advertisement


The Leveson Inquiry Thread.

Still said:
To be fair, I can think of a handful ... Nick Griffin ... Tony Blair ... whoever produced/mastered the first Sisters of Mercy album ...
Click to expand...

You've gone and spoiled it, just when the PFM tidal wave of righteous indignation was coming to a stuttering crescendo you stick in a frivolous aside that knocks the whole project sideways. No wait its forming again...
 
If a paper publishes something that is later proven to be untrue , any one who sold said paper, or bought it , would be liable to prosecution. Think of it like buying stolen goods ,instead you are buying lies , I quite like that idea:eek:
 
zener said:
If a paper publishes something that is latter proven to be untrue , any one who sold said paper, or bought it , would be liable to prosecution. Think of it like buying stolen goods ,instead you are buying lies , I quite like that idea:eek:
Click to expand...

When is Leveson due to get round to Wot HiFi?
 
I rather lost sight of the point of most newspapers many years ago. They may have had a function pre radio/tv.

The tabloid gutter press are little more than comics for people who never got past adolescence.

The 'proper' newspapers either wind you up with their political bias, or they stroke you with their political bias. Pretty pointless really.

Some of the supplements can be interesting, but I really don't have time for ploughing through half a tree every Sunday.

I get my news from radio and TV.
 
The problem with TV & radio news, apart from Newsnight/Unreported World type programmes, is they don't have the time to provide the depth of reporting provided by quality newspapers.
 
The guy whom the press convicted of killing Jo Yeates was giving evidence today. Apparently he did not do it...
 
Among many others I have so far heard Charlotte Church and J K Rowling give evidence.
I am therefore completely in agreement with the father of the 7/7 victim who declined his invitation to give evidence because of the tortured luvvie circus it has turned into.
 
Quite right. Any 13 year old who has the damn cheek to have a singing talent deserves all she gets. As for Rowling, her books have sold 400 million and she's also made a few bob from the movies. What a ****ing bitch!
 
When do the press get a right of reply?
Is the evidence collected under privilege or is it actionable outside of the commons?
 
auric said:
When do the press get a right of reply?
?
Click to expand...

Oh don't worry they are already trashing those giving evidence at the hearings in their editorials.

The Daily Mail is calling Hugh Grant a liar in its pages, others are being followed. I enjoyed the public comments made at the hearings about Paul Dacre's sexual proclivities.
It will be interesting to see what the Sun prints when Coulson and Rebekkahh are sent to prison. Let me guess..." justice delivered against these two criminals who destroyed a much loved British institution and tried to blame the Murdochs" followed by "exclusive! First pics of 13 yr old murder victim's underwear on page2."
 
7_V said:
Quite right. Any 13 year old who has the damn cheek to have a singing talent deserves all she gets. As for Rowling, her books have sold 400 million and she's also made a few bob from the movies. What a ****ing bitch!
Click to expand...

Given what the Dowlers went through I have very little sympathy with a whining millionairess who complains that she thought the Mauritian beach she was on was private and then went on to say that her hubby spotted a boat out to sea which was "long lensing" them. My heart bled.

I have already said I would simply change the law to make it an illegal act to publish a photo without the subjects permission.

However such puerile bleatings by the luvvies and the rich is stopping much more intrusive actions carried out on people who have really suffered from being heard.
 
Bob McC said:
Given what the Dowlers went through I have very little sympathy with a whining millionairess who complains that she thought the Mauritian beach she was on was private and then went on to say that her hubby spotted a boat out to sea which was "long lensing" them. My heart bled.
Click to expand...
We're in complete agreement that the press' treatment of the Dowlers and (presumably) the McCanns is beneath contempt and inexcusable.

However, that does not mean that they should behave abominably to the JK Rowling, Hugh Grant or Charlotte Church. Separate issues.

However such puerile bleatings by the luvvies and the rich is stopping much more intrusive actions carried out on people who have really suffered from being heard.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't. These other actions are certainly being heard. Moreover, press action has caused genuine suffering to the 'luvvies' and the 'rich', no matter how much you feel that a career in the public eye or being wealthy means a disentitlement to the rights of privacy or truth.
 
Bob McC said:
Given what the Dowlers went through I have very little sympathy with a whining millionairess who complains that she thought the Mauritian beach she was on was private and then went on to say that her hubby spotted a boat out to sea which was "long lensing" them. My heart bled.

I have already said I would simply change the law to make it an illegal act to publish a photo without the subjects permission.

However such puerile bleatings by the luvvies and the rich is stopping much more intrusive actions carried out on people who have really suffered from being heard.
Click to expand...
Dude, you're a genius. It's obvious to me now. The privacy of an individual should be inversely proportional to their wealth, minus a proportion dependent on the source of that wealth, where musician/actor is weighted highest.

Wow.
 
Just because someone is famous, good/bad at their job (be it acting, singing or whatever) and earns a lot of money doing it is not license to treat them like a this...the inhumanity of some of the acts perpetrated in the name of 'news' is beyond me...I'm no great fanboi of Anne Diamond but no-one deserves this type of treatment...releasing a picture of you burying your Son against your wishes!...I hope this haunts whoever authorised such action until their dying day...have they no shame?

Paul
 
It really is disheartening to hear tossers like Piers Morgan and then Trevor Kavanagh try to minimise and evade, the latter while blaming the Guardian, the BBC. The Times Executive Editor shamed himself similarly on Newsnight. Murdoch must be holding them tightly by the scrotum.
 
The situation is the same whoever it is, it's just more difficult to feel sympathy for those who court the media as a 'career' when they want to be off duty. They should be treated exactly the same, but you do have to wonder if, to a degree, they bring it upon themselves. It's private to have a family wedding, unless you've sold the exclusive rights to Hello!. I think the Age Of Celebrity for those who pursue it has a price, and if you sell your soul to the Devil, one day the day of reckoning will come.

Katie Price shopping is one thing, but someone burying her son is off the scale.

I'd love to see Piers Moron being squished underfoot like a beetle. He is is the slimiest wet turd that ever was defecated onto the earth.
 
I thoroughly enjoyed watching Mr Moron yesterday. The slow transformation from smug git to petulant, guilty-as-f**k wide-boy was most gratifying. I particularly enjoyed seeing him at the start ofhis evidence, responding to the obvious excitement in the court, probably thinking they were worshipping his celebrity. I'm pretty sure the realisation that the excitement was because they all knew he was in for a slow skewering must have dawned on him at some point.

But the best bit was at the end when the second QC roughed him up with unconcealed disdain. And sitting directly behind the lawyer was Michael White of the Guardian, scribbling with some relish. His piece today is most enjoyable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top