'My column at the News of the World' blog discussion

Alpha_Kenny_1

I'd be intrigued to hear Mr Lewis' thoughts on the matter now. It seems money grabbing and money saving mean the same to the messiah Martin.

springboarder

I am APPALLED at the sheer nastiness directed at Martin Lewis personally in a number of the comments on this thread. OK, he made an error of judgement but, by God, have you tried to make him pay for it with horrendous assumptions and vicious attacks. Do you Really think he was writing his column because he wanted the money??
And as for the snide comments on his charitable work.... words fail me.
You have very short memories.
This is the Martin Lewis who is of those rare creatures in life, one who not only who cares but ACTS by spending the majority of his life working flat out in areas that will change people’s lives for the better, much of the work unpaid.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion on anything but the words that have been thrown at this good man by some over the last few days are inexcusable.
You should be ASHAMED of yourselves.... you know who you are.

Alpha_Kenny_1

springboarder wrote: »

I am APPALLED at the sheer nastiness directed at Martin Lewis personally in a number of the comments on this thread. OK, he made an error of judgement but, by God, have you tried to make him pay for it with horrendous assumptions and vicious attacks. Do you Really think he was writing his column because he wanted the money??
And as for the snide comments on his charitable work.... words fail me.
You have very short memories.
This is the Martin Lewis who is of those rare creatures in life, one who not only who cares but ACTS by spending the majority of his life working flat out in areas that will change people’s lives for the better, much of the work unpaid.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion on anything but the words that have been thrown at this good man by some over the last few days are inexcusable.
You should be ASHAMED of yourselves.... you know who you are.

It is directed to Mr Lewis personally because A) he is the man that said he would continue to write for the NOTW and he has answered none of the criticism directed at him.

He spends the majority of his time writing articles that include affiliate links to earn himself a pretty penny. As it is the users of this site that earn him his money, they should hold him to account when he makes a mistake.

T_T_2

Alpha_Kenny_1 wrote: »

he has answered none of the criticism directed at him.

As it is the users of this site that earn him his money, they should hold him to account when he makes a mistake.

First of all, I'm glad to hear you accept that it was a mistake.

As for the rest of it, what nonsense. At what point did Martin become accountable to the general population of this forum? Nobody is forced to visit this website and most people would agree that anyone who frequents this site will typically come away with either a saving or armed with the knowledge of how to exercise their rights.

Just to be clear, as far as this forum goes you have only one right. The right to not visit. Any other rights or privileges outside of this are given at Martin's discretion, if you aren't happy with those terms then as Martin Luther King would say "Sod off and bother the fine people of hotukdeals instead".

Martin Lewis explaining himself to you, that's hilarious... :rotfl:

Alpha_Kenny_1

T_T wrote: »

First of all, I'm glad to hear you accept that it was a mistake.

As for the rest of it, what nonsense. At what point did Martin become accountable to the general population of this forum? Nobody is forced to visit this website and most people would agree that anyone who frequents this site will typically come away with either a saving or armed with the knowledge of how to exercise their rights.

Just to be clear, as far as this forum goes you have only one right. The right to not visit. Any other rights or privileges outside of this are given at Martin's discretion, if you aren't happy with those terms then as Martin Luther King would say "Sod off and bother the fine people of hotukdeals instead".

Martin Lewis explaining himself to you, that's hilarious... :rotfl:

It is the users of this forum that earn him his money. As such, if they feel he has made a decision that is wrong, they should be entitled to criticise him for that decision.


As far as this forum goes, he can't have his cake and eat it. He is a public figure, running a money saving forum. If he makes a mistake then people should be able to comment on that mistake.

Where did I say he had to explain himself to me? I said he had answered none of the criticisms directed at him. Not quite the same is it?

If he wants to continue with this site then he has to take the rough with the smooth and as the users of this site provide him with a decent income, they should have the opportunity to pull him up when they don't agree with a decision of his.

darkpool

springboarder wrote: »

I am APPALLED at the sheer nastiness directed at Martin Lewis personally in a number of the comments on this thread. OK, he made an error of judgement but, by God, have you tried to make him pay for it with horrendous assumptions and vicious attacks. Do you Really think he was writing his column because he wanted the money??
And as for the snide comments on his charitable work.... words fail me.
You have very short memories.
This is the Martin Lewis who is of those rare creatures in life, one who not only who cares but ACTS by spending the majority of his life working flat out in areas that will change people’s lives for the better, much of the work unpaid.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion on anything but the words that have been thrown at this good man by some over the last few days are inexcusable.
You should be ASHAMED of yourselves.... you know who you are.

You're a brand new poster that just happened to read this thread and have an opinion that 99.9% of the site disagree with. I'd imagine you are Martin himself or one of his family?

So why did he write the column if it wasn't for the money? he said he wouldn't give his fee to charity, he also said other newspapers wanted to employ him.

He's a businessman trying to line his own pocket.

*MF*

T_T wrote: »

Martin Lewis explaining himself to you, that's hilarious... :rotfl:

Isn't that where everything that has followed - actually started - Martin explaining himself?

http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2011/07/06/my-column-at-the-news-of-the-world/

whitewing

Springboarder's post is the type of post that is written by somebody who has been or is in deep financial trouble, possibly having the most desperate thoughts, who found out about the site and is beginning to see a glimmer of a brighter future. I seriously doubt he is related to/knows Martin personally.

That is one point though, for all Martin does have affiliate links etc, it is still possible via his website to get a lot of assistance at no cost, and it has definitely proved lifesaving for some.

Certainly, I have used the forums - for free - most days since I joined. I don't use any other website as frequently or for as long.

I disagree with Martin's decision to continue writing his column, but I do now see that as simply a - fairly major - decision that I disagree with, not as a reason to unsubscribe to his email or stop using the website.

I am still, however, still awaiting Rebekah Brooks to go. Will be cancelling the Times subscription tomorrow.. I know it's only a small gesture but it makes me feel better.

T_T_2

Alpha_Kenny_1 wrote: »

It is the users of this forum that earn him his money. As such, if they feel he has made a decision that is wrong, they should be entitled to criticise him for that decision.

This is where you have failed to read what I have said. Nobody on this website is entitled to anything. It is a privately owned business, not a government agency.

The users of this forum didn't just hand their money over to Martin. This website is ultimately run as a business. Customer choose whether or not to click on affiliate links which acts a revenue stream for the site. Are you honestly suggesting that by buying something from a business you become automatically entitled to demand explanations from the CEO whenever he does something you don't agree with? No, your only entitlement is to not shop there any more if it upsets you.

As far as this forum goes, he can't have his cake and eat it. He is a public figure, running a money saving forum. If he makes a mistake then people should be able to comment on that mistake.

Of course he can have his cake and eat it. It is his forum, he owns and runs it. He can do whatever he wants. I can't see why you don't understand the principles of private enterprise. Martin may be publically known and respected by a lot of people, but he isn't a public figure. He isn't accountable to anyone other than the tax man.

Where did I say he had to explain himself to me? I said he had answered none of the criticisms directed at him. Not quite the same is it?

Your words:"As it is the users of this site that earn him his money, they should hold him to account when he makes a mistake." Are you not a user? Are you not demanding that he holds himself to account?

If he wants to continue with this site then he has to take the rough with the smooth and as the users of this site provide him with a decent income, they should have the opportunity to pull him up when they don't agree with a decision of his.

You have graciously been given the opportunity. But as for your ultimatum, I suspect that Martin is in a much better position to make that decision for himself, and it is something he has spent a lot of time considering lately.

ALIBOBSY

I think some posters are losing perspective here and are decending into a slanging match. Whilst i believe Martin made a serious error in judgement and the only way back for some on here will be if he confirms he will not be writing for ANY murdock paper again, I do understand his reasoning. I don't agree with it, but understand it.

That aside lets step back and look at the whole issue. Journos have always been known as scum (with a few good exceptions). It has always been anything for the story and make it up exagerate if you have to. many journos were well known for having doctors outfits/police uniforms etc to access areas and people they wouldn't normally get near. Papers decide on an angle to take on a story then plow on with that irrelevent of new facts that come to life and with no thought for the feelings of ANYONE.
Do I think its right? Absolutely not its despicable and no better than the romans watching gladiators/christians die for entertainment or the fact that people used to queue up to watch public executions.

I suspect virtually every paper will have some involvement in this type of underhand behavior, and the news of the world will just be the start, but murdock has led from the top and brought the media in this country to a horrible low-more worryingly he seems intent on controlling more and more of the media in this country and his takeover of sky can only be a new horror.

Ali x