I don't know if any of you saw Newsnight last night, but The Scum could be in deep, deep sh.t. The assistant commissioner of the met has been heading an investigation into bribery and corruption of senior officials by that vile rag. There is evidence that senior police, politicians, prison officials etc have been taking large bribes in return for information. Some 'retainers' have even been paid. Let's hope this is the beginning of the end for the filthy, lying rag.
Why do you think that they rushed out the Scum on Sunday? This latest phase of the Leveson Enquiry is going to make the phone hacking scandal seem like a picnic.
It's only a matter of time, surely. They continuously embarrass this country with utter tripe. Bit like you
Have you two had a tiff while I've been away? On topic. It amazes me that the rags still have the gall to print ****e like they did in the Suarez case after almost everything they do is exposed to be corrupt and cynical. Any society with pretensions to democracy needs a free press, but with that freedom comes responsibility. Their "self-regulation" is clearly a joke, and may well lead to more government interference and censorship. If that happens, the repercussions will be far greater than we are seeing at the moment.
Self-regulation doesn't work primarily because there is no disincentive to overpush the boundaries. Every editor knows that they have to print the vacuous ****e and salacious gossip, because if they don't, someone else will, and they'll lose sales (and advertising revenue...). Sadly, one thing is true - you get the media you deserve; if you buy red tops, you're buying tattle, political deceit and agendas, not news. If you put yourself in the position of an Editor, basically, you publish everything and anything unless you know the target is rich, and the story is provably bollocks. The only ones who are safe from them are the owners, who sit in the position of the figurative positions of Presidents with their fingers on the nuclear button. They have to contend with mutually assured destruction, so we hear nothing about the likes of Murdoch, just like we heard nothing about Maxwell until after he was dead and the media company he had built up was out of his family's hands. Happily, the sewer is being sluiced clean by the Leveson Enquiry and they are being pretty much forced to reveal the deceitful practices and morally and legally unsound behaviour. Of course, its the tabloids with the most to lose in this because of their hypocritical behaviour and false moralising, and I'm enjoying this hugely. I have the sincere hope that we will see the end of the S*n very soon. And Murdock will hopefully be ousted by the NewsCorp board (fat chance, I know) because of the laws in the US about having squeeky clean owners of their media... The S*n is setting on Murdock...
I certainly hope so St. That's the main reason I would never subscribe to Sky TV. Whereas, I'd subscribe to Sky+ anytime
i think its important that this paper is not only ended but is put out of business. declining sales = online presence. i want the name and owners and all concerned back then to get karma so i do hope this enquiry produces yet another set of circumstnaces that ends that title. all in all though taking perosnal out of it... its good for this country to put this meadi pack of rabid dogs down and get back to standards just like all the pigs i nthe trough at westminster had to get thiers over expenses.
Nothing would please me more than to see Murdoch's empire crumble beneath him while the old bastard's still around to see it. The only drawback to all these revelations - hugely satisfactory in themselves- is that some equally venal politicians might see the opportunity to cover up their own corruption by imposing tighter restrictions on the press as a whole.
From what I understand from the report, it seemed pretty clear that the recipients will be named and shamed as well. Let's hope so
At the end of the day, if the 'venal politicos' have left a paper trail, then decent, hard-working investigative reporters should be able to expose them, regardless of the restrictions. However, I don't give a toss who they are sleeping with, regardless of whether they are married...
Nah, me neither. Couldn't be arsed about Clinton and Lewinsky or any of the others' bedroom frolics. Those of us old enough to remember Profumo though know that sometimes it is a bit more than just lurid voyeurism. I was thinking more about genuine political corruption. The Murdoch regime has dragged the press through the gutter, and genuine reporters will be tainted with the stink, so it might give the unscrupulous politicians the weaponry they need to stifle them.
Now that this can of worms has been well and truly opened, I feel we can expect major repercussions. Why the fu.k did that no-mark welsh slapper get so much more in a phone-hacking settlement than anyone else, by the way?
If the journo can provide chapter and verse, then I'll happily read all about it (see what I did there?), but its all about proving the links. If you're saying someone is sleeping with someone, who is linked in a business/political way - that is news. If they're just playing away with someone who has no links, its just gossip, and I just don't give a flying one. As an example, Profumo is relevant, but Antonia De Sancha was completely irrelevant and despite being a Chelsea loving twat, David Mellor shouldn't have lost his job for sleeping with her rather than his wife. Consequently, I have a lot of time for Private Eye...
I think it may have been to do with having been pretty much blackmailed into providing services - a personal performance at a wedding reception or something, rather than just having her privacy invaded... I am assuming you mean Charlotte Church, not Imogen Thomas btw... p.s. didn't Church take then to court, rather than settle out of court too?
