Drencrom":1oof15v5 said:orange71":1oof15v5 said:I've never understood why people don't get anonymity until proven guilty :?
I've never understood why people buy tabloids.
+1 to that
Drencrom":1oof15v5 said:orange71":1oof15v5 said:I've never understood why people don't get anonymity until proven guilty :?
I've never understood why people buy tabloids.
What's to understand - surely it's one of the scenarios that the bell curve doesn't completely oversimplify?Drencrom":34ae136r said:I've never understood why people buy tabloids.orange71":34ae136r said:I've never understood why people don't get anonymity until proven guilty :?
Drencrom":2egihin3 said:I've never understood why people buy tabloids.
Neil":2bfjj71n said:Injunctions, super injunctions or Faustian pacts.1duck":2bfjj71n said:What i want to know is why we get severely censored news about say the royal family or pseudo celebrities whilst normal people have zero protection.
Was it family related?1duck":2bfjj71n said:I remember the story a few years ago about prince charles that was reported everywhere in the world, but not in britain...a quick google could bring up the results from thousands of sites but yet the british press weren't allowed to report the story.
I guess all the relates to the super injunction / privacy debate / thread that occurred on here a while back. Most enforced privacy (beyond family court, or information on minors) is largely served to those that can afford it - whereas those that should surely deserve privacy, until proved otherwise, don't get it. Not least of all that can be a bad thing in terms of sub judice.
Sometimes there's no real defence.Ycawsfach":ftvifboe said:Newspapers in general, but tabloids in particular (and I include the Daily Mail although they don't like being compared to the Sun/Mirror) always hide behind the mantra of "Freedom of the Press" when justifying their sleazy methods of gathering and printing gossip. They insult the principle.
As is often pointed out, they seem quite happy to conflate things that "the public are interested in" with "in the public interest".Ycawsfach":ftvifboe said:They also use the phrase "in the public interest" when what they mean is "of interest to those members of the public who love a scandal (and who buy our papers)"
DM":11932sty said:Drencrom":11932sty said:I've never understood why people buy tabloids.
Basically, I suspect it's because they're "mouth-breathers" who either know no better or simply don't care about their moronic gullibility.
There, I said it.
petitpal":2coe3o53 said:Jif an American sees someone driving down the street in a Cadillac they'll say, "how can I get one of those?" - a British person will say, "God, what an awful car - give me a DB9 any day".
apache":3sypwbg3 said:petitpal":3sypwbg3 said:Jif an American sees someone driving down the street in a Cadillac they'll say, "how can I get one of those?" - a British person will say, "God, what an awful car - give me a DB9 any day".
Fixed that for you