• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "As if we didn’t already know"

Collapse

  • Troll
    replied
    Originally posted by VectraMan View Post
    • Specific nationalities were singled out for particularly negative
    coverage – especially Turks and Albanians, but also Romanians and
    Poles
    .

    Well I'm shocked.
    Switzerland has just implemented immigration limits on Bulgarians & Romanians

    Will be interesting to see if it's extended beyond 2019

    Leave a comment:


  • VectraMan
    replied
    The Remain claim that Brexit would cost households £4,300 per year
    by 2030 was discussed in more articles than the Leave campaign’s
    claim that the EU cost the UK £350 million each week (365 articles
    vs 147 articles).
    Coverage of the effects of immigration was overwhelmingly negative.
    Migrants were blamed for many of Britain’s economic and social
    problems – most notably for putting unsustainable pressure on public
    services.
    • Specific nationalities were singled out for particularly negative
    coverage – especially Turks and Albanians, but also Romanians and
    Poles.
    • The majority of negative coverage of specific foreign nationals was
    published by three news sites: the Express, the Daily Mail, and the
    Sun
    .
    Well I'm shocked.

    Leave a comment:


  • BrilloPad
    replied
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    For those of us too lazy and/or busy to read the whole thing, are there any summary points that stand out?
    Originally posted by OwlHoot View Post
    For those of us too lazy and/or busy to read the whole thing, are there any summary points that stand out?
    A couple of bits stood out for me: -

    Coverage of the effects of immigration was overwhelmingly negative. Migrants were blamed for many of Britain’s economic and social problems – most notably for putting unsustainable pressure on public services.
    UK media coverage of the EU Referendum campaign can best be described as acrimonious and divisive.

    I *think* it means the "establishment" has convinced the immigrants are to blame for the establishment screwing things up.

    No doubt sasguru will be along soon to point out I am a cretin. Without offering any reasoning....

    Leave a comment:


  • OwlHoot
    replied
    Originally posted by Paddy View Post
    For those of us too lazy and/or busy to read the whole thing, are there any summary points that stand out?

    Leave a comment:


  • Paddy
    started a topic As if we didn’t already know

    As if we didn’t already know

    http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/policy-ins...m-campaign.pdf

    As if we didn’t already know

Working...
X