|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2020 18:36:13 GMT
When I was young it was Princess Margaret, her purported flings with various men, such as Roddy Llewellyn and her supposed hedonistic lifestyle.
It’s vicious attitudes from press barons and their ideologically adjacent lackies that is the problem. 99% of what they publish about the royals is of no public interest and yet they miss the obvious (deliberately, I might say).
Take the Epstein scandal, which appears to be of great concern for many powerful men (Ghislaine Maxwell also being the daughter of disgraced press baron Robert Maxwell). It took Prince Andrew sweating his way through the most unconvincing interview possible to get their acknowledgement when it was there for decades to expose, Better they publish ‘squirrels’ on celebrities (hacked phones or not) than possibly endanger anyone connected to their employment.
* Maxwell nearly had a West End musical staged about his life but that’s another story.
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 27, 2020 18:50:12 GMT
When I was young it was Princess Margaret, her purported flings with various men, such as Roddy Llewellyn and her supposed hedonistic lifestyle. It’s vicious attitudes from press barons and their ideologically adjacent lackies that is the problem. 99% of what they publish about the royals is of no public interest and yet they miss the obvious (deliberately, I might say). Take the Epstein scandal, which appears to be of great concern for many powerful men (Ghislaine Maxwell also being the daughter of disgraced press baron Robert Maxwell). It took Prince Andrew sweating his way through the most unconvincing interview possible to get their acknowledgement when it was there for decades to expose, Better they publish ‘squirrels’ on celebrities (hacked phones or not) than possibly endanger anyone connected to their employment. * Maxwell nearly had a West End musical staged about his life but that’s another story. Through Indepedent media would be even less risk taking as Libel laws mean you need to have absolute proof before publishing it. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2020 19:14:45 GMT
There are loads of rumours about what the press know but are too afraid to press. When Heather Mills was married to Sir Paul McCartney there were rumours that tabloids had stories about her previous exploits but wouldn't publish because they were scared of Macca's Lawyers. Once they split the tabloids printed.
|
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Jul 29, 2020 9:32:02 GMT
There are loads of rumours about what the press know but are too afraid to press. When Heather Mills was married to Sir Paul McCartney there were rumours that tabloids had stories about her previous exploits but wouldn't publish because they were scared of Macca's Lawyers. Once they split the tabloids printed. I am very ambivalent about this - should Heather Mills have her private life splashed over the newspapers? There’s no true public interest justification for it, is there? It’s only interesting as gossip because she married someone famous. On the other hand U.K. libel laws do need reform - partly because it shouldn’t take expensive lawyers like the ones Macca has to stop the press defaming you, and partly because they are far too easily abused by those who can afford expensive lawyers. But we are now very far from the point of this post - except perhaps to point out that the press feel free to print whatsoever they want about people who don’t have expensive lawyers and that does have considerable impact on people of colour who are caught up in news stories. |
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 29, 2020 10:42:35 GMT
There are loads of rumours about what the press know but are too afraid to press. When Heather Mills was married to Sir Paul McCartney there were rumours that tabloids had stories about her previous exploits but wouldn't publish because they were scared of Macca's Lawyers. Once they split the tabloids printed. I am very ambivalent about this - should Heather Mills have her private life splashed over the newspapers? There’s no true public interest justification for it, is there? It’s only interesting as gossip because she married someone famous. On the other hand U.K. libel laws do need reform - partly because it shouldn’t take expensive lawyers like the ones Macca has to stop the press defaming you, and partly because they are far too easily abused by those who can afford expensive lawyers. But we are now very far from the point of this post - except perhaps to point out that the press feel free to print whatsoever they want about people who don’t have expensive lawyers and that does have considerable impact on people of colour who are caught up in news stories. I know he is a powerful man but surprised me somewhat with a programme with Heather Mills when they were married and she was trying to stop slaughter of seals for their fur. Macca called up Tony Blair from the Arctic and Blair returned his call in about five minutes. Power of being a Beatle |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Jul 29, 2020 11:00:20 GMT
That's a fair point - look how quickly Marcus Rashford got a policy change. Other people had been banging on about it for ages, it only took a few days for the government to U-turn once he got involved.
(I am absolutely counting down the days for the tabloids to dig up - or manufacture - some kind of 'scandal' involving Rashford. It's their M.O. - build someone up as a hero so you can knock them down again.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2020 11:17:32 GMT
When I was young it was Princess Margaret, her purported flings with various men, such as Roddy Llewellyn and her supposed hedonistic lifestyle. It’s vicious attitudes from press barons and their ideologically adjacent lackies that is the problem. 99% of what they publish about the royals is of no public interest and yet they miss the obvious (deliberately, I might say). Take the Epstein scandal, which appears to be of great concern for many powerful men (Ghislaine Maxwell also being the daughter of disgraced press baron Robert Maxwell). It took Prince Andrew sweating his way through the most unconvincing interview possible to get their acknowledgement when it was there for decades to expose, Better they publish ‘squirrels’ on celebrities (hacked phones or not) than possibly endanger anyone connected to their employment. * Maxwell nearly had a West End musical staged about his life but that’s another story. Through Indepedent media would be even less risk taking as Libel laws mean you need to have absolute proof before publishing it. There is a way to have media that is not beholden to individual interests whilst conforming to strict rules on truth and privacy. What you paint as risk taking is not a good thing, there is no risk in truth if backed up by the law (and for that to be backed up by access to the law). |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2020 12:09:55 GMT
I am very ambivalent about this - should Heather Mills have her private life splashed over the newspapers? There’s no true public interest justification for it, is there? It’s only interesting as gossip because she married someone famous. On the other hand U.K. libel laws do need reform - partly because it shouldn’t take expensive lawyers like the ones Macca has to stop the press defaming you, and partly because they are far too easily abused by those who can afford expensive lawyers. But we are now very far from the point of this post - except perhaps to point out that the press feel free to print whatsoever they want about people who don’t have expensive lawyers and that does have considerable impact on people of colour who are caught up in news stories. I know he is a powerful man but surprised me somewhat with a programme with Heather Mills when they were married and she was trying to stop slaughter of seals for their fur. Macca called up Tony Blair from the Arctic and Blair returned his call in about five minutes. Power of being a Beatle Tony Blair was probably a huge Beatles fan and even the most powerful people have their own heroes. Plus if people get well known and those with a big social media reach to push a cause, sign a petition then things can snowball quickly. Someone with say a 1 million Twitter following highlights something they have been alerted to. A percentage of there followers do likewise. It starts tending. Others see this and wonder what it is, investigate and RT etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2020 12:13:07 GMT
That's a fair point - look how quickly Marcus Rashford got a policy change. Other people had been banging on about it for ages, it only took a few days for the government to U-turn once he got involved. (I am absolutely counting down the days for the tabloids to dig up - or manufacture - some kind of 'scandal' involving Rashford. It's their M.O. - build someone up as a hero so you can knock them down again.) Marcus Rashford whilst I could say considering he is likely on 100k plus a week and could fund a load of free meals himself does seem like a very well meaning and high character person. He has struck me as the sort of person who will become a captain of his club and country in due course and also be an excellent role model. |
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 29, 2020 12:22:45 GMT
That's a fair point - look how quickly Marcus Rashford got a policy change. Other people had been banging on about it for ages, it only took a few days for the government to U-turn once he got involved. (I am absolutely counting down the days for the tabloids to dig up - or manufacture - some kind of 'scandal' involving Rashford. It's their M.O. - build someone up as a hero so you can knock them down again.) Marcus Rashford whilst I could say considering he is likely on 100k plus a week and could fund a load of free meals himself does seem like a very well meaning and high character person. He has struck me as the sort of person who will become a captain of his club and country in due course and also be an excellent role model. I'd say Rashford is on slightly double that amount by this stage in his career. But, not sure the 'he could fund a load of free meals himself' is quite the discussion Rashford was raising. Perhaps a more longer term plan is needed. Either way, lad done amazingly well to date in his campaigning. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2020 12:59:26 GMT
Marcus Rashford whilst I could say considering he is likely on 100k plus a week and could fund a load of free meals himself does seem like a very well meaning and high character person. He has struck me as the sort of person who will become a captain of his club and country in due course and also be an excellent role model. I'd say Rashford is on slightly double that amount by this stage in his career. But, not sure the 'he could fund a load of free meals himself' is quite the discussion Rashford was raising. Perhaps a more longer term plan is needed. Either way, lad done amazingly well to date in his campaigning. His salary is probably what you said even more so he could stick his hand in his pocket and lead from the front. I'm always of the thought give rather than encourage others to do so, they can claim most of it back as tax relief too. I equate this with the multimillionaires being on these charity records or concerts. |
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 29, 2020 13:13:25 GMT
I'd say Rashford is on slightly double that amount by this stage in his career. But, not sure the 'he could fund a load of free meals himself' is quite the discussion Rashford was raising. Perhaps a more longer term plan is needed. Either way, lad done amazingly well to date in his campaigning. His salary is probably what you said even more so he could stick his hand in his pocket and lead from the front. I'm always of the thought give rather than encourage others to do so, they can claim most of it back as tax relief too. I equate this with the multimillionaires being on these charity records or concerts. Think he does already. Big driver in footballers giving up wages for food banks and you can see which charities locally in Manchester he supports. A very impressive young man. Point of order though, Trent will captain the National side longer term |
|
4,156 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Jul 29, 2020 13:21:13 GMT
I'd say Rashford is on slightly double that amount by this stage in his career. But, not sure the 'he could fund a load of free meals himself' is quite the discussion Rashford was raising. Perhaps a more longer term plan is needed. Either way, lad done amazingly well to date in his campaigning. His salary is probably what you said even more so he could stick his hand in his pocket and lead from the front. I'm always of the thought give rather than encourage others to do so, they can claim most of it back as tax relief too. I equate this with the multimillionaires being on these charity records or concerts. 1. Why do people always assume this? Lots of rich people do actually put their hand in their pocket and donate their own money. The Times even makes a list of the top philanthropists every year at the same time as the rich list, but it never gets the same press coverage. 2. Individual donations cannot replace organised structural change, no matter how generous. You need government intervention to tackle problems of this scale. |
|
1,970 posts
|
Post by sf on Jul 29, 2020 16:28:00 GMT
His salary is probably what you said even more so he could stick his hand in his pocket and lead from the front. Perhaps he prefers to give privately, rather than to be perceived as exploiting charitable donations for their publicity value? The point of giving to charity, after all, is to do good, rather than to show off. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2020 17:23:26 GMT
With charity donations I always think that those who give should get as much praise as those that organize. Some charity work or initiatives needs to be highlighted if Sir Tom walking up and down on his walker hadn't been highlighted then he wouldn't have raised so much.
Also anyone giving to charity who doesn't use gift aid doesn't help the charities as much as they can. If I was a footballer on 200k a week and probably paying a good whack of that to the Treasury. I'd look to ensure I could get max tax relief on that via charity donations.
|
|
4,029 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Jul 29, 2020 20:52:45 GMT
Also anyone giving to charity who doesn't use gift aid doesn't help the charities as much as they can. I'd just like to point out that it's not always possible for everyone to do Gift Aid. If you don't pay tax you're not allowed to do Gift Aid so I can't do Gift Aid because I'm a temp with an uncertain income & never know if I'm going to earn enough in a year to pay tax. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 11:33:50 GMT
Also anyone giving to charity who doesn't use gift aid doesn't help the charities as much as they can. I'd just like to point out that it's not always possible for everyone to do Gift Aid. If you don't pay tax you're not allowed to do Gift Aid so I can't do Gift Aid because I'm a temp with an uncertain income & never know if I'm going to earn enough in a year to pay tax. Okay then anyone who knows they will reach their tax threshold whatever it may be. |
|
724 posts
|
Post by basdfg on Jul 30, 2020 19:03:27 GMT
www.thesun.co.uk/news/12253551/meghan-harry-exiled-royals-made-bed-poll/'ALMOST half of Brits think Meghan and Harry should be exiled from the Royal Family because they have “made their bed”, a poll has revealed. Four in 10 believe the pair should be permanently ousted - with more than half branding their controversial biography Finding Freedom “inappropriate”. ' 'Prince Andrew is the UK’s least favourite royal, with Meghan second from bottom.' 'The Queen remains the UK’s favourite royal, with Prince Harry in second place - despite the public backlash. Kate is the third most popular, with husband William close behind, followed by Princess Anne and then Prince Charles.'
Media having an impact but the unwanted findings are hidden only the wanted ones in the headline.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2020 19:34:26 GMT
'ALMOST half of Brits think Meghan and Harry should be exiled from the Royal Family because they have “made their bed”, a poll has revealed. They made their bed? Ooh, how la-di-da of them. Next thing you know we'll be finding out they wash their socks as well. |
|
1,127 posts
|
Post by samuelwhiskers on Jul 31, 2020 1:53:00 GMT
A survey of just 2,000 people, and there’s no mention of who conducted this poll. Was it a proper poll conducted by YouGov or similar, or a poll of Sun readers? Or an online poll on the Sun’s website, in which case 2,000 responses doesn’t necessarily mean 2,000 people.
|
|
2,339 posts
|
Post by theglenbucklaird on Jul 31, 2020 7:42:37 GMT
www.thesun.co.uk/news/12253551/meghan-harry-exiled-royals-made-bed-poll/'ALMOST half of Brits think Meghan and Harry should be exiled from the Royal Family because they have “made their bed”, a poll has revealed. Four in 10 believe the pair should be permanently ousted - with more than half branding their controversial biography Finding Freedom “inappropriate”. ' 'Prince Andrew is the UK’s least favourite royal, with Meghan second from bottom.' 'The Queen remains the UK’s favourite royal, with Prince Harry in second place - despite the public backlash. Kate is the third most popular, with husband William close behind, followed by Princess Anne and then Prince Charles.'
Media having an impact but the unwanted findings are hidden only the wanted ones in the headline.
I can't be the only one uncomfortable with the Sun link? I think we should try choose our sources a little better |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2021 18:36:38 GMT
The trial of Derek Chauvin has started.
In other news, three officers who beat up an undercover black colleague ( link) have been partially acquitted with no conviction being returned on other aspects of the offences. Apparently it was a case of "mistaken identity". Given that the identity of the people being policed wasn't relevant it suggests that the mistaken identity was that they mistook the victim for someone they could rough up without getting into trouble over it.
On the positive side, progress is being made in getting rid of the qualified immunity that makes it impossible for members of the public to bring civil law suits against the police.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2021 20:32:53 GMT
So Derek Chauvin has been found guilty on all counts, and my word are some of the hard right in the US upset about that. They're going on about how "the police won't be able to do their jobs" and "you can't even fart without being jailed for murder" and "who would want to be a cop now?" I don't know whether to be amused by their frothing outrage at the idea that justice is a thing or depressed that they exist in the first place.
|
|
5,062 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Apr 22, 2021 0:31:53 GMT
You won’t get jailed for murder if you fart, but you will be jailed for second degree murder by putting your knee on someones neck, who is handcuffed and suffocating the suspect, choke holds are illegal for this reason. This still ranks as one of the worst things I have ever seen, I said that further up the thread when this happened and my view hasn’t changed.
Derek Chauvin was unanimously convicted (something I disagree with, that to secure a conviction you need a unanimously verdict, I prefer our system where you simply need a simple majority of 10-2) on all charges.
He was a dreadful bully in uniform and has now got his comeuppance. I so hope the judge throws the keys away, when he is sentenced.
I delighted at this verdict and at least now poor George Floyd and his family has got some semblance of justice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2021 7:08:16 GMT
You won’t get jailed for murder if you fart, but you will be jailed for second degree murder by putting your knee on someones neck, who is handcuffed and suffocating the suspect, choke holds are illegal for this reason. This still ranks as one of the worst things I have ever seen, I said that further up the thread when this happened and my view hasn’t changed. Derek Chauvin was unanimously convicted (something I disagree with, that to secure a conviction you need a unanimously verdict, I prefer our system where you simply need a simple majority of 10-2) on all charges. He was a dreadful bully in uniform and has now got his comeuppance. I so hope the judge throws the keys away, when he is sentenced. I delighted at this verdict and at least now poor George Floyd and his family has got some semblance of justice. Indeed. Although how it took the Jury 10 hours to reach that verdict is telling of how f&%$d the US really is. Also worrying is the talk of an appeal already. He'll go to jail, serve half the sentence and get preferential treatment by white Guards and Prison Officers over there for the duration. |
|
