Amazing to see the hard left tearing itself apart over this. Momentum has withdrawn support for Pete Willsman in the NEC elections which has led to loads of the Corbynistas tearing up their membership cards and going into a frenzy about the 'MSM propaganda' and 'Tory plots', some of them sound seriously unhinged

Corbyn himself is still silent of course

Why would the media be biased though?..they are all reporting this story..

Yes they are aren't they? Why?

The 2010 meeting was so titled due to the keynote speaker, the leader arranged the whole thing to show there were Jewish people opposed to the actions of the Israeli govt.

Europe is splitting, there are two emerging factions socialist, and far right.
Judging by our media which way are we leaning?

https://evolvepolitics.com/the-right...jeremy-corbyn/

There must be a reason for this supposed bias?

Because the big nasty meanie corporations are worried that political genius Jeremy Corbyn is gonna change the world, leaving them with less power!!11one

it's interesting that absolutely everyone other than a group within the labour party are considered biased

Personally, given that Corbyn has apologised numerous times, that other labour MP's and executive members have apologised numerous times, it's reporting of news events, not bias

There is a political bias to our media... it's a joke withing the rest of Europe just how biased it is. In general not just on this issue our mainstream media is leaning further and further right.
So much so the BBC now legitimize breitbart as a source and tommy robinson is hailed as some kind of folk hero...And is there no antisemitism in the ranks in which they fraternize with no apology or reform required?

hmmmmm?....

Do you ever wonder if you're on the wrong side in this anti-Semitism debate?

Breitbart is a news source, and thousands of people protest marching, chanting "oh Tommy Tommy, Tommy Tommy Tommy Tommy Robinson" is an indication that he actually might be a folk hero.

Sargon of Akkad, who opposes everything Corbyn stands for, posted a video today defending Corbyn on all this anti-Semitic stuff.

No I don't. If you're attempting to accuse me of something have the balls to do it in a manner where I can challenge that.

https://www.thecanary.co/exclusive/2...were-trashing/

It's the mainstream media legitimising far right leaning sources, don't you think these have links to facist/ antisemitic organisations?
The media have kept robinson in the public eye they have created him as a folk hero as they did with farage... my question is why?

Why would they? Being far right and being fascist are separate things. What visible links are there between Breitbart and fascist/antisemitic groups?

Tommy robinson hardly made the news, only time i recall was an interview he did..he was never on the front pages before he was locked up.

And corbyns racism towards the jews is big news and the medua would be failing if it didnt highlight this major issue.

Oh hello Oliver, it is a haven for the alt right ... it's hailed as a extreme right wing safe space is it not?

My question is why are the BBC using this as a legitimate news source?

Owen Jones is a political activist just like Robinson, though they just have differing opinions.

Owen Jones was on celebrity pointless yesterday, are you outraged about that?

I don't bother with it, but if it has journalists doing their own research, the information they gather deserves to be looked at as much as any other source. Plus, I've seen Corbyn quote bloody HuffPo so it goes both ways.

Owen Jones is a journalist.

Why?... why does am alt right information site deserve to be looked at by the bbc?

Are you presuming huffpo is left leaning?

Why does it not? As someone who avoids ad hominem arguments, I'm more likely to decide if information deserves to be looked at based on what it says, rather than who is saying it.

Would you say that's an unfair assumption?

And a political activist.

It's just not usual to find someone who accepts that there is a sometimes clear political bias in the media, by accepting that huffpo is left leaning then you will be accepting that breitbart is seen as the opposite in terms of ethos.

My post was wondering why the BBC which claims to be independent of bias is giving only the right a platform...you indicated that Corbyn quoted huffpo not the BBC.... he is perfectly entitled to quote whomsoever he chooses.

For a debate to be balanced the 'independent' BBC you would have thought would seek out a counter to the right wing veiwpoint wouldn't you think?

Whereas robinson is neither journalist or political activist.. he has no political allegiance. He's just a rabble rouser.

If they're reporting on something, they can use whatever sources they desire.
I'm not even sure what article you're referring to, when did they cite Breitbart with no counterpoints?