National News Supreme court ruling

[Gary Baldi]

On both sides...!

 

[Essexyellows]

Far more misinformation as well.

Is it not the individual`s responsibility to validate their information?
Some of the recycled folk post on "social media" is embarrassing, on both sides!

 

[SteMerritt]

Is it not the individual`s responsibility to validate their information?
Some of the recycled folk post on "social media" is embarrassing, on both sides!

Is it not the responsibility of the person providing the information to be accurate?

There are a lot of things posted on social media that can be easily checked before posting, that is definitely true.

 

[gofish2]

Wrong.The electorate had access to far more information this time around than in 1975.

A referendum question can only be "simplistic" and it was changed from the original Act!

Thats why we have a lot of work happening in the back ground to ensure the question is understandable to all.

Testing the EU referendum question

Find out about our testing of the EU referendum question

www.electoralcommission.org.uk

Wrong. The information was not available in an objective form partly because consequences of trying to leave were unknown, and also because political misinforming was in overdrive. Add to this that many people simply could not be bothered (I suspect) to take the time to examine the information that was available. This was exploited by Farage et al, and the 'fear of remaining' card was played at every turn.

 

[Briggsy]

Is it not the individual`s responsibility to validate their information?
Some of the recycled folk post on "social media" is embarrassing, on both sides!

Yes, it is the individual's responsibility. But I suspect you know full well that 95% of individuals don't and merely take their opinions from sources such as the Daily Mail, Express, Sun and other not entirely disinterested parties.

And I'm never convinced by the "both sides lied" argument. I'm yet to see anything published by the Remain campaign that was an outright lie. Predictions and forecasts that could be argued with, yes, but not lies. Happy to be corrected if anybody can point some out to me, of course.

Nor did I see any Remain campaign ads appealing to the basest instincts of the electorate, such as the disgraceful 'Breaking point' poster.

 

[Sheik djibouti]

Yes, it is the individual's responsibility. But I suspect you know full well that 95% of individuals don't and merely take their opinions from sources such as the Daily Mail, Express, Sun and other not entirely disinterested parties.

And I'm never convinced by the "both sides lied" argument. I'm yet to see anything published by the Remain campaign that was an outright lie. Predictions and forecasts that could be argued with, yes, but not lies. Happy to be corrected if anybody can point some out to me, of course.

Nor did I see any Remain campaign ads appealing to the basest instincts of the electorate, such as the disgraceful 'Breaking point' poster.

Wait for it - the "Country going into recession immediately after a leave vote" line will be along any minute now.....

 

[Scotchegg]

In the Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy, the computer Deep Thought, having considered the question; 'what is the meaning of life, the universe and everything' gave the answer, 42! His bewildered recipients were disappointed to say the least. 'What kind of answer is that?' they complained. 'The problem is' said Deep Thought, 'did you really understand the question.....'

How many of the 17.4 really understood the question?

42 of them?

 

[Essexyellows]

Several points were already in the European treaties, so were not a result of Cameron’s renegotiation, and most importantly nothing the EU had assured Cameron was legally binding. Also, absolutely none of what was claimed was exclusive to the UK, as the “special status” inferred.

 

[ZeroTheHero]

42 of them?

That's being generous.

 

[SteMerritt]

nothing the EU had assured Cameron was legally binding.

A bit like the referendum result then.