Sir Keir Starmer has vowed to press ahead with savage welfare cuts, describing the current system as “unsustainable, indefensible and unfair”.

Luckygirl3

Indeed sensationalist and very annoying.

But "Starmer takes a look at reforming benefits system" doesn't really cut the mustard in today's sensation-speak world. The papers have their funders' to please with circulation figures and need something that will catch the eye on the news stand.

I'm sure it's possible to choose a nifty headline without lying.....and causing unnecessary alarm.

Thankyou Ladies for your kind words,
I hope you all have a good weekend.

Indeed sensationalist and very annoying.

But "Starmer takes a look at reforming benefits system" doesn't really cut the mustard in today's sensation-speak world. The papers have their funders' to please with circulation figures and need something that will catch the eye on the news stand.

Daniel Martin. Fifteen years peddling similar inflammatory stuff at the Dail Mail and now doing the same at the Telegraph.

Of course people are concerned about how changes in benefit spending will be achieved but even following the link from the phrase “savage cuts” in the article doesn’t lead to anything that says savage cuts, just another Martin piece again using the word "ruthless”. It’s all just his hyperbole which is then repeated verbatim on this board.

Add: its not the headlines, its all the front pages, so you can see what different issues are "up"

I player news, every morning, has a round up of all the news headlines. Just go to the front page and it's up until about midday. I spotted the "savage cuts" before it appeared here!

Yes, I trust the BBC, and am happy to go with that as a main source of news. I do read across a range of sources, but I like to have one that sends breaking news headlines and that I check in the morning when there's not time to read a range of articles.

I won't be bothering with the DT again. The climate around trans issues is changing, so if the Guardian stops its bigoted stance I might end up back with them - my father took the Graun when I was growing up, and it was my natural home for years, so I've missed it. I just found it's been bad for my blood pressure recently.

Wyllow3 I absolutely agree with you about BBC I Player news. You can see why certain people deride the BBC and want it 'defunded'. Silencing that balanced voice would suit them very well.

The hysteria and ridiculous headlines in the DT and DM etc when Labour won the election was beyond belief. Having spent the last several years whinging about excitable rabid snowflakes these publications proved that they were exactly that. The thinking people I know gave up on the DT then.

Fartooold Have a great time on holiday with your family.

Lots of love around you I’ll bet.💕

Doodledog

'Savage' is definitely a loaded word. The DT is not the paper it used to be. I've never agreed with its political stance, but it used to be a serious paper. I had a year's subscription to it recently (a gift), and found it sensationalist and very biased (the sub ran in the year before the GE, which probably made things worse).

I'm reading the i now, and am not delighted with that either. I stopped reading the Guardian because of its anti-feminist stance, so I find myself more or less homeless when it comes to newspapers (which I read online with a subscription, as a rule). When the i subscription runs out I might just stick with the BBC app, unless anyone can suggest a verifiable alternative.

The DT's headlines have turned Red Top and almost always when they get repeated on GN they are revealed to be sensationalist at best and so biased at worst - by only giving a small chunk of a story which distorts the reality. Cross checking soon reveals the reality behind the headline. As we'd expect from the DM and the Express.

However I really miss the chance to look across the different papers online to get the broadest views.

I think the BBC I player news is the best going. they are cautious in their reporting, do not sensationalise it, and there is nowhere else you can look at world news which doesnt appear in the papers at all generally. I think the Guardian has a liberal filter but does give lots of useful facts and covers necessary issues and its free access - I dont feel I have to agree with it all, and it doesnt sensationalise. At the moment for example it has a story running that criticises benefit cuts and why.

Fartooold Wishing you and all your family a wonderful holiday.

Fartooold

Woodenspoon I hope you don’t see us on holiday next week, three with Down Syndrome I did not give birth to any of them they are adopted! Many of my friends are in the same situation please do not judge without knowing the full facts! Also despite being adults they do get benefits.

If woodenspoon does happen to see you I hope she has her smelling salts with her when she has a touch of the vapours 😱
And that Pearl necklace must be worn out by now. 😂

Fartooold - sending you and yours best wishes for a lovely holiday.

'Savage' is definitely a loaded word. The DT is not the paper it used to be. I've never agreed with its political stance, but it used to be a serious paper. I had a year's subscription to it recently (a gift), and found it sensationalist and very biased (the sub ran in the year before the GE, which probably made things worse).

I'm reading the i now, and am not delighted with that either. I stopped reading the Guardian because of its anti-feminist stance, so I find myself more or less homeless when it comes to newspapers (which I read online with a subscription, as a rule). When the i subscription runs out I might just stick with the BBC app, unless anyone can suggest a verifiable alternative.

Starmer never said 'savage': it's purely provocative and typical DT fear mongering.

Woodenspoon I hope you don’t see us on holiday next week, three with Down Syndrome I did not give birth to any of them they are adopted! Many of my friends are in the same situation please do not judge without knowing the full facts! Also despite being adults they do get benefits.

theworriedwell

Iam64

I’m well aware it was an HR failure, one of many. The ASOS doctor told me his experience of my employer led him to suspect they’d sack me, despite his carefully worded report which made clear they’d be sacking me unfairly.

I find your hectoring posts directed at Doodledog unnecessary and unpleasant .

Do you? Yet you see the HR behaviour as wrong or do you think making people feel they should go to work when they are ill is a good thing? Surely not.

Thank you again, Iam.

theworriedwell, the reality (which I lived) was that it was the attitude of HR that meant I knew that if I stayed off much longer there would be complaints from students who were already having classes that my colleague wasn't taking covered - some by me. They were paying a lot of money for a course, and the HR attitude was not to hire more staff but to threaten to close any courses that scored low on student satisfaction, which would have resulted in redundancies on my team.

Of course it is not good to have to go to work ill, but HR were to blame for not replacing my colleague (either permanently as she was patently incapable of carrying out the job for which she was paid, or temporarily whilst she was absent), and (b) for their constant messaging making it very plain that they were more concerned about the reputation of courses than about the welfare of staff.

So in answer to your question, it was HR's behaviour that was wrong because they made people feel they should go to work when ill.

There but for the grace of God …

I never thought that I would be reading a post from a GN member who is snootily looking down her nose at a disabled child and their family. This is a new low.

woodenspoon

It’s obvious to anybody. You included.

How obvious?

Did they tell you?

You say one child was in a wheelchair.
There are many Trusts and charities which provide holidays for disabled children and their families.

"a mother who could barely walk, pushing a child in a wheelchair, another overweight girl barely able to walk, a boy, and a father in his vest shorts and flip flops padding through the airport stuffing food in as they walked.

Woodenspoon what do you mean by "after one child like that then no extra support or encouragement to have more."

I rember the late great Frank Field was told to go and 'think the unthinkable'.
He went away and thought it.

When Blair saw what the unthinkable involved he thought it was unthinkable and hoofed it into the long grass where it resides to this day.

Iam64

I’m well aware it was an HR failure, one of many. The ASOS doctor told me his experience of my employer led him to suspect they’d sack me, despite his carefully worded report which made clear they’d be sacking me unfairly.

I find your hectoring posts directed at Doodledog unnecessary and unpleasant .

Do you? Yet you see the HR behaviour as wrong or do you think making people feel they should go to work when they are ill is a good thing? Surely not.

I’m well aware it was an HR failure, one of many. The ASOS doctor told me his experience of my employer led him to suspect they’d sack me, despite his carefully worded report which made clear they’d be sacking me unfairly.

I find your hectoring posts directed at Doodledog unnecessary and unpleasant .

Iam64

After almost 40years, the RA I’d worked with for 30 years had me off long term sick for the first time. My team was struggling with many unallocated cases. I managed my case load from home for 6 months. HR and my manager visited, I updated on my wait to be well enough to start ‘the gold standard treatment which within 2 weeks would make clear if I could ever work again. Recommendation, you allow iam64 the time for this “. This was the recommendation of the ASOS doctor employed by my employer. The HR person told me if I didn’t resign now, I’d be ‘terminated’
The HR person clearly didn’t understand the report meant if they sacked me, I’d have a tribunal case. In fact the doc told me he’d phrased his report in knowledge they might sack me but if it went to tribunal, I’d succeed. My manager later apologised, had no idea of the HR plan and had told them if I was sacked, she’d speak for me at the tribunal, not the organisation.

Again a failure by HR. Some don't seem to realise that good staff are a valuable asset and should be supported not abused.

Letting their employer down as well as the costs of winning your case would have been substantial.

I'm retired now but in my career I was taken to tribunal once, well they tried but it was thrown out before the actual hearing.