Jump to content
Spam messages. Please stop reporting messages from Orange 15, Ivsa and Pupyh. They’ve been banned. ×

maynragh

Regulars
  • Content Count

    764
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

457 Excellent

About maynragh

  • Rank
    MF Addicted

Recent Profile Visitors

1,529 profile views
  1. Are these links still working?
  2. So... Can you explain why we have planning policy at all then?
  3. The 'right' approach or connections are also essential of course. As Roger has mentioned, some people probably fall foul of playing things too 'straight'. I remember working on a fairly extensive set of plans back in the early 00s purely so the client could take them to a meeting with someone in government - to "rattle their cage" (his words). As far as I could tell there was never any intention to follow through on the proposal despite a not inconsiderable amount of money spent. It was purely a leverage tool to get something else agreed (which they did ultimately get). It's a game. You'v
  4. Just to clarify... you're "all for" a two tier planning system? One for those with enough money and the right friends, and one for everyone else?
  5. Is the article factually incorrect? Or does it paint an inaccurate impression generally? The OP IOM press article (in particular the comments from the former minister on why this application should be granted) are just another little snap shot of how the planning system works on the IOM if you have enough money. It's been that way for as long as people with money have been arriving on these shores. There are many many other examples. Several I can think of that aren't even buried - the details are all available to the public if you go looking through the files of certain applications tha
  6. Do you think IOMG are being harder on the SSS & Mera this time as a form of social engineering? Like... "you should be able to survive without income through at least a month... "
  7. Chemical Brothers & Q-Tip. Go...? "Feel the weight and you feelin' the girth Now you get it, now you feelin' your worth..."
  8. Fair enough. That's a good point. What is the point of press conferences and news in general if nobody applies any critical thought to anything. A sanguine and compliant society would make the government's job soooo much easier, and they really are having a hard time at the moment. Should we have a MF moratorium and cut them some slack maybe? #prayforhowie #prayforgef
  9. I agree. Even if government had explicitly asked for positive news stories and press questions, we live in a world where that would no longer be considered that unusual I guess. It's just a question of disclosure from my perspective. I don't believe anyone in Government explicitly asked anyone at Gef to feed, modify or soften their questions in press conferences, or to spin 'news' stories - the reality is that isn't necessary. If you run this type of media company and someone walks in to ask you to run a bit of PR or some infomercials, you do not then stick it on them in a press conference or
  10. Erm, you've sort of confirmed the point. It wasn't really a news platform before Covid, then it became one around the same time (we have to assume) they started receiving payments from government. But no no, I'm sure everyone here would be fine if Lansons had been there as well, all totally normal.
  11. It wouldn't be any different if Lansons had developed their own 'news' platform, and were invited to ask questions at government press conferences. I'm sure nobody would mind that at all would they?
  12. If that's the way it reads to anyone else I'd be concerned, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't so I can only assume I've offended you by even discussing it. My apologies.
  13. For the avoidance of doubt yes. I assume you are insinuating that Gef the Mongoose has a legally defined position as a government supported independently regulated national broadcaster, which I have somehow overlooked? For the further avoidance of doubt please also note that I have not made comment on the effectiveness of the defined journalistic independence of MR. I have simply noted the fact it exists and is publicly defined in law. If the same applies to Gef please provide a reference or link to this new information. It would certainly help dispel the impression that a group of people who
  14. I didn't realise the validity of a fact was proportionally related to the number presented. If you want to point out what you think is factually incorrect we can discuss, but you won't. This isn't a conspiracy. They have been asking questions alongside other 'news' outlets, and presenting articles as 'news'. They are in receipt of government funding. As noted, that's not a unique situation, the only question is the nature of the relationship. MR funding is secured on the basis of journalistic independence, presumably Gef doesn't have the same security. There are plenty other people
×
×
  • Create New...