Kettering Pete
Member
One of my biggest irritations in life is the way the press behaves, not just over us at LCFC, but the rest of the world too. I re-read that article by that vitriolic woman from the mirror, in a recent post, and in the light of the good news, I felt her article needed editing by someone with an objective viewpoint, now that her editor has left, er resigned er got sacked...
Sorry it's so long but that's her fault. I'm going after the Independent (it isn't It's Shit) next.
JOURNALIST YOBS PAY PENALTY
ANOTHER week, another crop of what appears to be lies and half truths perpetrated by a bunch of Britain's journalists.
Coming after a month of printing pictures that seemingly the only people in the country who thought were in any way genuine was in fact the Mirror, articles by many sportswriters and in particular an article by Carole Malone has hit the headlines for it's alleged inaccuracies.
Naturally the Mirror will deny everything. Of course they will. It's what their big fat fancy lawyers will have told them to do. And yes, she may well be innocent. But denying everything is becoming a habit for Britain's imbecilic journalists who are under the impression they can behave in whatever depraved way they choose, safe in the knowledge they're answerable to no one and that the papers’ bosses will wipe up their mess. And of course the papers - who don't give a stuff about careers that might be ruined, marriages that might be wrecked, children who might be traumatised for life because of the stories against their fathers or even form that may be lost by the players subsequently dooming the club to relegation - will do exactly that.
And all because of money. Let's face it, if a £20,000-a-week player is accused of rape it's good for the paper to print the bloody details - it improves their image as ‘investigative journalists’ and sells more papers and advertising space.
But if the bosses and a bevy of top-notch lawyers work their magic then all charges of incompetence, lies and misconduct are likely to be dropped due to that infamous phrase "freedom of the press" which isn't actually about freedom but is about being able to print any rubbish in the name of ‘truth’. Phrases like ‘allegedly’, ‘appears to be’, ‘was said to be’, ‘an insider said’ are sufficient to cover an alleged lie or half truth and make it look like the journalist has a fact in her grimy hands and should it prove not to be then what the hell. And if that doesn’t work, that other well worn cliché, “It’s in the public interest” is trotted out, whether the public is actually interested or not. This particular story has gone a long way to further promote the perception that any footballer that goes on a tour MUST be a loud-mouthed yob, a drunk and a rapist. And even if they aren’t, they deserve the reputation anyway.
Journalists in this country seem to imagine that if someone tells them a sordid tale of rape and debauchery involving any celebrity, it must be true. And if it’s not they’ll couch it in such terms to make it appear so, at the same time as writing a big fat cheque to the storyteller. And they think this way because most of them are one chromosome short of a full set, which is why it's now tediously predictable that any story by any journalist operating with fewer brain cells than your average sheep are going to publish more lies and falsehoods. Allegedly.
But with these shameful allegations becoming an everyday occurrence something has to be done - and quick. Because whatever these ‘professionals’ at the Mirror end up being charged with is irrelevant. They're still violent, aggressive, unpleasant, socially inept morons who shouldn't be out on their own, let alone be representing a top newspaper.
And instead of defending these yobs, it's time papers’ bosses took responsibility for the people they employ. They have to make it abundantly clear to journalists that the minute they step out of line they're out - not just out of the paper but the industry as well. Why not draw up a charter which would be signed by every rookie at the age of 15 and which would spell out loud and clear what the rules are. Rules like: Any journalist who knowingly prints an untruth - sacked. Any journalist who doesn’t do proper research and checks the facts - sacked. I suppose the problem here is that it wouldn’t be long before editors would be left without any journalist at all. But would that be such a bad thing?
Of course, the weasly Press Complaints Council is allegedly already abdicating responsibility and squealing that journalists cannot be charged with bringing reporting into disrepute if the incident was reported in alleged good faith. Shame on them!
As for the bumptious Piers Morgan, the former editor of the Mirror who no doubt got paid a huge amount and will, I suspect, get a healthy golden handshake, (the size of which is none of my or the publics business but a journalist will print it anyway – even if they got the amount wrong) did nothing when Carole Malone printed what turned out to be a badly researched editorial. Look what happened to him in the end.
So why didn’t he earn his obscene salary and set a few ground rules - like telling his staff they cannot go through life believing they're untouchable and above the law. That they must not be allowed to think that being a journalist entitles them to print what the hell they like - with no consequences. And he must tell them to ditch the notion that any one who wants paying for a big story is telling it how it is and so the subjects deserve to be treated like animals. I can only hope that journalists such as the vitriolic Ms Malone will do the same honourable thing as her former boss and seek out a new career.
Just watch how fast these louts toe the line the minute they think their freedom and liberties are under threat. For they have forgotten that with freedom and rights come responsibilities. It would be a red-letter day indeed when journalists realise they have a responsibility to the truth.
I can see a time when legislation is bought in to prevent this diatribe of nonsense and lies, but I until such a glorious day, I for one will never buy the Mirror again. Except perhaps, to publicly boycott the companies who advertise within.
But has anyone stopped to think why it's only journalists who are self-seeking, self important, overpaid and drunk with power? After all what journalist doesn’t bombard us with their personal ideals disguised as public opinion. You don't get this kind of behaviour in say banking, accountancy, legal practise or other careers where the employees earn buckets of money. One can only assume that journalists live in a world of their own where sex scandals and such behaviour is commonplace, which is probably as close as they get to have debauched sex - which may be what they REALLY want.
Allegedly.
Sorry it's so long but that's her fault. I'm going after the Independent (it isn't It's Shit) next.
JOURNALIST YOBS PAY PENALTY
ANOTHER week, another crop of what appears to be lies and half truths perpetrated by a bunch of Britain's journalists.
Coming after a month of printing pictures that seemingly the only people in the country who thought were in any way genuine was in fact the Mirror, articles by many sportswriters and in particular an article by Carole Malone has hit the headlines for it's alleged inaccuracies.
Naturally the Mirror will deny everything. Of course they will. It's what their big fat fancy lawyers will have told them to do. And yes, she may well be innocent. But denying everything is becoming a habit for Britain's imbecilic journalists who are under the impression they can behave in whatever depraved way they choose, safe in the knowledge they're answerable to no one and that the papers’ bosses will wipe up their mess. And of course the papers - who don't give a stuff about careers that might be ruined, marriages that might be wrecked, children who might be traumatised for life because of the stories against their fathers or even form that may be lost by the players subsequently dooming the club to relegation - will do exactly that.
And all because of money. Let's face it, if a £20,000-a-week player is accused of rape it's good for the paper to print the bloody details - it improves their image as ‘investigative journalists’ and sells more papers and advertising space.
But if the bosses and a bevy of top-notch lawyers work their magic then all charges of incompetence, lies and misconduct are likely to be dropped due to that infamous phrase "freedom of the press" which isn't actually about freedom but is about being able to print any rubbish in the name of ‘truth’. Phrases like ‘allegedly’, ‘appears to be’, ‘was said to be’, ‘an insider said’ are sufficient to cover an alleged lie or half truth and make it look like the journalist has a fact in her grimy hands and should it prove not to be then what the hell. And if that doesn’t work, that other well worn cliché, “It’s in the public interest” is trotted out, whether the public is actually interested or not. This particular story has gone a long way to further promote the perception that any footballer that goes on a tour MUST be a loud-mouthed yob, a drunk and a rapist. And even if they aren’t, they deserve the reputation anyway.
Journalists in this country seem to imagine that if someone tells them a sordid tale of rape and debauchery involving any celebrity, it must be true. And if it’s not they’ll couch it in such terms to make it appear so, at the same time as writing a big fat cheque to the storyteller. And they think this way because most of them are one chromosome short of a full set, which is why it's now tediously predictable that any story by any journalist operating with fewer brain cells than your average sheep are going to publish more lies and falsehoods. Allegedly.
But with these shameful allegations becoming an everyday occurrence something has to be done - and quick. Because whatever these ‘professionals’ at the Mirror end up being charged with is irrelevant. They're still violent, aggressive, unpleasant, socially inept morons who shouldn't be out on their own, let alone be representing a top newspaper.
And instead of defending these yobs, it's time papers’ bosses took responsibility for the people they employ. They have to make it abundantly clear to journalists that the minute they step out of line they're out - not just out of the paper but the industry as well. Why not draw up a charter which would be signed by every rookie at the age of 15 and which would spell out loud and clear what the rules are. Rules like: Any journalist who knowingly prints an untruth - sacked. Any journalist who doesn’t do proper research and checks the facts - sacked. I suppose the problem here is that it wouldn’t be long before editors would be left without any journalist at all. But would that be such a bad thing?
Of course, the weasly Press Complaints Council is allegedly already abdicating responsibility and squealing that journalists cannot be charged with bringing reporting into disrepute if the incident was reported in alleged good faith. Shame on them!
As for the bumptious Piers Morgan, the former editor of the Mirror who no doubt got paid a huge amount and will, I suspect, get a healthy golden handshake, (the size of which is none of my or the publics business but a journalist will print it anyway – even if they got the amount wrong) did nothing when Carole Malone printed what turned out to be a badly researched editorial. Look what happened to him in the end.
So why didn’t he earn his obscene salary and set a few ground rules - like telling his staff they cannot go through life believing they're untouchable and above the law. That they must not be allowed to think that being a journalist entitles them to print what the hell they like - with no consequences. And he must tell them to ditch the notion that any one who wants paying for a big story is telling it how it is and so the subjects deserve to be treated like animals. I can only hope that journalists such as the vitriolic Ms Malone will do the same honourable thing as her former boss and seek out a new career.
Just watch how fast these louts toe the line the minute they think their freedom and liberties are under threat. For they have forgotten that with freedom and rights come responsibilities. It would be a red-letter day indeed when journalists realise they have a responsibility to the truth.
I can see a time when legislation is bought in to prevent this diatribe of nonsense and lies, but I until such a glorious day, I for one will never buy the Mirror again. Except perhaps, to publicly boycott the companies who advertise within.
But has anyone stopped to think why it's only journalists who are self-seeking, self important, overpaid and drunk with power? After all what journalist doesn’t bombard us with their personal ideals disguised as public opinion. You don't get this kind of behaviour in say banking, accountancy, legal practise or other careers where the employees earn buckets of money. One can only assume that journalists live in a world of their own where sex scandals and such behaviour is commonplace, which is probably as close as they get to have debauched sex - which may be what they REALLY want.
Allegedly.
