Newspaper of the year

[JOHNNYAITCH]

If you do buy the Sun, I think you're scum.

 

I do buy the Sun.

 

You are of course entitled to your opinion no matter how offensive I find it

 

I'm a football fan

 

Me too

 

& the Scum lost their privilege to report on it 28 years ago.

 

They didn't but if their appalling reporting of Hillsborough is enough to want to you to never by the Sun I can respect that

 

Your pious brand of right wing cack won't convince me otherwise.

 

If you see wanting a free press (with all the down sides of that as well as the up sides) as pious right wing cack then again you are entitled to your opinion even though I think you are very wrong.

 

Daily Mail/ anti-abortion? Get back go the 19th century.

 

I won't bring abortion into this

 

JFT96

 

I totally agree

[JOHNNYAITCH]

What was the point of the article in the newspaper? Comments on his skills or otherwise as a football should be the topic, throw in pay,social life, etc for a bit of interest is surely enough.

 

It wasn't in the sports section and McKenzie isn't an investigative journalist just a columnist so it wasn't meant as some great incisive piece. So what was the point? To stir up interest and get a reaction is my guess.

 

Picking on non-football physical characteristics is surely not relevant, why authorise the article?

 

It wasn't in the sport section so it wasn't a sport column. The issue of authorisation and editorial control is interesting as surely if McKenzie suffers cos of this (and I think he he should as it was at best somewhat defamatory) then others have to be called into question too.

[Fosse69]

It wasn't in the sports section and McKenzie isn't an investigative journalist just a columnist so it wasn't meant as some great incisive piece. So what was the point? To stir up interest and get a reaction is my guess.

 

 

 

It wasn't in the sport section so it wasn't a sport column. The issue of authorisation and editorial control is interesting as surely if McKenzie suffers cos of this (and I think he he should as it was at best somewhat defamatory) then others have to be called into question too.

So it is quite acceptable to use a footballers facial characteristics to stir up interest? No wonder there was a fuss.

[JOHNNYAITCH]

So it is quite acceptable to use a footballers facial characteristics to stir up interest? No wonder there was a fuss.

 

A fuss may well have been his intention.

 

Acceptable to whom? Some will find it acceptable, some will not, some will see something more sinister (they may be right, they may not be) and so on....the readership and public opinion will decide how they feel, the regulators and courts may be asked to opine on the matter

 

When I read it I saw it as unpleasant and possibly defamatory/libelous and a crude attempt to whip up a 'fuss'. Having found out about the player's ethnicity I find myself thinking there could be something more sinister behind this but I certainly don't know that there is.

[For Us All]

So it is quite acceptable to use a footballers facial characteristics to stir up interest? No wonder there was a fuss.

 

To be fair how many football fans knew that the said footballer was of mixed race?

[ultravaliant]

To be fair how many football fans knew that the said footballer was of mixed race?

 

It was mentioned during skys commentary during the recent merseyside derby.

[davidatpreston]

I won't be calling anyone 'duck'from now on,it might cause offence?

 

That's bad news for the local Chinese takeaway then, will you just have pancakes and hoisin sauce on their own ?

 

Now let's forget Mr McKenzie for a while and hope Vale can do the business at Oxford.

[JOHNNYAITCH]

To be fair how many football fans knew that the said footballer was of mixed race?

 

Even Mayor Joe said

 

"“I think a lot of people don’t realise that Ross has Nigerian heritage and here Mackenzie is calling him an ape."

 

[mr.hobblesworth]

This is hilarious.

 

Following the terrorist attack on the Finsbury Park Mosque, The Guardian printed this (brilliant) cartoon by Martin Rowson

 

 

and the Mail has gone apoplectic

 

 

printing a full page attack on The Guardian, leading with the following...

 

“But this week the Guardian published a cartoon so sick and disgusting - so deranged and offensive to the four million decent, humane and responsible people who read us - that we owe it to every one to lay to rest this malicious smear.”

 

and also the following bull sht

 

“Earlier this week, a Guardian writer attacked the Daily Mail for carrying comments by the controversialist Katie Hopkins. That was a lie. The Guardian and its writer know that Ms Hopkins has nothing to do with the Daily Mail, but works for Mail Online - a totally separate entity that has its own publisher, its own readership, different content and a very different world view.

 

“The Guardian knows this, because the Mail has told it countless times, but, hey, why let a little lie get in the way of a good smear.”

 

It's really funny watching them get their hate filled little knickers in such a twist.

 

Guardian journalists and the cartoonist in question seem generally delighted that Dacre's got so worked up about the cartoon, with Rowson saying "..worth recalling @campbellclaret's wise advice to Tony Blair when TB was in process of writing to the Graun to complain about a toon of mine in 1996: Never complain about a cartoon; everyone will think that you're a nutter. 'Nuff said"

[For Us All]

Double standards?

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3846217/why-do-lefties-say-london-bridge-attack-was-an-incident-but-finsbury-park-mosque-attack-was-terrorism/

[jimbo57]

This is hilarious.

 

Following the terrorist attack on the Finsbury Park Mosque, The Guardian printed this (brilliant) cartoon by Martin Rowson

 

 

and the Mail has gone apoplectic

 

 

printing a full page attack on The Guardian, leading with the following...

 

 

 

and also the following bull sht

 

 

 

It's really funny watching them get their hate filled little knickers in such a twist.

 

Guardian journalists and the cartoonist in question seem generally delighted that Dacre's got so worked up about the cartoon, with Rowson saying "..worth recalling @campbellclaret's wise advice to Tony Blair when TB was in process of writing to the Graun to complain about a toon of mine in 1996: Never complain about a cartoon; everyone will think that you're a nutter. 'Nuff said"

 

if the mail (average daily sales 1.511,000 ) or the Sun (ads 1,666,000) had printed the same cartoon with the words Guardian (ads 156,000) on the side of the van - there would be cried of 'racist' 'hate crime' etc etc from certain lefties. 'nuff said

[mr.hobblesworth]

Well done! You've won the award for Most Stupid Post of the Day! In fact, it might well be the most stupid post I've read on here since ForUsAll said that saying 'Tory scum' was "as bad as writing it on a war memorial."

 

I would go in to detail about how gobsmackingly thick your post is but you probably wouldn't understand.

[SourceOfTheTrent]

Daily Heil, newspaper of the year? More like bogpaper of the year only I wouldn't stoop so low as to use it for my abloutions. A hate filled propaganda sheet if ever there was one and that's a fact irrelevant of anyone's political convictions, capitalist or socialist or whatever.

[davidatpreston]

Daily Heil, newspaper of the year? More like bogpaper of the year only I wouldn't stoop so low as to use it for my abloutions. A hate filled propaganda sheet if ever there was one and that's a fact irrelevant of anyone's political convictions, capitalist or socialist or whatever.

 

It should be a DUP newspaper, perfect for them - even its anti-abortion views, which are as dated as supporting child salvery and just as silly and pathetic.

[For Us All]

if the mail (average daily sales 1.511,000 ) or the Sun (ads 1,666,000) had printed the same cartoon with the words Guardian (ads 156,000) on the side of the van - there would be cried of 'racist' 'hate crime' etc etc from certain lefties. 'nuff said

 

It's probably a desperate publicity stunt from the Guardian.Everytime you go on their website they are begging you for money.

Hypocrites comes to mind.