News of the World - utter scum

drussellh

Azari wrote: »

But you will be the one whose wasted his money on 10 copies of something that is useless unless you need to wipe your backside. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Compare the circulations of the Guardian and the Sun. the Sun sells millions of copies. Let's see the Guardian do that. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Cool_Mint

Rosie1978 wrote: »

Oh OK I'll swallow the expenses thing - credit where credit is due but the above statement is a) completely untrue and b) shows you have no actual knowledge of what you are talking about.

If I had rehashed a press release and tried to submit that, my editor would have thrown it back in my face. I worked damn hard for my stories - as do hundreds of journalists across the country. It's a hard, often miserable, and poorly paid job, until you hit the upper echelons. You do it because you love it.

In my time I was threatened with violence, shouted at, abused - all to break stories that were in the public interest. May I remind you that around the world the so-called 'lazy journalists' you speak of are actually killed for doing their jobs with shocking regularity, because they dared to shine a light on injustice?

Believe me, if rewriting PR puff pieces was all it was about then my life would have been much easier - but nowhere near as satisfying.

Sorry but when it comes to their jobs virtually all journalists and reporters for major newspapers and magazines are amoral at best and I doubt you were any different. What happened at NOTW is common practice across the media (television included) and much more serious crimes are committed every day; everyone knows what's going on so being in the industry yourself you should know what I'm talking about. If it were up to me I would be quite happy to see every paparazzi photographer and journalist put in prison.

"Reasonable expectation of privacy"... Only the ignorant and journalists have any objection to that idea being put into law. I don't think even 1 in 100 journalists are in favor of it.

Azari

drussellh wrote: »

Compare the circulations of the Guardian and the Sun. the Sun sells millions of copies. Let's see the Guardian do that.

The relative circulations are irrelevant.

You'll still end paying for 9 copies of something that are complete useless to you.

Except for the function I mentioned.

Devils-Advocate_3

Cool_Mint wrote: »

Sorry but when it comes to their jobs virtually all journalists and reporters for major newspapers and magazines are amoral at best and I doubt you were any different. What happened at NOTW is common practice across the media (television included) and much more serious crimes are committed every day; everyone knows what's going on so being in the industry yourself you should know what I'm talking about. If it were up to me I would be quite happy to see every paparazzi photographer and journalist put in prison.

"Reasonable expectation of privacy"... Only the ignorant and journalists have any objection to that idea being put into law. I don't think even 1 in 100 journalists are in favor of it.

What a ridiculous generalising article....how old are you? 12?

Grow up, realise you are an adult, and stop tarring everyone with the same brush. Saying ALL photographers and journalists should be put in prison is probably the most absurd and idiotic statement I've ever had the misfortune to read.

Do yourself a favour and go back to school you stupid boy.

antrobus

Rosie1978 wrote: »

... If I had rehashed a press release and tried to submit that, my editor would have thrown it back in my face. ...

Then you obviously don't work for The Independent where re-hashing press releases is how they fill the paper.

Case in point;

Are we really this stupid? By Matilda Battersby, 30 July 2010
http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2010/07/30/are-we-really-this-stupid/

Where a 'journalist' has received a "press release from the nice people who make Velvet Toilet Tissue" and bemoans the fact that the British public are stupid because they "don’t realise that the oxygen we breathe is produced by trees". Had the 'journalist' made the slightest effort to fact check this claim (five minutes on Google would have done it) they would have found out that, a) the amount of oxygen that trees produce is a very small percentage of the volume of atmospheric oxygen that already exists, and b) that the overwhelming majority of the atmospheric oxygen that exists was produced by marine algae not land based trees.

Sadly The Independent is full of this sort of carp these days.

antrobus

Cool_Mint wrote: »

Sorry but when it comes to their jobs virtually all journalists and reporters for major newspapers and magazines are amoral at best and I doubt you were any different. What happened at NOTW is common practice across the media (television included) and much more serious crimes are committed every day; everyone knows what's going on so being in the industry yourself you should know what I'm talking about.

Devils-Advocate wrote: »

What a ridiculous generalising article....how old are you? 12?

Grow up, realise you are an adult, and stop tarring everyone with the same brush. Saying ALL photographers and journalists should be put in prison is probably the most absurd and idiotic statement I've ever had the misfortune to read.

Do yourself a favour and go back to school you stupid boy.

Private Eye recently had a story about a Trinity Mirror executive who was told his services were no longer required, but rapidly got his employers to change their mind when he threatened to spill the beans about what their journalists had been up to. Allegedly that is, of course.

We also have the results of Operation Motorman, an enquiry into the activities of another PI named Steve Whittamore dating back to 2003, where Whitmore was involved in blagging confidential information on selected targets on behalf of newspapers. Top of the list for Whitmore's employers was the Daily Mail, closely followed by the Sunday People and the Daily Mirror. Even The Observer was named and shamed.

So perhaps our stupid boy isn't so stupid.

drussellh

Azari wrote: »

The relative circulations are irrelevant.

You'll still end paying for 9 copies of something that are complete useless to you.

Except for the function I mentioned.

The circulations are very relevant. Of course, you would choose to ignore it as the Guardian sells far less copies than the SUN- which is Britain;s most popular newspaper. The problem with the guardian is that it is so rubbish I can't even use it as toilet paper.:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

drussellh

Azari wrote: »

The relative circulations are irrelevant.

You'll still end paying for 9 copies of something that are complete useless to you.

Except for the function I mentioned.

"The newspaper industry is expecting a busy Sunday, with high sales of the final News of the World predicted and rivals fighting to attract its readers."


Ha Ha Ha. Eat that !!! Long live the Sun . Down with the liberal Guardian.

Azari

drussellh wrote: »

The circulations are very relevant. Of course, you would choose to ignore it as the Guardian sells far less copies than the SUN- which is Britain;s most popular newspaper. The problem with the guardian is that it is so rubbish I can't even use it as toilet paper.

drussellh wrote: »

"The newspaper industry is expecting a busy Sunday, with high sales of the final News of the World predicted and rivals fighting to attract its readers."


Down with the liberal Guardian.

What is this obsession that you have with the Guardian?

I never mentioned it and yet you keep wittering on about it as if it was in some way relevant to the story at hand.

drussellh

Azari wrote: »

What is this obsession that you have with the Guardian?

I never mentioned it and yet you keep wittering on about it as if it was in some way relevant to the story at hand.

It is in response to your obsession and wittering on about the NOTW