sphericalfox Posted 14 November 2016 Posted 14 November 2016 50 minutes ago, RedSoxUK said: Honestly think I need a 10 page space to write about this in depth, but to keep it mildly short, here is a messy post. These companies that are advertising in the three / four right-leaning newspapers have very strong marketing teams that conduct continuous SWAT analysis of their activity, and are very clear about who they choose to do business with in terms of advertisement deals. These are not just things they do at the last minute, especially campaigns. John Lewis (w/ Waitrose,) has legitimate reasons why they're advertising with the Daily Mail - and it's not because they "fund hate," to suggest for them to cut all ties with The Daily Mail because a few headlines don't fit in with your narrative is extremely harsh. It actively calls for the fall of three newspapers, because their narrative is different to yours -- while holding on to this crazed illusion that they stick up for Freedom of Expression??!? No, I’m not buying that for a minute. If they stood up for Freedom of Expression then they would go about this a different way. They would be protesting these three newspapers direct, questioning the journalism that takes place - not attacking companies who don't share / nor pick the content that goes in those papers. They made this about censorship without trying, and I’m extremely worried about the direction this takes the free press... and to a lesser extent, peer pressure. The answer is quite simple. Don't buy the papers if they offend you... If you're so triggered that a few national newspapers are sensationalising stories; then I’m sorry you'll just have to walk around the news agents with your eyes closed or if it's legit and they are literally inciting hate, how about paying a visit here http://report-it.org.uk/your_police_force citing the Racial and Religious Hatred Act; see how much Stop Funding Hate care about the validity of Freedom of Expression then. The press is not your safe space. As for not shopping for high end goods at John Lewis, flying BA, buying frozen food from Iceland.... all because they choose to advertise in The Daily Mail (who the chief activist of Stop Funding Hate clearly has an inner hatred for,) I just think it’s bizarre. I don't read The Daily Mail, I don't like The Daily Mail - the same goes for many of our news sources; but I wouldn’t ever want to censor, or attack them to the point they lose business because I disagree with their view; be it strong or mild, they have the right to it, as do you. Free press. lols.
Barky Posted 14 November 2016 Posted 14 November 2016 1 hour ago, RedSoxUK said: Honestly think I need a 10 page space to write about this in depth, but to keep it mildly short, here is a messy post. These companies that are advertising in the three / four right-leaning newspapers have very strong marketing teams that conduct continuous SWAT analysis of their activity, and are very clear about who they choose to do business with in terms of advertisement deals. These are not just things they do at the last minute, especially campaigns. John Lewis (w/ Waitrose,) has legitimate reasons why they're advertising with the Daily Mail - and it's not because they "fund hate," to suggest for them to cut all ties with The Daily Mail because a few headlines don't fit in with your narrative is extremely harsh. It actively calls for the fall of three newspapers, because their narrative is different to yours -- while holding on to this crazed illusion that they stick up for Freedom of Expression??!? No, I’m not buying that for a minute. If they stood up for Freedom of Expression then they would go about this a different way. They would be protesting these three newspapers direct, questioning the journalism that takes place - not attacking companies who don't share / nor pick the content that goes in those papers. They made this about censorship without trying, and I’m extremely worried about the direction this takes the free press... and to a lesser extent, peer pressure. The answer is quite simple. Don't buy the papers if they offend you... If you're so triggered that a few national newspapers are sensationalising stories; then I’m sorry you'll just have to walk around the news agents with your eyes closed or if it's legit and they are literally inciting hate, how about paying a visit here http://report-it.org.uk/your_police_force citing the Racial and Religious Hatred Act; see how much Stop Funding Hate care about the validity of Freedom of Expression then. The press is not your safe space. As for not shopping for high end goods at John Lewis, flying BA, buying frozen food from Iceland.... all because they choose to advertise in The Daily Mail (who the chief activist of Stop Funding Hate clearly has an inner hatred for,) I just think it’s bizarre. I don't read The Daily Mail, I don't like The Daily Mail - the same goes for many of our news sources; but I wouldn’t ever want to censor, or attack them to the point they lose business because I disagree with their view; be it strong or mild, they have the right to it, as do you. It's not just a few headlines not fitting in with a narrative though is it? It's a specifically designed sustained campaign of lies and manipulation. I'm all for the free press offering different perspectives, but outright lies and cynical manipulation aren't that. I personally don't think the press do have the right to lie and manipulate, they should be held to standards of honestly and integrity befitting organisations which hold such social responsibility. As it is they can tell all the lies they want and most of the time, like the cowards they are, they pick on easy targets like immigrants or minorities who can't fight back. When they do pick on someone who can afford to defend themselves they pay the damages and close it down, or at worst hide a correction or apology somewhere in the middle pages well after the damage is done. I mean, you've got people who read the daily mail every day and yet don't even realise they tell lies, and some of them have even had kids so you know they're not stupid.
RedSoxUK Posted 14 November 2016 Posted 14 November 2016 9 minutes ago, sphericalfox said: Free press. lols. Yeah as in Freedom of the Press. I stand with liberty, not censorship.
sphericalfox Posted 14 November 2016 Posted 14 November 2016 9 minutes ago, RedSoxUK said: Yeah as in Freedom of the Press. I stand with liberty, not censorship. It's not North Korea, yet... https://www.nuj.org.uk/news/media-ownership-power-and-influence-belongs-to-few/ 'Just three companies control nearly 70 per cent of national newspaper circulation – Rupert Murdoch's News UK; DMGT (The Daily Mail group), chaired by Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere; and Trinity Mirror. Five companies control three-quarters of regional daily newspaper circulation and five control more than 70 per cent of online news consumption (measured by browsing time). If we were to do the same at the global level, it would not get much beyond Amazon, Google, YouTube and Facebook. So, despite the proliferation of websites and social media, power and influence is still concentrated in the hands of the few - super-rich billionaires, multinational corporations and governments.' All about the liberty innit.
RedSoxUK Posted 14 November 2016 Posted 14 November 2016 1 minute ago, Barky said: It's not just a few headlines not fitting in with a narrative though is it? It's a specifically designed sustained campaign of lies and manipulation. I'm all for the free press offering different perspectives, but outright lies and cynical manipulation aren't that. And that is your opinion. I'm sure there's some lies and manipulation at play coming down to ignorance and a lack of fact checking, all papers left / right suffer from it, but for the most part it's not. It's their view, their politics - something their readers like, something their readers pay for. Editors at The Daily Mail are not gathering round a table and planning hate campaigns. The founder of Stop Funding Hate quite clearly has a view point which differs to that of the general right-wing media.
Nick Posted 14 November 2016 Posted 14 November 2016 2 minutes ago, RedSoxUK said: And that is your opinion. I'm sure there's some lies and manipulation at play coming down to ignorance and a lack of fact checking, all papers left / right suffer from it, but for the most part it's not. It's their view, their politics - something their readers like, something their readers pay for. Editors at The Daily Mail are not gathering round a table and planning hate campaigns. The founder of Stop Funding Hate quite clearly has a view point which differs to that of the general right-wing media. Have you ever read the Daily Mail?
RedSoxUK Posted 14 November 2016 Posted 14 November 2016 4 minutes ago, sphericalfox said: It's not North Korea, yet... https://www.nuj.org.uk/news/media-ownership-power-and-influence-belongs-to-few/ 'Just three companies control nearly 70 per cent of national newspaper circulation – Rupert Murdoch's News UK; DMGT (The Daily Mail group), chaired by Jonathan Harmsworth, 4th Viscount Rothermere; and Trinity Mirror. Five companies control three-quarters of regional daily newspaper circulation and five control more than 70 per cent of online news consumption (measured by browsing time). If we were to do the same at the global level, it would not get much beyond Amazon, Google, YouTube and Facebook. So, despite the proliferation of websites and social media, power and influence is still concentrated in the hands of the few - super-rich billionaires, multinational corporations and governments.' All about the liberty innit. So long as they're not government controlled and funded partisanship.
RedSoxUK Posted 14 November 2016 Posted 14 November 2016 2 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said: Have you ever read the Daily Mail? Yes, it's not a very good paper - and it's borderline left compared to the Daily Express which doesn't seem to get as much attention because they're not as circulated.
sphericalfox Posted 14 November 2016 Posted 14 November 2016 8 minutes ago, RedSoxUK said: So long as they're not government controlled and funded partisanship. I suppose 5 or 6 dictating the agenda is better than one. Good point.
fuchsntf Posted 14 November 2016 Posted 14 November 2016 I dont read any dailies, no papers anymore.Its a total waste of my time, insults my intelligence. Forces others to have opinions of myself, and my peers, insinuating they can decipher my level of IQ. Its The major reason I give my total trust, and fetch the required truth soley from the only platform I can follow and know will feed me with a solid ambiguous, wide spectrum of honest, well presented worldly information. ...........THE FOXESTALK FORUMS. .. We Midlanders simply understand the problems, difficulties and our responsibilities we take on in the name of this the beautiful BLUE planet.... Some just dont get it !! When we try to educate them to that simple fact we really do ..... " know what we are" Being the rightlfull and honourable people of Middle earth, is always a difficult and painfull task to fullfill... Our suffering souls are and will always stay, unstained and free of any blemishes, our opinions show the true paths to enlightment. Thanks also to our high-tech admins who keep us on our toes, so anarchy has no platform to succeed to corrupt or warp our competent , broad knowledgable minds. Actually this forum is the only honest and true scriptures and sanskrit of the spirit of soul that turns the ever revolving wheel of life.... Sometimes our great midland minds are just simply wasted..!!
Voll Blau Posted 15 November 2016 Posted 15 November 2016 15 hours ago, GazzinderFox said: The thing I'm mulling over is not whether they have the right to do this, of course they do, they're doing nothing illegal, but... a) The potential for it to influence the stories that editors run with. If a scandal breaks tommorow about one of these companies, these papers will now be under substantial pressure to sit on the story. Well, that has nothing to do with whether those companies are being pressured by outside sources does it? Any newspaper worth it's mettle will run the story and disregard commercial sensitivities. I'm not saying it always plays out that way, but it should.
CosbehFox Posted 15 November 2016 Posted 15 November 2016 On 12/11/2016 at 21:00, AKCJ said: In my own personal experience, those who think that political correctness should "get in the bin" are closet racists and homophobes. Name one thing that is actually bad about it. I am with you on this. As much as I understand the argument about 'PC gone mad', it's also gave allowed the likes of Farage to call Obama 'a creature' and then get away with it by tagging 'PC gone mad'. Society needs to start calling out racism for when it occurs rather than ignoring it for fear of ridicule. 23 hours ago, Voll Blau said: Also, not sure how this 'Corbyn jig' thing hasn't made its way on to this thread yet. The Mail and Sun cropping out a war veteran to make Corbyn look bad on Remembrance Sunday. FFS. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/no-jeremy-corbyn-wasnt-dancing-9252300 The biggest example (I don't know whether its mentioned) but the Brexit/High Court was painted by the Mail and Express as the Parliament blocking the Public vote. The reality being that a vote will occur on the offered deal. This has led to a massive amount on misinformation and opinions based on nothing.
GazzinderFox Posted 15 November 2016 Author Posted 15 November 2016 37 minutes ago, Voll Blau said: Well, that has nothing to do with whether those companies are being pressured by outside sources does it? Any newspaper worth it's mettle will run the story and disregard commercial sensitivities. I'm not saying it always plays out that way, but it should. You don't sound very sure about that! And I don't blame you. I mean, it's not like we live in an era where press freedoms are under intense pressure from all sorts of different angles is it? The thing is most people on this forum are saying that the DM isn't worth its mettle and that it does lie and suppress the truth! So which is it?
GazzinderFox Posted 15 November 2016 Author Posted 15 November 2016 10 hours ago, fuchsntf said: I dont read any dailies, no papers anymore.Its a total waste of my time, insults my intelligence. Forces others to have opinions of myself, and my peers, insinuating they can decipher my level of IQ. Its The major reason I give my total trust, and fetch the required truth soley from the only platform I can follow and know will feed me with a solid ambiguous, wide spectrum of honest, well presented worldly information. ...........THE FOXESTALK FORUMS. .. We Midlanders simply understand the problems, difficulties and our responsibilities we take on in the name of this the beautiful BLUE planet.... Some just dont get it !! When we try to educate them to that simple fact we really do ..... " know what we are" Being the rightlfull and honourable people of Middle earth, is always a difficult and painfull task to fullfill... Our suffering souls are and will always stay, unstained and free of any blemishes, our opinions show the true paths to enlightment. Thanks also to our high-tech admins who keep us on our toes, so anarchy has no platform to succeed to corrupt or warp our competent , broad knowledgable minds. Actually this forum is the only honest and true scriptures and sanskrit of the spirit of soul that turns the ever revolving wheel of life.... Sometimes our great midland minds are just simply wasted..!! Hows your head this morning?
Voll Blau Posted 15 November 2016 Posted 15 November 2016 18 minutes ago, GazzinderFox said: You don't sound very sure about that! And I don't blame you. I mean, it's not like we live in an era where press freedoms are under intense pressure from all sorts of different angles is it? The thing is most people on this forum are saying that the DM isn't worth its mettle and that it does lie and suppress the truth! So which is it? Er, I am sure about that. It has always been the case that companies threaten to withdraw/do withdraw advertising from newspapers which run negative stories about them. This little pressure group won't change that. The Section 40 amendment which the Commons is voting on today is a far greater threat to press freedom than any commercial sensitivities.
GazzinderFox Posted 15 November 2016 Author Posted 15 November 2016 42 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said: I am with you on this. As much as I understand the argument about 'PC gone mad', it's also gave allowed the likes of Farage to call Obama 'a creature' and then get away with it by tagging 'PC gone mad'. Society needs to start calling out racism for when it occurs rather than ignoring it for fear of ridicule. But surely it is political correctness when he can call David Cameron a 'loathsome creature' but not Obama? I'm sure your not suggesting that Farage was saying by that remark that somehow Obama was closer to an 'ape-like-creature'? Or are you? Sounds like PC gone mad to me.
GazzinderFox Posted 15 November 2016 Author Posted 15 November 2016 Just now, Voll Blau said: Er, I am sure about that. It has always been the case that companies threaten to withdraw/do withdraw advertising from newspapers which run negative stories about them. This little pressure group won't change that. The Section 40 amendment which the Commons is voting on today is a far greater threat to press freedom than any commercial sensitivities. More power to their collective elbows now though eh? All things taken together, the heat is massively on all sections of the press at the moment. You have to say, to some extent they have brought some of this on themselves, but I think we're getting very close to the tipping point where the bath is being prepared for an emptying with the baby still in it.
Finnaldo Posted 15 November 2016 Posted 15 November 2016 19 minutes ago, GazzinderFox said: You don't sound very sure about that! And I don't blame you. I mean, it's not like we live in an era where press freedoms are under intense pressure from all sorts of different angles is it? The thing is most people on this forum are saying that the DM isn't worth its mettle and that it does lie and suppress the truth! So which is it? I'd argue the difference is that this is supposed to be a campaign for more balanced and up-to-trade-standard journalism (whether some see it as a way to silence the Mail agenda, which I would totally disagree with) whereas what you're suggesting is to totally cover up a story of interest.
Voll Blau Posted 15 November 2016 Posted 15 November 2016 Just now, GazzinderFox said: More power to their collective elbows now though eh? All things taken together, the heat is massively on all sections of the press at the moment. You have to say, to some extent they have brought some of this on themselves, but I think we're getting very close to the tipping point where the bath is being prepared for an emptying with the baby still in it. Hardly. A company is not going to go to a tabloid and say "you're going to run a negative story about us AND a little pressure group wants us to stop advertising with you, so we're not going to." It'll just be the former reason. It's been said so many times before on this thread it's barely worth repeating, but I can't understand why people are getting so worked up about an insignificant little group who haven't actually had any success yet (if you read Lego's response to their Tweet properly). If you're genuinely concerned about press freedom, get on to your MP about the proposed Section 40 legislation ASAP. The vote's today.
AKCJ Posted 15 November 2016 Posted 15 November 2016 26 minutes ago, GazzinderFox said: But surely it is political correctness when he can call David Cameron a 'loathsome creature' but not Obama? I'm sure your not suggesting that Farage was saying by that remark that somehow Obama was closer to an 'ape-like-creature'? Or are you? Sounds like PC gone mad to me. Nobody should be calling anyone a 'creature'.
GazzinderFox Posted 15 November 2016 Author Posted 15 November 2016 18 minutes ago, Finnaldo said: I'd argue the difference is that this is supposed to be a campaign for more balanced and up-to-trade-standard journalism (whether some see it as a way to silence the Mail agenda, which I would totally disagree with) whereas what you're suggesting is to totally cover up a story of interest. I'm saying that the consequences might be that it could lead to making it more tempting for a paper to sit on a story about a supermarket (or other advertiser), yes.
GazzinderFox Posted 15 November 2016 Author Posted 15 November 2016 7 minutes ago, AKCJ said: Nobody should be calling anyone a 'creature'. Well quite. But if you are going to, you should be able to consistently.
AKCJ Posted 15 November 2016 Posted 15 November 2016 7 minutes ago, GazzinderFox said: Well quite. But if you are going to, you should be able to consistently. No... Nobody should be calling anyone a creature.
GazzinderFox Posted 15 November 2016 Author Posted 15 November 2016 2 minutes ago, AKCJ said: No... Nobody should be calling anyone a creature. Why not? We are creatures.
urban.spaceman Posted 15 November 2016 Posted 15 November 2016 They're have a pop at John Cleese and David Attenborough now. Unforgivable.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.