TV showed,
And the scholars seized,
That 1 dog in Asia
You can sew a pig's head off.
He detected a bimbo dog on time,
The clippings are done by uncle,
How to Lubricate Margarine
TV's broadcasting.
Lo di ri di, for young people
Two boiler rooms in Skierniewice.
As they chased the Nazi,
His pants were falling.
On TV, 4 experts
From fertilizers and from the world
They decide what happens
Guatemala in 3 years.
The working masses will lose,
When real pay goes down.
Guatemala doesn't see,
That the elite of power steals. [...]
Usia pee, sceleada,
In the garden, Miss Mania.
The cloud has slid,
Eggs are unbearable.
It turns out that I was not the only 1 on Friday, erstwhile 2 presidential "debates" were held (it's hard to compose without quotes), I had a connection with this superb song "Independent Salon", written by Jack Kleyff in 1972 (here only a fragment of the text). It has been 53 years, the strategy has changed, and Kleyff’s “Television” is inactive up to date and is inactive the most accurate commentary on the circus that gives us mainstream media. Eggs are unbearable, ladies and gentlemen.
To the agenda, almost everyone went over the fact that the 3 largest Polish tv channels – with national tv at the head – were attentive to the snapping of Mr.Trzaskowski's staff and immediately declared that they would be willing to broadcast and service the presidential 'debate' under the conditions that this staff wished for. And I remind you that first he wished only a debate with Mr Karol Nawrocki. The rhetorical question is, of course, whether TVN, Polsat and TVP would be on the same alert if Mr Nawrocki had stated that he would be debiting with Mr Trzaskowski (such a challenge had already appeared) or if Mr Hołownia wanted a debate with Mr Mentzen.
Private televisions have, of course, freedom here – they can fool themselves on their own account. As to TVN's political affiliation, there is most likely no uncertainty (and after the sale of this station, regardless of the youthful hopes of the PiS camp, nothing will change), Polsat acts cyclically. State television, on the another hand, is scandalous.
The second is obliged by the Electoral Code and its Regulation, issued in 2011 by the National Broadcasting Council, to hold at least 1 debate before the presidential election, taking into account all registered candidates who request to be notified of the date of the gathering at least 48 hours earlier, and TVP announces that specified a debate will be held on 12 May. At the same time, however, TVP is not allowed to engage in the run of 1 of the candidates. It is known that this ban has never been respected, especially for the erstwhile power. This had its reflection in specified a way of presenting candidates, the amount of time devoted to them in news or publicist programs, or in the sociotechnical grasps used. Regrettably, but someway inactive trying to pretend to follow standards.
In the event of Friday's debate, we have a fresh level. There was no pretending here anymore. TVP simply decided to handle the election maneuver of the KO candidate. Clearly, however, there must have been a hazard awareness in the management of the company, since Mrs Joanna Danikowska-Paź, who led the TVP, stressed respective times that Polish tv is not the organizer of the debate. In that case, 1 can ask what Mrs Danikowska-Paź was doing in the hall in Koński together with editors Kajdanowicz and Witwicki. She was walking by with the porters and she just came by – and there's something to drive?
TVP defenders say that it was simply not a debate – the 1 from the bill – so state tv had the right to co-organise it on the same rule as it organizes its publicist programs. but that in the name of this program the word "debate" was utilized by the TVP leader herself, who repeated that the organizer was Mr. So TVP handled a peculiar candidate's run staff.
And if at least this undertaking looked rather serious, but looking at the complete chaos around it there is no way to say so. A large country in Europe for a small over a period before the key elections is incapable to organize a debate between candidates in a civilised and orderly way, and alternatively there are circuses: safety guards at the hall's door in Koński conflict and push the candidate's spokeswoman, occupying second place in the polls; a third-place candidate gets a message of an invitation to the debate at 20 o'clock, while he is at the end of Poland, almost 4 hours drive from Koński; journalists conducting the debate first announce that in Question Times any candidate will be able to ask a peculiar individual a question only once, after which they do not full observe this principle. And so on, and so on.
At the same time, it should be noted that matters got out of control to the designers of this hucpa, or staff of Mr. Originally, it may have been a substance of not having a debate at all, that Mr Nawrocki would not accept the invitation and that it would be possible to announce that he had chickened out. Then – to play classically for polarization: Trzaskowski vs Nawrocki. However, erstwhile it turned out that the Republic is having its own debate, respective another candidates are coming to it, and then these candidates can make a demonstration at the hall door in Koński – the staff of the president of Warsaw had to capitulate and let them to the studio. As it turned out – with serious consequences.
It's not just that Mr. Trzaskowski was attacked from many sides. More even the point is that – as we analyzed and announced European Analyst Res Futura (with very accurate analysis of online trends utilizing modern instrumentarium) – for the first time since 2015, the polarization algorithm in Polish social media ceased to work. "The communicative “or we, or disaster, loses effectiveness” wrote the collective analysts in their report.
Then we read:
Comments massively rejected a message based on fear and polarization. Most users did not want to choose between "minor evil" but sought alternatives.
Both the KO and the PiS lost their monopoly on attention. The candidates of these parties were most frequently commented – but besides most frequently criticized. Their content did not make lasting commitment.
The most on this shift loses the PiS. Its current advantage – acute polarization, the message of “anti”, the rhetoric of fear – not only stopped working, but was reconstructed in real time by the users themselves. Nawrocki became the mark of irony and discouragement, and the Confederacy — although not gaining in debate — began to consume its possible electorate online.
[...] Duopol KO-PiS can no longer base its strategy on polarisation. Algorithms, social emotions and the structure of comments clearly show that the "we versus them" model no longer generates commitment – it generates fatigue.
The candidates of these camps must halt counting on organization loyalty and start convincing with concrete, personality and authentic message. The key is not who has a bigger media machine, but who builds trust outside his bubble.
The 2025 elections will be the first in which the consequence will be decided not by hard electorates, but by those who have stood by for years. They are voters tired of conflict, calculation and artificiality. present they want a policy that does not play a role, but speaks to them usually – and is not afraid to choose a side.
And possibly that's optimistic.
Eggs are unbearable.
Luke Warches
