I believe that the QT audience is supposed to be vetted and selected to represent "political balance". The folk that undertake this task (who are highly suspect) try to reflect the UK view of balance not the balance of the local area. I believe this is different from Any Questions where the audience is self selecting.
As a result of this audience fixing, QT comes in for a substantial level of criticism north of the border. I think that Bruce (her team messed up an earlier Scottish show) would have been acutely aware of the fact that her audience was not really representative and to try and head off further criticism at the pass she was trying to make an overt statement.

In Scotland we always take national political programmes the same way we take our porridge.


Graeme

 

With a tablespoon of sugar?

 

Nothing quiet about it - quite raucous at times.
Some (paraphrased) quotes from self styled SNP supporters:

"We are part of the UK. I'm a democrat and we were outvoted"
"Maybe you should learn to run Scotland properly before banging on about your hobby horse"
"We are not being ignored - we were outvoted. You make 'suggestions' that you know to be unacceptable simply so that you can cause political chaos and have a drum to bang!"

To say that I was surprised is an understatement.

MickLL

 

BBC balance? The programme which has had Farage on 34 times?

S

 

I believe that to be incorrect and that the audience is selected locally and is intended to represent local views. I remember reading some such a while back but can't remember where.

I know that there have been questions about audiences - but that's normal when a group thinks that it didn't fare too well.
If you have evidence I would be most interested to read it.

MickLL

 

No true scotsman eats porridge with sugar! Well, so my scottish dad told me - he ate his porridge with salt.

 

I believe it came from Elgin? Moray Firth. Always LibDem. Now probably a fair collection of ex-service personnel and probably current, if any left. Nice area Moray Firth. I've never actually liked Elgin, but that's my own preference showing.
I really don't take much notice of TV audiences. It's a self-selecting population and hardly representative of the population at large. I think we Scots are, as a rule, quietly content with our political preferences and not swayed by loud mouths.

 

Anybody know

I try to avoid reading news links about him and BJ in the hope that less might be written about them.

A vote for SNP could be a vote for more farmed Salmon and less healthy wild ones.... https://www.snp.org/meet-the-snps-candidates-for-europe/

 

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news...rWnNVRjKfr6LJXQxv6FW8N3DlAqCjv9HNh3_gotrg4HHY

this mornings news....

Graeme

 

To continue this theme, Graeme - the programme which followed QT was "This Week", in which there was a (supposed) discussion about Jeremy Corbyn's leadership.

The participants in the discussion were:-

Michael Portillo - former Tory MP
Melanie Onn - former Labour front-bench spokesperson who resigned that position, in protest at Corbyn's leadership
Ian Austin - Labour back-bencher who (from his comments during the programme) appears to detest Jeremy Corbyn
​

I've tried very hard to detect the BBC's oft-asserted 'balance' in this line-up, for such a discussion........ but it has, so far, eluded me.

 

Before I start let me be clear - I'm NOT defending the BBC or anyone else but trying to work with the facts and not opinion. What follows is very much Devil's Advocate - I don't pretend to be expert in any sense.

None of the stuff that you linked to is fact (except that woman with the funny hair do was recognised as a ex MSP and she was Conservative). The rest could easily be described as being 'sore losers'. Their man came off badly so the obvious reason must be audience bias!!!

As far as the funny woman was concerned she apparently retired 3 years ago and her only contribution last night was about the Tory leadership election (upcoming). She got about 30 seconds. OK she was a Tory - but that doesn't ban her from the programme does it? Nor does it have any relevance to how the SNP was treated.

Sorry Graeme. I hear what you say and I recognsie that there's some unhappiness in certain quarters but I don't see any of it as evidence.

MickLL

 

The problem with the tories and the BBC is that the tories have decided views about how the BBC should behave. Past events have made it quite clear that the tories believe that if the BBC criticises the Labour party they're being even handed and that if they criticise the Conservative party they're being partisan. This is an odd definition of objectivity in my opinion.

 

Back to the polls and my three referendum indicators; I see the most recent polls predict Leave (no deal) parties 35%, Leave (deal) 33%, Remain 32%.

So on the face of it, 68% for leave one way or the other. But allowing for Cons and Lab voters to be split in event of no deal being agreeable roughly evenly between leave with no deal and remain, looks like no deal will win.

But, if we do leave, it should collapse Farage, as his supporters should return to main parties.

 

So we leave with no deal and with Boris in charge. Oh joy! The lunatics have taken over the asylum.

 

So... assuming there was no bias.. the SNP supporters in the audience were a bunch of shrinking violets who decided not to support their party.... or there was a labour/tory cabal of loud mouthed yobs? I wont be watching that programme again so I will leave it to you to determine which option was in play...

In the mean time I'll just continue to keep an eye on what is happening around me.

Graeme

 

I agree. It's a dirty game and we've been here before.

 

Oh, hell. If only the problem [bold highlight] were as benign as that, Kate.

 

It's just too scary to voice the reality.

 

Well only if there is no second referendum on the decision. That probably depends on Corbyn's tactics and he is a devoted leaver. However there is a very good chance that Leave could win that vote.
There seem to be more people concerned about the democratic implications of not leaving after the first vote, than are concerned about actually leaving.

 

They also decide the order of the candidates on the list. So the first one has a better chance of being elected than the others.
you can not influence who is elected out of them.