Talk:Chris Bryant/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

http://www.chrisbryantmp.co.uk/home.htm - I had to link into this page of his site because the index page of the domain ( http://www.chrisbryantmp.co.uk/ ) uses VBscript to check for the presence of Flash. I got a blank screen. Pah.

I'm also a little skittish about the NPOV status of some of the analysis here, but I don't know enough about Welsh politics to be sure.

--rbrwr

Photo

This page needs a photo Matthewfelgate 00:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I have obtained, via our glorious interweb, a picture of this said individual, this Chris Bryant MP, which I think is very suitable. I divine you know which picture. What'dya reckon? Five OKs and I upload. Mogtheforgetfulcat (talk) 09:06, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Affair of the underpants and gay website

Ridiculous hagiography this clearly written by Bryant's office if not by himself. I am a writer for Associated Newspapers in the UK and Bryant is barely tolerated by us [but he makes good copy] as he is vain, self important and self-aggrandising; he goes to wherever the wind blows. More to the point, Bryant has no prospects as a politician since he was outed for his sexually explicit postings on gay websites where he cruised for casual sex. Please consult this BBC story and also google Chris Bryant with the word 'underpants'http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22chris+bryant%22+underpants . Here is the BBC story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3256348.stm MP 'sorry' over underpants photo. Labour MP Chris Bryant has apologised for e-mailing a picture of himself in his underpants via a gay website. After the picture was published by a number of newspapers, the 41-year-old Rhondda Labour MP issued a statement on Tuesday apologising.

Bryant and his advisers are clearly positioning him back in 'serious' territories with his clever calculation that he should ride the wave of New Labour disenchantment with Blair - hence his concert-master role in the letter to Blair asking for his resignation. Us British hacks [sorry - journalists!] have utter contempt for his scruples - he was once Blair's cheerleader, when the wind was blowing fair; clearly jockeying for position with the Brown camp now.

I am amazed this encyclopaedia has not a section on the 1 week wonder of Bryant's gay underpants pictures: I was in the Press Gallery when the whole House [Commons] smirked the day after the story broke in every media outlet. I will rectify. Goonteam 19:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Yea... 97.64.215.195 (talk) 14:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

"Controversy" Section

I've re-titled the "Controversy" section of this article. The controversy is not about Bryant's sexuality - there are plenty of other gay MPs - but over the way that he behaved. A straight MP would have been subject to the same treatment by the media if he had solicited casual sex with women, or sent half-naked pictures to an anonymous female respondent. The point of this is to highlight Bryant's judgement (or lack of it), not his sexuality. With this in mind, I've restored the sense of the earlier article (which was heavily re-written by Tawney), and added citations. RomanSpa 02:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I've amended the 'Social Cleansing Controversy' section, which appeared, intentionally or not, to have some POV issues. What are other editors' positions on whether this should be included at all? Countless people called the plans 'ethnic cleansing', and those accused of pushing the policy criticised all of them. I don't think there was anything in any way notable about this. Why it's included is beyond me. Regardless, in the meantime what I've amended is that it was phrased to make it sound like Bryant said something outrageous, whereas his terminology was suggested to be harsh, by the target of the criticism. Marty jar (talk) 23:23, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Again - thoughts please on another extremely strange addition to the article, namely the story that the Guardian printed 4 spoof Chris Bryant Diaries 5 years ago (!), and later had to clarify they were spoofs, after some people believed them, and Bryant complains. Seems like another rather bizarre inclusion. Marty jar (talk) 23:30, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Concern Over Editing of this Article

I have to say I share Goonteam's concern (above) about the way this article has sometimes been edited. The re-writes of 17 September 2006, in particular, seem designed for positive political spin more than dispassionate presentation of information: the excision of the main controversial points in the "underpants" story, and the blurring of the date on which Bryant resigned as Falconer's PPS, for example, suggest an attempt to slant this article away from NPOV. RomanSpa 02:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Bryant resigned in June [1]. --Coroebus 14:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I have "reverted" from the version of 7 October to the version of 20 September, and then added one word ("anonymous"). I hope this reversion has worked properly, and that the reasoning is clear. One of the most important, and clearly documented, aspects of this scandal is that Bryant didn't just send his half-naked picture to people, he also actively solicited anonymous sex. I don't believe the scandal is because Bryant is gay, or that he looks dreadful in elderly underwear, but that he was soliciting sex on an anonymous basis. This is material, and documented. Any attempts to gloss over this look to me very like "spin", which I don't think is appropriate for Wikipedia. Please could we discuss further changes to this section of the article here before making them? Thanks! RomanSpa 00:39, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

This biography reeks of new labour sleeze and spin. I remember linking an article which asked which drink he prefered pepsi or coke. This was a legitimate bit of research. Guess what one of his over protective researchers kept removing it.

This is a particularly poor article. Between political aides, and bloggers, there's lots of very cheap content with major POV issues - plenty about pictures of pants, and nothing about News International (the other of the two main things he's known for). Requires considerable work. Marty jar (talk) 23:34, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Guido Fawkes

I'm cheezed off with the labour spin machine which patrols this profile. I'm make reference to Guido Fawkes as the leading political blogger in Britain. Howevr, another editor says its my POV.

Is this one of Bryants researchers. THe fact that the BBC Radio 4 profile on Guido which says he is the leading political blogger is not good enough for this person.

I suggest you go to www.order-order.com and look through the archive where Guido has proof thqat he is the leading blooger. Beats, MPs, government ministers & multi national media outlets to be Number 1.

I can't understand stand why right-wing blogger should stand over britain leading political blogger. The link on guidos site says he is a right wing libertarian.

But then Bryant needs mindless drones to keep him elected thats why he was parachuted into the Rhondda a sheep in tights would be elected under a labour banner there. I should now i lived there!!

No, Guido Fawkes is utterly irrelevant to Chris Bryant and I've removed him.

The Golux 18:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


Do you understand comedy & parody the fact that this is funny is obviously beyond our comprehension!

Should we include the Guido Fawkes parody "Chris Bryants Legal Diary"? I think qwe should as it is written in jest. to the amusement of people but not to Chris. What I'm trying to say is that this is a fact, Guido was sent a letter and he refuses to appologise. Isn't that factual enough for Wikkipedia? User: Scifry 15/2/07

Burberry Campaign

Do you think we should start refferences to this highly visable campaing which as of the 14 Feb 2007 went global i.e. New York, Paris and London? User: Scifry

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Chris Bryant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:03, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chris Bryant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:03, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chris Bryant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:25, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Childcare costs coverage

An edit of mine has been reverted by User:Bellowhead678. It was 'On 19th October 2019, Bryant attracted unfavourable press comment when he made a speech in the House of Commons demanding that MPs be reimbursed for the cost of childcare arising from them attending the first Saturday sitting of the House for 37 years. The coverage compared the pay and expenses of MPs with others and noted the infrequency of the occasion.'[1]

I would argue for its inclusion on the following grounds: 1) It was covered by high circulation, if downmarket, publications e.g. The Express, Metro, The Mirror, The Sun, AOL and Yahoo. 2) It was reported explicitly in relation to live political issues i.e. austerity, MPs expenses scandal, elitism of Parliament, Parliament vs. the People, populism and contributes to those themes. 3) It relates to Bryant's own history of large expense claims, even though he has no children. 4) It relates to Bryant's political judgement. 5) It is surely as or more consequential than existing material on the page e.g. his asking questions about Prince Andrew's indiscretions or wishing the speaker a "Kiss a ginger day". Jontel (talk) 10:13, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm happy for the content about Prince Andrew and 'Kiss a ginger day' to be removed. I'm not sure how it relates to his previous expenses claims given that (as you say) he doesn't have any children. I don't see how the other points make it notable. Bellowhead678 (talk) 10:53, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
On your first point, I am not asking for the material to be removed: on the contrary, see my point 3. Regarding your second point, it is further evidence of his arrogant sense of entitlement as an MP. As a candidate for speaker, he is extending that to the claims of other MPs. Regarding your third point, notable is not the correct word to use. As per WP:NOTEWORTHY, The notability guidelines do not apply to contents of articles ... Content coverage within a given article or list (i.e. whether something is noteworthy enough to be mentioned within the article or list) is governed by the principle of Wikipedia:due weight and other content policies. I've looked at these for you and think the most relevant is WP:PROPORTION An article should not give undue weight to minor aspects of its subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight proportional to its treatment in the body of reliable, published material on the subject. For example, discussion of isolated events, criticisms, or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. This is a concern especially in relation to recent events that may be in the news. So, is it proportionate to mention it in relation to Bryant himself? I accept that its relevance to wider issues is not directly material. I think it is proportionate because it is yet another example of his poor judgement, so speaks to his character and ability. It should have been obvious to him that seeking a small amount of expenses on behalf of people, who are relatively well paid and at public expense, for something that happens once in a generation would have attracted criticism. That is particularly the case in the context of austerity, the expenses scandal, populism and the Brexit "people vs. parliament" theme. Moreover, it fits into and contributes to a pattern of poor judgement on his part: the expenses claims, the half-naked touting for sex while an MP, attacking a member of the Royal family, the "Kissing a ginger day" episode and the calling for the arrest of President Trump. If it had no significance, it would not have received the publicity that it did. It can be shorter but I think it should be included. Jontel (talk) 11:49, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Your argument seems to be that because he has done things which you think are ill-advised, we should also add this thing which you also think was ill-advised? Bellowhead678 (talk) 20:17, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
It is all the popular press that think it was ill-advised, an opinion that has been expressed about several previous unforced actions of his. Let's see whether any other editor has a view. Jontel (talk) 20:41, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
This was a very fleeting exchange between Bryant and the Speaker, and I don't think it is worthy of mention, whatever gloss the right-wing tabloid press might put on it. -- Alarics (talk) 21:00, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Mosalski (19 October 2019). "Rhondda MP Chris Bryant causes outrage by calling for MPs to receive money for childcare when Parliament sits on a Saturday". Wales Online. Retrieved 20 October 2019. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |firstRuth= (help)

The £650,000 profit Chris Bryant MP made from selling flats the taxpayer helped fund

John Cummings (talk) 16:46, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chris_Bryant/Archive_1&oldid=1167687051"