever numbers in terms of activity on the Barmies' various social media platforms, concluding that Bazball is therefore an unambiguous success. Anyone in the comments pointing out that England actually lost got the kind of treatment you'd expect of someone promoting dumping sewage in rivers etc.
2 - Somewhat more obscurely, I had an interesting exchange with a guy on Twitter who runs Adam Peaty's commercial operations and is an ex top level swimmer himself. He was pushing the line that the only reason he watched a particular session at the recent World Swimming Champs was to watch the final involving a swimmer who had been endlessly bigging himself up on social media, predicting a gold medal and world record.
I asked the guy if the medley relay finals (always worth a watch, particular when the US are looking for redemption after a mauling in the medal table from the Aussies) or the potential for World Records in finals where the record had been beaten in the semi finals might have also piqued his interest. He was adamant that it was only the self-promotion that had drawn him in. Ironically, self-promoting swimmer finished 4th, barely in camera shot, but what's falling flat on your face in competition compared to lots of social media "hits"?
Maybe put it to him that the media ignore one of our true world beaters because they think he is addled by drugs
But to your point re Peaty, he gets a lot of media coverage (by the standards of swimming in the UK) even when he's not competing. When the World Champs team was announced, the media coverage was mainly "Adam Peaty not selected for World Champs" even though he'd formally withdrawn from the selection process weeks previously and not attended Trials. And on the days the WCs started, there was virtually no media coverage of the swimming itself (the BBC wouldn't pay for the TV rights, for example) but there was an article about the pool in which Peaty learnt to swim being demolished.
I'm mystified by the media interest in Tom Daley relative to other divers. I think what was wrong with this particular interest was in Rio (I think) where there was a headline along the lines of "Tom Daly and partner win pairs medal". He's not even necessarily GB's most successful diver either. Jack Laugher (who?) could put in a good claim for that title.
Re drugs, the sports journos are highly unlikely to raise the subject. Firstly, doping is something that only nasty foreigners do. Secondly, a big doping scandal would potentially kill off sports that rely on funding and sponsors, and the journos that make their living from such sports would be out of a job. And even where a sport would survive a scandal, a journalist asking awkward questions would soon be short of interviews, access etc.0 -
Struggling with this.surrey_commuter said:
Would you mind asking him why Peatty is ignored (relatively speaking) compared to others such as Tom Daly or even Mo Farah?wallace_and_gromit said:
Good points, both.Jezyboy said:
What heavyweight media? It feels like a dying industry held up merely by clickbait.wallace_and_gromit said:
From my rather quirky perspective, I think the real issues emerging from the UK's GDP progression are:First.Aspect said:wallace_and_gromit said:
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)
Sure. "Not as bad as we thought" is the headline I think.
1 - Why is the forecasting so poor at the moment?
2 - What hope is there when the reporting of such economic matters in even the heavyweight media is superficial at best and positively biased at worst?
The forecasting question is interesting. Is it just that forecasting -0.2 and getting +0.2 feels like a terrible result compared to forecasting +3.5 and getting +4, is it that forecasts are now reported on in greater detail, or is it something completely different.
I was being somewhat ironic with the use of the word "heavyweight". The Guardian isn't so bad, but the Torygraph definitely reads nowadays as though its aim is to tell readers what they want to read, rather than report the news objectively.
To my mind, there's a somewhat alarming trend in the world generally towards everything being about generating hits / clicks / other measures of coverage rather than producing results. A couple of example from sport:
1 - In the aftermath of England losing the first Ashes test from an eminently loss-avoiding position, the Barmy Army took to Twitter to put down the Bazball sceptics by reference to the highest ever numbers in terms of activity on the Barmies' various social media platforms, concluding that Bazball is therefore an unambiguous success. Anyone in the comments pointing out that England actually lost got the kind of treatment you'd expect of someone promoting dumping sewage in rivers etc.
2 - Somewhat more obscurely, I had an interesting exchange with a guy on Twitter who runs Adam Peaty's commercial operations and is an ex top level swimmer himself. He was pushing the line that the only reason he watched a particular session at the recent World Swimming Champs was to watch the final involving a swimmer who had been endlessly bigging himself up on social media, predicting a gold medal and world record.
I asked the guy if the medley relay finals (always worth a watch, particular when the US are looking for redemption after a mauling in the medal table from the Aussies) or the potential for World Records in finals where the record had been beaten in the semi finals might have also piqued his interest. He was adamant that it was only the self-promotion that had drawn him in. Ironically, self-promoting swimmer finished 4th, barely in camera shot, but what's falling flat on your face in competition compared to lots of social media "hits"?
Maybe put it to him that the media ignore one of our true world beaters because they think he is addled by drugs0 -
I think swimming medals are seen a bit like dog years. Certainly at the Olympics, they seem to give out swimming medals like sweeties.wallace_and_gromit said:
It was exchange in passing, as one sometimes has on Twitter. I doubt very much he'd respond to a DM!surrey_commuter said:
Would you mind asking him why Peatty is ignored (relatively speaking) compared to others such as Tom Daly or even Mo Farah?wallace_and_gromit said:
Good points, both.Jezyboy said:
What heavyweight media? It feels like a dying industry held up merely by clickbait.wallace_and_gromit said:
From my rather quirky perspective, I think the real issues emerging from the UK's GDP progression are:First.Aspect said:wallace_and_gromit said:
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)
Sure. "Not as bad as we thought" is the headline I think.
1 - Why is the forecasting so poor at the moment?
2 - What hope is there when the reporting of such economic matters in even the heavyweight media is superficial at best and positively biased at worst?
The forecasting question is interesting. Is it just that forecasting -0.2 and getting +0.2 feels like a terrible result compared to forecasting +3.5 and getting +4, is it that forecasts are now reported on in greater detail, or is it something completely different.
I was being somewhat ironic with the use of the word "heavyweight". The Guardian isn't so bad, but the Torygraph definitely reads nowadays as though its aim is to tell readers what they want to read, rather than report the news objectively.
To my mind, there's a somewhat alarming trend in the world generally towards everything being about generating hits / clicks / other measures of coverage rather than producing results. A couple of example from sport:
1 - In the aftermath of England losing the first Ashes test from an eminently loss-avoiding position, the Barmy Army took to Twitter to put down the Bazball sceptics by reference to the highest ever numbers in terms of activity on the Barmies' various social media platforms, concluding that Bazball is therefore an unambiguous success. Anyone in the comments pointing out that England actually lost got the kind of treatment you'd expect of someone promoting dumping sewage in rivers etc.
2 - Somewhat more obscurely, I had an interesting exchange with a guy on Twitter who runs Adam Peaty's commercial operations and is an ex top level swimmer himself. He was pushing the line that the only reason he watched a particular session at the recent World Swimming Champs was to watch the final involving a swimmer who had been endlessly bigging himself up on social media, predicting a gold medal and world record.
I asked the guy if the medley relay finals (always worth a watch, particular when the US are looking for redemption after a mauling in the medal table from the Aussies) or the potential for World Records in finals where the record had been beaten in the semi finals might have also piqued his interest. He was adamant that it was only the self-promotion that had drawn him in. Ironically, self-promoting swimmer finished 4th, barely in camera shot, but what's falling flat on your face in competition compared to lots of social media "hits"?
Maybe put it to him that the media ignore one of our true world beaters because they think he is addled by drugs
But to your point re Peaty, he gets a lot of media coverage (by the standards of swimming in the UK) even when he's not competing. When the World Champs team was announced, the media coverage was mainly "Adam Peaty not selected for World Champs" even though he'd formally withdrawn from the selection process weeks previously and not attended Trials. And on the days the WCs started, there was virtually no media coverage of the swimming itself (the BBC wouldn't pay for the TV rights, for example) but there was an article about the pool in which Peaty learnt to swim being demolished.
I'm mystified by the media interest in Tom Daley relative to other divers. I think what was wrong with this particular interest was in Rio (I think) where there was a headline along the lines of "Tom Daly and partner win pairs medal". He's not even necessarily GB's most successful diver either. Jack Laugher (who?) could put in a good claim for that title.
Re drugs, the sports journos are highly unlikely to raise the subject. Firstly, doping is something that only nasty foreigners do. Secondly, a big doping scandal would potentially kill off sports that rely on funding and sponsors, and the journos that make their living from such sports would be out of a job. And even where a sport would survive a scandal, a journalist asking awkward questions would soon be short of interviews, access etc.0 -
Sort of, it's a more circular process though. They tell them what to think and then tell them they are right for thinking that way.TheBigBean said:
I read an article in the Telegraph yesterday which made me wonder what the point of it was. Do the Telegraph and the Guardian simply exist to tell their readers that they are right?Jezyboy said:Tbf I presume the telegraphs reporting will be similarly cherry-picky.
0 -
Pleased you lot can cheer along effectively stagnant growth.
Delighted it’s not recession but forgive me if I don’t cheer stagnation on.
Not-sh!t-news is a bar that’s too low for me.
I wonder how much is down to that turbo immigration.
Curious to see how it plays out on the productivity stats.
Over the last decade it’s largely immigration that drove the headline figures.
Ironically..0 -
It all stems from him bursting onto the scene at such a young age in a sport where at the time there was very little British success and then there has been a lot of clickbait stuff they can latch onto for 'human interest' stories such as his dad's illness / death, coming out' having a surrogate child and his knitting habit.wallace_and_gromit said:
It was exchange in passing, as one sometimes has on Twitter. I doubt very much he'd respond to a DM!surrey_commuter said:
Would you mind asking him why Peatty is ignored (relatively speaking) compared to others such as Tom Daly or even Mo Farah?wallace_and_gromit said:
Good points, both.Jezyboy said:
What heavyweight media? It feels like a dying industry held up merely by clickbait.wallace_and_gromit said:
From my rather quirky perspective, I think the real issues emerging from the UK's GDP progression are:First.Aspect said:wallace_and_gromit said:
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)
Sure. "Not as bad as we thought" is the headline I think.
1 - Why is the forecasting so poor at the moment?
2 - What hope is there when the reporting of such economic matters in even the heavyweight media is superficial at best and positively biased at worst?
The forecasting question is interesting. Is it just that forecasting -0.2 and getting +0.2 feels like a terrible result compared to forecasting +3.5 and getting +4, is it that forecasts are now reported on in greater detail, or is it something completely different.
I was being somewhat ironic with the use of the word "heavyweight". The Guardian isn't so bad, but the Torygraph definitely reads nowadays as though its aim is to tell readers what they want to read, rather than report the news objectively.
To my mind, there's a somewhat alarming trend in the world generally towards everything being about generating hits / clicks / other measures of coverage rather than producing results. A couple of example from sport:
1 - In the aftermath of England losing the first Ashes test from an eminently loss-avoiding position, the Barmy Army took to Twitter to put down the Bazball sceptics by reference to the highest ever numbers in terms of activity on the Barmies' various social media platforms, concluding that Bazball is therefore an unambiguous success. Anyone in the comments pointing out that England actually lost got the kind of treatment you'd expect of someone promoting dumping sewage in rivers etc.
2 - Somewhat more obscurely, I had an interesting exchange with a guy on Twitter who runs Adam Peaty's commercial operations and is an ex top level swimmer himself. He was pushing the line that the only reason he watched a particular session at the recent World Swimming Champs was to watch the final involving a swimmer who had been endlessly bigging himself up on social media, predicting a gold medal and world record.
I asked the guy if the medley relay finals (always worth a watch, particular when the US are looking for redemption after a mauling in the medal table from the Aussies) or the potential for World Records in finals where the record had been beaten in the semi finals might have also piqued his interest. He was adamant that it was only the self-promotion that had drawn him in. Ironically, self-promoting swimmer finished 4th, barely in camera shot, but what's falling flat on your face in competition compared to lots of social media "hits"?
Maybe put it to him that the media ignore one of our true world beaters because they think he is addled by drugs
But to your point re Peaty, he gets a lot of media coverage (by the standards of swimming in the UK) even when he's not competing. When the World Champs team was announced, the media coverage was mainly "Adam Peaty not selected for World Champs" even though he'd formally withdrawn from the selection process weeks previously and not attended Trials. And on the days the WCs started, there was virtually no media coverage of the swimming itself (the BBC wouldn't pay for the TV rights, for example) but there was an article about the pool in which Peaty learnt to swim being demolished.
I'm mystified by the media interest in Tom Daley relative to other divers. I think what was wrong with this particular interest was in Rio (I think) where there was a headline along the lines of "Tom Daly and partner win pairs medal". He's not even necessarily GB's most successful diver either. Jack Laugher (who?) could put in a good claim for that title.
Re drugs, the sports journos are highly unlikely to raise the subject. Firstly, doping is something that only nasty foreigners do. Secondly, a big doping scandal would potentially kill off sports that rely on funding and sponsors, and the journos that make their living from such sports would be out of a job. And even where a sport would survive a scandal, a journalist asking awkward questions would soon be short of interviews, access etc.0 -
Deary me, Rick. This is pretty feeble. Have you actually read the discussion or have you just gone straight into "rant mode" having read something non-negative in one of the early posts on the subject? Most of the discussion has been about the quality of forecasting and reporting.rick_chasey said:Pleased you lot can cheer along effectively stagnant growth.
Delighted it’s not recession but forgive me if I don’t cheer stagnation on.
You have the rare gift of being able to start an argument with people who are pretty much in agreement with you!
1 -
I guess going to the OGs age 15 helped boost his profile. But 2008 was an absolute medal-fest in the velodrome, backed up by the sailers, rowers and Becky Adlington, so he didn't get the publicity for the want of stories to fill the vacuum that should be filled by success. God only knows what would have happened had he sprung to prominence for the 1996 OGs where there was but one GB gold medal.Pross said:
It all stems from him bursting onto the scene at such a young age in a sport where at the time there was very little British success and then there has been a lot of clickbait stuff they can latch onto for 'human interest' stories such as his dad's illness / death, coming out' having a surrogate child and his knitting habit.wallace_and_gromit said:
It was exchange in passing, as one sometimes has on Twitter. I doubt very much he'd respond to a DM!surrey_commuter said:
Would you mind asking him why Peatty is ignored (relatively speaking) compared to others such as Tom Daly or even Mo Farah?wallace_and_gromit said:
Good points, both.Jezyboy said:
What heavyweight media? It feels like a dying industry held up merely by clickbait.wallace_and_gromit said:
From my rather quirky perspective, I think the real issues emerging from the UK's GDP progression are:First.Aspect said:wallace_and_gromit said:
Surely if one is to be fair, one has to acknowledge that this isn't just a one-off month in terms of beating consensus forecasts / "surprising on the upside". The IMF has repeatedly revised its forecasts for 2023 upwards since November last year.First.Aspect said:Stevo you are getting awfully excited about +0.2% +/- 0.1%, instead of a predicted +0.1% +/- 0.1%.
Statistically, they aren't all that much different. As in, by some measures, not different at all.
And equally, the Eurozone being in recession does raise a few questions about the impact of Brexit (vs impact of other factors such as gas prices).
And equally, "Not being in a recession" counting as good news poses a few awkward questions about the current state of the UK economy, which I would summarise as "Bad, but not as bad as the ardent anti-Brexit faction would like to make out." (Note I'm specifically not saying that anyone actually wants the UK economy to do badly, just that some folk (in the wider world rather than here specifically) for their own reasons want to portray the UK's position as being uniquely bad at the moment.)
Sure. "Not as bad as we thought" is the headline I think.
1 - Why is the forecasting so poor at the moment?
2 - What hope is there when the reporting of such economic matters in even the heavyweight media is superficial at best and positively biased at worst?
The forecasting question is interesting. Is it just that forecasting -0.2 and getting +0.2 feels like a terrible result compared to forecasting +3.5 and getting +4, is it that forecasts are now reported on in greater detail, or is it something completely different.
I was being somewhat ironic with the use of the word "heavyweight". The Guardian isn't so bad, but the Torygraph definitely reads nowadays as though its aim is to tell readers what they want to read, rather than report the news objectively.
To my mind, there's a somewhat alarming trend in the world generally towards everything being about generating hits / clicks / other measures of coverage rather than producing results. A couple of example from sport:
1 - In the aftermath of England losing the first Ashes test from an eminently loss-avoiding position, the Barmy Army took to Twitter to put down the Bazball sceptics by reference to the highest ever numbers in terms of activity on the Barmies' various social media platforms, concluding that Bazball is therefore an unambiguous success. Anyone in the comments pointing out that England actually lost got the kind of treatment you'd expect of someone promoting dumping sewage in rivers etc.
2 - Somewhat more obscurely, I had an interesting exchange with a guy on Twitter who runs Adam Peaty's commercial operations and is an ex top level swimmer himself. He was pushing the line that the only reason he watched a particular session at the recent World Swimming Champs was to watch the final involving a swimmer who had been endlessly bigging himself up on social media, predicting a gold medal and world record.
I asked the guy if the medley relay finals (always worth a watch, particular when the US are looking for redemption after a mauling in the medal table from the Aussies) or the potential for World Records in finals where the record had been beaten in the semi finals might have also piqued his interest. He was adamant that it was only the self-promotion that had drawn him in. Ironically, self-promoting swimmer finished 4th, barely in camera shot, but what's falling flat on your face in competition compared to lots of social media "hits"?
Maybe put it to him that the media ignore one of our true world beaters because they think he is addled by drugs
But to your point re Peaty, he gets a lot of media coverage (by the standards of swimming in the UK) even when he's not competing. When the World Champs team was announced, the media coverage was mainly "Adam Peaty not selected for World Champs" even though he'd formally withdrawn from the selection process weeks previously and not attended Trials. And on the days the WCs started, there was virtually no media coverage of the swimming itself (the BBC wouldn't pay for the TV rights, for example) but there was an article about the pool in which Peaty learnt to swim being demolished.
I'm mystified by the media interest in Tom Daley relative to other divers. I think what was wrong with this particular interest was in Rio (I think) where there was a headline along the lines of "Tom Daly and partner win pairs medal". He's not even necessarily GB's most successful diver either. Jack Laugher (who?) could put in a good claim for that title.
Re drugs, the sports journos are highly unlikely to raise the subject. Firstly, doping is something that only nasty foreigners do. Secondly, a big doping scandal would potentially kill off sports that rely on funding and sponsors, and the journos that make their living from such sports would be out of a job. And even where a sport would survive a scandal, a journalist asking awkward questions would soon be short of interviews, access etc.0 -
I'll just leave this here. ...
https://news.sky.com/story/asylum-seekers-to-be-moved-off-bibby-stockholm-barge-after-legionella-bacteria-found-129379040 -
Meanwhile, the secretary of state for important matters is chairing a high level meeting to address unacceptable levels of sobriety in government fermentation facilities.0
-
Who could have predicted such a thing.First.Aspect said:I'll just leave this here. ...
https://news.sky.com/story/asylum-seekers-to-be-moved-off-bibby-stockholm-barge-after-legionella-bacteria-found-129379041985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
They stopped the boat“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!2
-
At least the guy with TB won't be moved there now.0
-
Isn't it pretty normal? I'd imagine many of the hotels in use have it as well.0
-
Shouldn't be. For legionella to be in the water system they are not storing at the correct temperature.TheBigBean said:Isn't it pretty normal? I'd imagine many of the hotels in use have it as well.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
We periodically get notices about it. It is common especially when nothing is used for ages. In theory, I'm supposed to run every tap for at least 5 mins every week to avoid it building up.rjsterry said:
Shouldn't be. For legionella to be in the water system they are not storing at the correct temperature.TheBigBean said:Isn't it pretty normal? I'd imagine many of the hotels in use have it as well.
0 -
I'm actually pleasantly surprised that the Bibby Stockholm comes with any form of plumbing.TheBigBean said:
We periodically get notices about it. It is common especially when nothing is used for ages. In theory, I'm supposed to run every tap for at least 5 mins every week to avoid it building up.rjsterry said:
Shouldn't be. For legionella to be in the water system they are not storing at the correct temperature.TheBigBean said:Isn't it pretty normal? I'd imagine many of the hotels in use have it as well.
You'd think Portakabin would have been given the option of a competitive tender though.
The government could then have used some of the spare space between the traffic cones and the central reservation all ocer the motorway network. Its not being used for anything else, and it would help to corral the prisoners away from any local communities.
0 -
Yeah a margin of around 0.2% either way.wallace_and_gromit said:
Deary me, Rick. This is pretty feeble. Have you actually read the discussion or have you just gone straight into "rant mode" having read something non-negative in one of the early posts on the subject? Most of the discussion has been about the quality of forecasting and reporting.rick_chasey said:Pleased you lot can cheer along effectively stagnant growth.
Delighted it’s not recession but forgive me if I don’t cheer stagnation on.
You have the rare gift of being able to start an argument with people who are pretty much in agreement with you!
So another quarter of no growth.
Well done everyone.0
