IanB
|
Edited Dec 04, 2011, 19:42
Leveson?
Dec 02, 2011, 06:48
|
|
Anyone else been watching / listening to this? It has been absolutely astonishing. I have hardly listened to any music the last couple of weeks. At times it comes off as a sort a Nuremberg for the tabs. Though it hasn't exactly had a huge amount of mainstream broadcast media coverage. No wonder! Shame is word that they seem to reserve solely for lurid headlines.
|
Moon Cat
|
Edited Dec 02, 2011, 17:38
Re: Leveson?
Dec 02, 2011, 12:37
|
I've seen some footage. There's definitely a whiff of some slebs relishing the long-awaited opportunity to get revenge on the tabloids without fear of reprisal...for the moment at least. It's quite eye-popping some of the stuff that the papers have been up to over the years though; the methods, the man-hours and dodgy dealings and mostly in pursuit of what? Who Hugh Grant's been shagging this week ffs and usually under the vague pretence that it's in the 'public interest'.
I genuinely feel for the families and ordinary joe's that have been victim to these things. I had my email hacked recently which caused minor inconvenience and so on, and that felt a bit shit so I can't imagine what industrial scale intrusion feels like.
I think the back-stabbing between disgruntled hacks, lawyers and other employees and editors/management, as lines were progressively drawn during the initial phone-hacking enquiries, is likely to get more bitter and savage as this rotten ship sinks further in the mire.
|
sanshee
|
Edited Dec 21, 2011, 20:12
Re: Leveson?
Dec 21, 2011, 20:12
|
Anne Diamond having her daughter's funeral 'photographed from the bushes' aside, which goes beyond barrel scraping, I can't see the public having that much sympathy for many of the celebs involved.
It's become a bit unfocused in that respect (after all, it has been pitched as something of a call to arms, hasn't it?) and it seems it's only half way through.
x
|
IanB
|
Edited Dec 24, 2011, 12:35
Re: Leveson?
Dec 24, 2011, 12:00
|
|
sanshee wrote: Anne Diamond having her daughter's funeral 'photographed from the bushes' aside, which goes beyond barrel scraping, I can't see the public having that much sympathy for many of the celebs involved.
It's become a bit unfocused in that respect (after all, it has been pitched as something of a call to arms, hasn't it?) and it seems it's only half way through.
x
Not even half way. The police are in for it next.
It is not just about celebs. Many celebs clearly play the game in exchange for column inches. Some do not. But I totally reject Piers Morgan's fair game argument. That is self-serving crap of Jeremy Kyle proportions. At least many celebs can afford to send Sue Grabbit and Run after a settlement though many tabloid victims are utterly defenceless. Generally speaking our build-em-up-knock-em-down attitude to the great, the good and the not so good is our worst national characteristic.
For me it comes down to whether we have a right to expect our papers to print the results of genuine news gathering instead of utter fictions.
For example, when asked about the McCann case one hack basically admitted that the public (i.e their editors) were so desperate for information that they had to print third hand tittle-tattle (in other words unsubstantiated leaks and gossip) to fill the vaccum left by the Portuguese authorities. Chris Jefferies had it even worse. The idea that we have the right to be entertained by the plight of grieving families is utterly abhorent and the hacks and the people who aid them are hopefully going to get everything that is coming to them. And no one has even mentioned Hilsborough yet.
I am sick of hearing tabloid hacks rely on the notion of what is of "public interest" to their readership to justify their muck-rakings. I shudder to think what some of the Clarkson-loving, tab-reading British public might be really interested in. To quote another vicious young Englishman "I've met the man in the street and he's a ****".
|
sanshee
|
Re: Leveson?
Dec 24, 2011, 14:31
|
Don't worry, I've no compulsion at all to read all about anyone's private doings, be it a tragedy or who they last got their rocks off with.
None of that is justifiable, or necessary even. Infact, it's scummy, very little decent folks would disagree.
I'm just talking pragamtically, as far as I see it.
It's going to just fritter away, to no great end, other than a few 'stern recomnedations'.
Had the enquiry been purely relentless in its pursuit of protecting 'the ordinary people' (there are thousands of examples out there, not just high profile ones), then I do believe the public would care more.
As fickle as it sounds, the sad reality is, 'they got the ones we care about over with first'.
x
|
