Paedogeddon on the British Paedoisles - Paed Heath

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Paedogeddon on the British Paedoisles - Paed Heath

pitch a fitness: Mar 19, 2010

marktheando posted:

Also someone needs to edit that image to show Mirror fake prisoner abuse story, Jo Yeats landlord story, Milly Dowler, etc.

DianaExpressWall.jpg

# ? Nov 23, 2012 15:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 19, 2024 20:59

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Peter Jukes has complained to the ASA about the ad, I'm going to do so later, might do a blog post on the exact details later.

# ? Nov 23, 2012 15:43

Party Boat: Nov 1, 2007; where did that other dog come from

who is he

Primly Stable tweeted this earlier:

# ? Nov 23, 2012 15:50

Mr Cuddles: Jan 29, 2010; Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.

Party Boat posted:

Primly Stable tweeted this earlier:

Shame this otherwise perfect rebuttal has a grammatical error in it

# ? Nov 23, 2012 16:30

Sex Vicar: Oct 11, 2007; I thought this was a swingers party...

SedanChair posted:

Thanks for the info. I'm not sure how that's "good" and not just "piling on the bloodlust" like they always do, however.

It's not as altruistic as Zephro makes it though. Nick Davies explained in Flat Earth News that originally the Mail were going to run with a gang violence angle and make Stephen out to be some sort of gang banger because "THE DARKIES FIGHTING IN THE STREETS" was a good angle to sell copy. So they sent their only black reporter on staff around to Stephen's father Neville to try get more out of him. When the reporter let Neville know who he was representing. Neville asked him for a minute and made a phone call. Soon after, Dacre rang the reporter was told to change the story immediately and they were running with a more sympathetic angle.

Turned out Neville Lawrence had plastered Paul Dacre's home a few weeks back and when he twigged what was going on. Made a phone call and made Paul Dacre change track.

When Mr. Jay called Dacre on it during his witness testimony, Dacre looked like he saw a ghost and stammered out a reply to try get Mr. Jay away from the subject. It was pretty hilarious but it's proof there's always an agenda behind a lot of the decisions.

# ? Nov 23, 2012 19:58

Loonytoad Quack: Aug 24, 2004; High on Shatner's Bassoon

Tomorrow's Mail has an interesting headline:

http://twitpic.com/bg4u8j

# ? Nov 24, 2012 21:46

Gonzo McFee: Jun 19, 2010

Loonytoad Quack posted:

Tomorrow's Mail has an interesting headline:

http://twitpic.com/bg4u8j

Surely after all the information about how close nit he is to the Murdochs and News International in general anything but a complete enforcement of everything Leveson suggests would seem like complete corruption.

# ? Nov 24, 2012 21:52

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Loonytoad Quack posted:

Tomorrow's Mail has an interesting headline:

http://twitpic.com/bg4u8j

I heard that might be happening a few months ago, apparently his Tory chums aren't too happy things got as far as they did.

# ? Nov 24, 2012 21:54

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Here's page 8-9 where they purposely confuse state control with statutory powers to scare their readers.

# ? Nov 24, 2012 22:05

baka kaba: Jul 19, 2003; PLEASE ASK ME, THE SELF-PROFESSED NO #1 PAUL CATTERMOLE FAN IN THE SOMETHING AWFUL S-CLUB 7 MEGATHREAD, TO NAME A SINGLE SONG BY HIS EXCELLENT NU-METAL SIDE PROJECT, SKUA, AND IF I CAN'T PLEASE TELL ME TO
EAT SHIT

He needs bulletproof vests NOT Charlotte Church deciding press regulation

# ? Nov 24, 2012 22:10

Sex Vicar: Oct 11, 2007; I thought this was a swingers party...

Brown Moses posted:

Here's page 8-9 where they purposely confuse state control with statutory powers to scare their readers.

I'm amazed Paul Dacre allowed that "Cozy Self-Regulation" headline through considering he's the main target of PCC Criticism. Maybe a last minute ploy to convince the public that "We do allow criticism of our regulation!".

Will be interesting to see how Cameron handles it. Side with the papers, he may as well straight up say "I am boning Rebekah Brooks". Side with regulation and he pisses all the papers off, who will promptly gently caress off back over to Labour.

# ? Nov 25, 2012 00:29

rejutka: May 28, 2004; by zen death robot

Brown Moses posted:

I heard that might be happening a few months ago, apparently his Tory chums aren't too happy things got as far as they did.

I CANNOT BELIEVE I AM BEING CALLED ON MY OWN poo poo! DAVE, DAVE, DAVE, Remember the times we squidged Head & Shoulders on Ivan's face when he was asleep and then we woke him up with all our cocks hanging out over his face?

# ? Nov 25, 2012 01:03

Strom Cuzewon: Jul 1, 2010

It seems the entire press is going into meltdown, it's wonderful. My favorite is the Mail claiming that freedom of the press was the basis for all wars ever

# ? Nov 25, 2012 11:52

Rude Dude With Tude: Apr 19, 2007; Your President approves this text.

Sex Vicar posted:

I'm amazed Paul Dacre allowed that "Cozy Self-Regulation" headline through considering he's the main target of PCC Criticism. Maybe a last minute ploy to convince the public that "We do allow criticism of our regulation!".

Will be interesting to see how Cameron handles it. Side with the papers, he may as well straight up say "I am boning Rebekah Brooks". Side with regulation and he pisses all the papers off, who will promptly gently caress off back over to Labour.

Paul Dacre isn't the editor of the Mail on Sunday :ssh:

# ? Nov 25, 2012 12:13

Pesmerga: Aug 1, 2005; So nice to eat you

Well this is the most ridiculous and depressing story I've read for weeks.

The Guardian posted:

Foreign press warn over dangers of new UK media laws prior to Leveson report: - Statutory controls would aid dictators abroad and send an 'appalling message', William Hague to be told by world body

Statutory controls on the British press would send an "appalling message" abroad and encourage some of the most illiberal regimes in the world, the foreign secretary, William Hague, will be warned ahead of a landmark report that could usher in a new era of newspaper regulation. However, the claim was rejected by campaigners for greater regulation, who say such a move is supported by the majority of the public.

The World Press Freedom Committee (WPFC), which campaigns against limitations on the press, has written to Hague, Justine Greening, the international development secretary, and Richard Ottaway MP, chairman of the foreign affairs select committee, in advance of the publication of Lord Justice Leveson's report on Thursday.

In the letter, Ronald Koven, the European representative of the WPFC, warns that a "chill will go through the world's media � matched by a warm glow in the ministries of some of the most illiberal regimes," if the Leveson report recommends legislation. He says editors around the world have contributed to a WPFC report making the case against state regulation.

Fred M'membe, editor of the Zambia Post, who this year was imprisoned for an unfounded allegation of criminal defamation, told the report's author, former regional newspaper editor Ian Beales, that statutory controls in Britain would "spread through Africa like a firestorm". Raymond Louw, a former South African editor and campaigner for press freedom, said: "Dictatorial governments would leap at anything repressive enacted in Britain as justifying their conduct."

Koven warns Hague: "One shudders to think how any recommendations for a statutory or quasi-statutory regulatory regime which the Leveson inquiry might recommend could be exploited in any number of countries with far weaker press freedom records, including in the Commonwealth."

The letter is backed by the Free Speech Network, a body representing media interests including the Newspaper Publishers Association, of which Guardian News & Media, owner of the Observer, is a member.

However, supporters of statutory control, notably the campaign group Hacked Off, set up following the phone-hacking scandal at the News of the World that led to the Leveson inquiry, say regulation is long overdue.

"The editors from overseas can be reassured that the problems in this country are the opposite of what they experience," said Evan Harris, associate director of Hacked Off. "We have seen industrial-scale intrusion and surveillance of ordinary members of the public, widespread corruption of the police and political system, and a conspiracy to cover it up � not by individual democratic voices like these African editors, but instead by large media corporations wielding anti-democratic power."

Harris said those calling for an end to self-regulation were not seeking to muzzle the press. "We are seeking an independent system of regulation of a code of conduct, similar to the existing industry one, which is backed by law to make it independent and to prevent large publishers walking out of the system," he said. "The vast majority of the British people, polls show, support that independent prescription."

The report is described as "voluminous", suggesting the extent of its findings and recommendations will take days to digest. Many believe it will propose a "statutory underpinning" of newspapers which would see the creation of a new regulatory body formally recognised in law. It is thought this would include a legal requirement for newspapers to sign up to the body, similar to the licensing system that governs broadcasters.

But there is confidence among critics of press laws within the government, including cabinet ministers, that he will seek to avoid legislation, should it be proposed. The prime minister is said to have privately signalled some sympathy with a model of regulation proposed by Lord Hunt, the current head of the Press Complaints Commission, in which newspaper editors would be contractually obliged to work within certain standards.

Such a new regulator would have the power to fine newspapers up to �1m for serious editorial breaches, and has been billed by its champions as a significant break from self-regulation of the past.

Angie Bray, the Tory MP for Ealing Central and Acton, who is an opponent of the state becoming involved in press regulation, said: "A new independent regime may be the solution to the problem that we cannot be seen to be bringing in no changes at all, but keeps people like me happy who are against the state wading in with regulation."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/24/foreign-press-warn-over-leveson

This is ridiculous. Change out 'press regulation' and try inserting other forms of regulation for a fun game.

Some guy on regulation of speeding offences posted:

Statutory controls on the British motorist would send an "appalling message" abroad and encourage some of the most illiberal regimes in the world...Ronald Koven, the European representative of the Gotta Go Fast Association, warns that a "chill will go through the world's car-owners � matched by a warm glow in the DMV ministries of some of the most illiberal regimes. Fred Clarkson, who owns a car dealership, who this year was imprisoned for an unfounded allegation of not paying speeding tickets, told the report's author, former formula 1 racer Agatha Mercedes, that statutory controls in Britain would "spread through Africa like a firestorm". Raymond Louw, a former South African driver and campaigner for motorist freedom, said: "Dictatorial governments would leap at anything repressive enacted in Britain as justifying their conduct."

What a truly terrible defence. Interestingly enough, when the same thing was said by China about the British government's censorship and use of social media in the wake of the London riots, and the desire to bring in different forms of Internet filtering, the government declared it to be incomparable. I wonder if we'll get the same here.

# ? Nov 25, 2012 12:45

thehustler: Apr 17, 2004; I am very curious about this little crescendo

I'm sick and tired of Nick Cohen ranting on Twitter. I fail to see how any kind of regulation is going to stop expos� journalism. If you have the evidence, go for it.

# ? Nov 25, 2012 18:29

HUGE PUBES A PLUS: Apr 30, 2005

Don't worry, it looks like people will have to give up ranting on twitter too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/technology/26iht-twitter26.html

At least if you say you're sorry and pay a small fee Mr. McAlpine is willing to forgive you.

# ? Nov 25, 2012 22:47

prefect: Sep 11, 2001; No one, Woodhouse.
No one.; Dead Man’s Band

Highspeeddub posted:

Don't worry, it looks like people will have to give up ranting on twitter too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/technology/26iht-twitter26.html

At least if you say you're sorry and pay a small fee Mr. McAlpine is willing to forgive you.

It's commonly accepted (by Americans, at least) that UKanian libel laws are insanely broad and powerful. How, then, do they wind up with all the crazy poo poo in their tabloids without being sued out of existence? (I'm sure I'm just missing something obvious.)

# ? Nov 26, 2012 14:04

Zombywuf: Mar 29, 2008

prefect posted:

It's commonly accepted (by Americans, at least) that UKanian libel laws are insanely broad and powerful. How, then, do they wind up with all the crazy poo poo in their tabloids without being sued out of existence? (I'm sure I'm just missing something obvious.)

The libel laws aren't really that broad and powerful. They're pretty sensible in principle, if you publish some sort of writing that causes harm to a person they can sue. The problem is that some people are much more powerful than others (i.e. richer) and can make a libel case last for years while the other party (plaintif or defendant) bleeds money and is forced to quit. Newspapers have more money than most private citizens so they can get away with just about anything. The damages awarded are rarely punitive so they can just budget for it as operating expenses.

There are some specific complaints with the actual laws, but it's the process of being involved in a libel trial that is the major problem.

# ? Nov 26, 2012 14:14

woke wedding drone: Jun 1, 2003; by exmarx; Fun Shoe

OK I have Roop-Saddamgate blueballs. What happened?

# ? Nov 26, 2012 14:26

Hong XiuQuan: Feb 19, 2008; "Without justice for the Palestinians there will be no peace in the Middle East."

prefect posted:

It's commonly accepted (by Americans, at least) that UKanian libel laws are insanely broad and powerful. How, then, do they wind up with all the crazy poo poo in their tabloids without being sued out of existence? (I'm sure I'm just missing something obvious.)

They're a little archaic and generally the preserve of the rich or the lucky. I still prefer our system to the US, where pretty much anything goes and (partly) as a result Yanks end up with the most comical news system on the planet.

E.g. in theory US media could probably get away with "Defense Secretary Lord McLoltwat: a colossal paedophile?" I'm surprised Obama isn't regularly accused by US hacks of being an immigrant benefit-sponging paedo.

Hong XiuQuan fucked around with this message at 15:08 on Nov 26, 2012

# ? Nov 26, 2012 15:06

goddamnedtwisto: Dec 31, 2004; If you ask me about the mole people in the London Underground, I WILL be forced to kill you; Fun Shoe

Hong XiuQuan posted:

They're a little archaic and generally the preserve of the rich or the lucky. I still prefer our system to the US, where pretty much anything goes and (partly) as a result Yanks end up with the most comical news system on the planet.

E.g. in theory US media could probably get away with "Defense Secretary Lord McLoltwat: a colossal paedophile?" I'm surprised Obama isn't regularly accused by US hacks of being an immigrant benefit-sponging paedo.

Well they regularly hint very heavily he's the first two.

# ? Nov 26, 2012 15:50

prefect: Sep 11, 2001; No one, Woodhouse.
No one.; Dead Man’s Band

Hong XiuQuan posted:

E.g. in theory US media could probably get away with "Defense Secretary Lord McLoltwat: a colossal paedophile?" I'm surprised Obama isn't regularly accused by US hacks of being an immigrant benefit-sponging paedo.

Check out the Freep thread if that's what you're looking for.

# ? Nov 26, 2012 15:56

Plavski: Feb 1, 2006; I could be a revolutionary

New job BM? As what?

# ? Nov 27, 2012 10:57

Brown Moses: Feb 22, 2002

Plavski posted:

New job BM? As what?

Data analyst at a company that manufactures ladies underwear. I'm literally surrounded by piles of lingerie and photographs of models in bikinis everywhere I look. I went to a meeting today and the table was covered in A4 close up photographs of ladies bosoms. 13 year old me would have gone bright red.

# ? Nov 27, 2012 22:05

Manic_Misanthrope: Jul 1, 2010

Brown Moses posted:

Data analyst at a company that manufactures ladies underwear. I'm literally surrounded by piles of lingerie and photographs of models in bikinis everywhere I look. I went to a meeting today and the table was covered in A4 close up photographs of ladies bosoms. 13 year old me would have gone bright red.

That was the test, if you could keep a straight face with no blush you were golden.

# ? Nov 27, 2012 22:22

Warcabbit: Apr 26, 2008; Wedge Regret

I am starting to get an idea for a new avatar for you, maintaining the spirit and integrity of the old one.

# ? Nov 27, 2012 22:24

Doug Sisk: Sep 11, 2001

They are really going all out in the run-up to the report being published.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20517798

quote:

No form of statutory regulation of the press would be possible without the imposition of state licensing - abolished in Britain in 1695. State licensing is inimical to any idea of press freedom and would radically alter the balance of our unwritten constitution.

# ? Nov 27, 2012 23:24

BogDew: Jun 14, 2006; E:\FILES>quickfli clown.fli

Brown Moses posted:

13 year old me would have gone bright red.

I see a future career at The Sun...

# ? Nov 28, 2012 08:05

baka kaba: Jul 19, 2003; PLEASE ASK ME, THE SELF-PROFESSED NO #1 PAUL CATTERMOLE FAN IN THE SOMETHING AWFUL S-CLUB 7 MEGATHREAD, TO NAME A SINGLE SONG BY HIS EXCELLENT NU-METAL SIDE PROJECT, SKUA, AND IF I CAN'T PLEASE TELL ME TO
EAT SHIT

WebDog posted:

I see a future career at The Sun...

Or a future hack job.

BROWN MOSES IN PERVY JOB SHOCK

INTERNET "MORAL CRUSADER" LEERS AT BUSTY BEAUTIES

# ? Nov 28, 2012 10:14

Byolante: Mar 23, 2008; by Cyrano4747

baka kaba posted:

Or a future hack job.

BROWN MOSES IN PERVY JOB SHOCK

INTERNET "MORAL CRUSADER" LEERS AT BUSTY BEAUTIES

Basement dwelling war perv only has eyes for our Kate's bombshells.

# ? Nov 28, 2012 11:00

PiCroft: Jun 11, 2010; I'm sorry, did I break all your shit? I didn't know it was yours

Hugh Grants documentary about tabloids is on tonight on Channel 4 at 8pm. Be there or be square!

(also try googling it, you're bound to find the usual shitehawks bawwwing about impartiality, its even funnier when they try to use this as a means of squashing it when they themselves are crying about similar things being applied to them in future)

# ? Nov 28, 2012 11:23

Loonytoad Quack: Aug 24, 2004; High on Shatner's Bassoon

Andy Coulson won his appeal and now News International have to pay his legal costs (as contractually agreed). Say what you will about Coulson but he deserved to win this one.

# ? Nov 28, 2012 11:53

Sex Vicar: Oct 11, 2007; I thought this was a swingers party...

Looks like it's going to be silly season over the next 48 hours

The Graun reports that an independent public poll completely backs statutory regulation

The Guardian posted:

David Cameron is facing a public backlash if he fails to act to rein in the press when Lord Justice Leveson reports on Thursday, according to a poll which finds that 79% are in favour of an independent press regulator established by law.

Some 60% believe the prime minister should implement Leveson's recommendations, and while 79% favour legislation to create an independent press regulator, only 9% are opposed. Just over 80% said national newspapers should be obliged to sign up to the new system by law.

Support for the creation of an independent body established by law is uniform across the voting spectrum, including 81% support from readers of the Daily Mail, one of the papers most vociferous in its opposition to any state interference.

Almost the entire newspaper industry is opposed to a regulator underpinned by law, although there are sharp internal disagreements between newspaper companies about the degree to which the regulator should be independent of industry.

The poll, conducted by YouGov on behalf of the Media Standards Trust, comes as Cameron and some senior government colleagues prepare to receive the report at lunchtime on Wednesday ahead of publication on Thursday, and a Commons statement by Cameron.

That's not going to be fun reading for a lot of people this morning.

# ? Nov 28, 2012 11:54

Strom Cuzewon: Jul 1, 2010

PiCroft posted:

Hugh Grants documentary about tabloids is on tonight on Channel 4 at 8pm. Be there or be square!

(also try googling it, you're bound to find the usual shitehawks bawwwing about impartiality, its even funnier when they try to use this as a means of squashing it when they themselves are crying about similar things being applied to them in future)

But its a free press, it doesnt have to be impartial.

Unless TV doesn't count?

# ? Nov 28, 2012 11:56

Zephro: Nov 23, 2000; I suppose I could part with one and still be feared...

Sex Vicar posted:

That's not going to be fun reading for a lot of people this morning.

Well if by "a lot of people" you mean "a few journalists engaged in hilarious special pleading", then sure.

What's really not going to be fun is the liklihood that Cameron is going to bottle the whole thing.

# ? Nov 28, 2012 12:09

Plavski: Feb 1, 2006; I could be a revolutionary

It'll go into a drawer and everyone will move on.

Speaking of which, Saddams pants? I thought that was gonna take down empires.

# ? Nov 28, 2012 12:11

cloudchamber: Aug 6, 2010; You know what the Ukraine is? It's a sitting duck. A road apple, Newman. The Ukraine is weak. It's feeble. I think it's time to put the hurt on the Ukraine

Strom Cuzewon posted:

But its a free press, it doesnt have to be impartial.

Unless TV doesn't count?

All TV broadcasters have to abide by rules of due impartiality:
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/legacy/text_srvcs/part_a/89248

# ? Nov 28, 2012 12:26

Strom Cuzewon: Jul 1, 2010

cloudchamber posted:

All TV broadcasters have to abide by rules of due impartiality:
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/legacy/text_srvcs/part_a/89248

I did not know that. So TV doesn't count. That makes the papers even more hypocritical.

# ? Nov 28, 2012 12:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 19, 2024 20:59

woke wedding drone: Jun 1, 2003; by exmarx; Fun Shoe

The Guardian posted:

Support for the creation of an independent body established by law is uniform across the voting spectrum, including 81% support from readers of the Daily Mail, one of the papers most vociferous in its opposition to any state interference.

I, and apparently The Guardian, died of a new kind of schadenfreude pleasure.

# ? Nov 28, 2012 13:06

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Paedogeddon on the British Paedoisles - Paed Heath

«‹›99 »