Are There No Limits To The Depths Of Depravity That Some Sections Of The Press Will Sink?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4190450/Twitter-abuzz-Der-Spiegel-publishes-shock-Trump-cover.html

[vortex]

I don't think there is much doubt that at some point or another 'certain sections of the press' will have sunk to the depths of depravity if one looks hard enough. Remember Leveson?

People have a choice, if they are offended by the subject matter then don't buy it...

[vortex]

Funny how so many people have it in for the DM and yet look at the readership in comparison to the rest of the market.

Why, even David Cameron is supposed to have leaned on the owner to call for Dacre's sacking!

Personally, I would have cited examples from the now defunct NOTW.

There is depravity and there is depravity...

[vortex]

Ok, I'll make it a hat-trick...

Sp1814 - would you have used those examples had the thread been posted by anyone but AOG?

[Zacs-Master]

I'll leave sp to answer that directly but it was a valid response to another overwrought question by AOG. If he just toned down his questioning and didn't sensationalise then he'd get more measured responses.

[mikey4444]

Well said Zacs !

But when has AG ever done that ?

[Peter Pedant]

// Personally, I would have cited examples from the now defunct NOTW. //

o I quite liked the news of the screws - I got into it once ( shenanigans at college hur hur hur ) and almost another time over Open Uni summer schoolz ( hur hur hur again )
The social science students were screwing around whilst the maff students ( of which I was one on M204 - that is a course and not a drug ! ) said " we never did anything like that at night - all I remember is sweating over long sums ". I passed

[sp1814]

vortex

You asked:

"Sp1814 - would you have used those examples had the thread been posted by anyone but AOG?"

Most certainly.

My response is about the Daily Mail and the fact that it is a pretty good example of how base our newspapers can be.

[vortex]

Zacs-Master //but it was a valid response to another overwrought question by AOG//

It was a valid response but it could easily have come from the Express, Sun, NOTW etc.

[vortex]

Sp1814 //My response is about the Daily Mail and the fact that it is a pretty good example of how base our newspapers can be.//

I know but you cited examples all from the same paper, a paper which AOG refers to regularly.

I simply wondered why you chose the DM instead of examples from other publications.

[Zacs-Master]

To better make his point against AOG who did use the DM as his source one would presume.

[vortex]

I expect so.

[Ninefingers]

Der Spiegel another lefty media group attacking Trump, no shock there

[mikey4444]

Ninefingers....acording to you and others like you, anybody or any organisation who dislikes Trump is "leftie" ....so, no change there then !

[Ninefingers]

When have I ever said I "like" Trump, the man is a complete joke BUT he was elected through a democratic process to the job, all I'll ever suggest is that people respect that.

Now if you want me to start on his competition for the job then I'd happily become offensive towards that contemptible, elitist, waste of oxygen

[whiskeryron]

As Will would say '' Much Ado About Nowt''

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

/// Like when the Daily Mail attacked one of the Brexit judges for being 'openly gay'? ///

I don't know what the Brexit judges have to do with this thread, but seeing you brought it up:

I have been criticised for using the word "Depraved" yet you and others think that one judge was "Attacked" for being openly gay??????????

He was not attacked at all he was truefully described as being an openly gay ex-Olympic fencer.

This is what the headline actually said:

*** “The judges who blocked Brexit: One founded a EUROPEAN law group, another charged the taxpayer millions for advice and the third is an openly gay ex-Olympic fencer” ***

All legitimate descriptions, not a sign of any of them being "Attacked".

All three judges were "attacked" (if one must use that word) for the decision they came to, not because one of them happened to openly gay.

[mikey4444]

Ninefingers....you need to think about what side of the fence you are on, because you run a very real risk of getting splinters in the posterior.

[andy-hughes]

AOG - //He was not attacked at all he was truefully described as being an openly gay ex-Olympic fencer. //

No-one would deny the truth of the observation, but many would question the need to mention it at all. Only in the minds of Middle England would the fact that a judge is gay be a factor - because it speaks to their perception that he is probably slightly dodgy, and unable to make a sound legal judgement.

[mikey4444]

Andy....it was quite clear why the DM thought it necessary to mention the Judges sexuality, and that was discredit him in the eyes of the Public.

But that goes without saying, doesn't it.....it is the DM after all.

[anotheoldgit]

Zacs-Master

/// Andy, let's not turn this into a bash AOG thread eh? You might be able to get away with it but I don't think I would. ///

Perfectly true Zacs you would not be able to get away with it and neither would many other ABers, I have even been openly chastised for daring to use his surname. AH seems to be a protected species.

I have reported him on numerous occasions, but he is still allowed to continuously goad me, even when I have took the decision to no longer debate with him, something that spoils the whole concept of sites such as this.