Boxing Forums



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 18 of 18

Thread: The Leveson Inquiry

Share/Bookmark
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The Edge Of Nowhere
    Posts
    24,873
    Mentioned
    937 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1311
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: The Leveson Inquiry

    Quote Originally Posted by Gandalf View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing View Post
    OK then, ban press intrusion for things like murder cases and celebrities or whatever. But not for consequential stuff.
    Stalking celebrities is not on, but you do need good political coverage. We likely agree strongly on the later. Wikileaks is great, but coverage of the maturation Charlotte Church? Not so worthwhile.
    I am not a huge fan but Church was very eloquent and well versed in all the issues and did really well on question time in presenting some salient facts. As for her own case well it turns out there are some really mean old bitches about

    Hidden Content

    "I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it."

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    49,121
    Mentioned
    950 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    0
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: The Leveson Inquiry

    Yes, bloody hell! What a mean old bitch!

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    13,929
    Mentioned
    123 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1923
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: The Leveson Inquiry

    Quote Originally Posted by Greenbeanz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Greenbeanz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing View Post
    They shouldn't be allowed to restrain the press in any qway. The government restricts so much information already that anything that does get out is worth any price in terms of press intrusion etc. My only complaint about the press is that they hacked the phones of a bunch of fucking celebrities. They should have hacked some consequential people instead.
    So you are quite happy with a society in which murder victims phones are hacked? A system of self regulation in which an innocent person can be presumed guilty of murder and painted as such by a hungry media eager to fulfill the baying hounds bloodlust ? You seem to be arguing for the continuation of the status quo in which the government serves not the public but the media barons who dictate their own agenda. This is not about preventing the investigation of governments , powerful individuals and organisations it is about not harassing bereaved relatives.
    Have some sort of compensation ystem where anything like that means massive fines and money paid to the family by the paper, but don't stop the papers from shining light where the authorities don't want it. If they allow this commission it'll neuter the press worse than it already is. Not good for democracy at all. Dragging murder victims into it just help the powerful get what they want, which is a muzzle for the press.
    I thought you were in the business of knowing what is right ? You sound like a spin doctor for a politician or a patsy for some big media baron. "Muzzle for the Press" ? Nobody is suggesting for one moment that the press should not be able to be exhaustive in its research of and vociferous in it's opposition to Government or Politicians. Your telling phrase "Dragging murder victims into it" suggests you have no interest in the issue and have read or even watched nothing about it, within this thread or anywhere else. The inquiry itself was started in part by the illegal hacking of the voicemail of school girl murder victim Millie Dowler a process which led her distraught Mother to believe she was still alive because her voicemail had been accessed. The press have continued to behave unethically and because of it's easy access to top lawyers, Illegally and this has left innocent victims little redress. The suggestion that a body other than it's own editors can call it to account on such occasions with fines and threats of legal redress seems perfectly sane and one wonders what those who use "muzzle the Press" arguments have to hide and lose in such situations.

    Look, this inquiry is currently trying to push for an anti-democratic law and it's using emotive cases like Milly Dowler to get public support. The government and the political class in general would like nothing better than to muzzle the press.

    Remember the parliamentary expenses scandal? Some fucker billing the cost of cleaning his moat to the taxpaer? You'd never have heard of that with this law. We'd be like France where politicians can do what they want, take any kind of bribes, openly live with mistresses and it doesn't get reported. If Milly Dowler is the best reason you can come up with to make a law like this, I rest my case.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Larry Merchant Inquiry
    By Otley in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-18-2011, 07:55 AM
  2. Warren Inquiry (Cox Spoiler)
    By Otley in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-11-2011, 06:46 PM
  3. Random Inquiry
    By boozeboxer in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-18-2011, 07:09 PM
  4. Signature inquiry?
    By reinvaldez in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-10-2009, 05:35 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Forum | Boxing Rankings

Copyright © 2000 - 2024 Saddo Boxing - Boxing