The last reporter to print negative story

[Blumhoilann 6,712]

2 hours ago, Sweetheart said:

They probably did. I get why inter would feel that way.(the blow up dolls) What I was trying to point out in the debate, was political allegiances in football clubs are not solely about Rangers and Celtic. That's why I said, to get parity the laws need to be changed.. The political media laws should be redefined  to follow same rules as in t.v. and radio. and include sport. To stay neutral.

Are these 'TV rules' deliberately ignored by the BBC?

[gmcf 34,566]

6 hours ago, Howsitgoing said:

A journalists in the recent bbc documentary stated that football sells and they try to be as controversial as possible, staying within the law. Im hoping it's a case of the newspapers going the same way as the dodoo and the cunts are getting desperate. They do seem to hammer Rangers hard but it's probably less a pro-celtic thing and more a desperation to sell their papers. There's plenty football fans wank themselves silly for anti Rangers stories and will buy the paper for that alone. 

c....c fans in recent times have given the press plenty ammo to sell their papers . I'd think stories based on fact instead of empty headlines would surely be more saleable. 

[plumbGER 24,518]

18 minutes ago, Blumhoilann said:

Are these 'TV rules' deliberately ignored by the BBC?

The BBC who should be bound by more rules than any broadcaster no less.

Tax payers money to fund that shite, they don't even try to hide it anymore, they hate our existance.

[Sweetheart 8,458]

29 minutes ago, Blumhoilann said:

Are these 'TV rules' deliberately ignored by the BBC?

I posted an example earlier about how governments and powerful organisation influence the media. The BBC come under this category.

Imo, here's the reason why http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3441566/Arrogance-BBC-bureaucrats-Corporation-s-boss-accountable-no-one-warns-powerful-group-MPs.html

[Sweetheart 8,458]

14 minutes ago, plumbGER said:

The BBC who should be bound by more rules than any broadcaster no less.

Tax payers money to fund that shite, they don't even try to hide it anymore, they hate our existance.

Tory MP Jesse Norman is campaigning to make the BBC more accountable to the Tax payers

[plumbGER 24,518]

23 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

Tory MP Jesse Norman is campaigning to make the BBC more accountable to the Tax payers

It's about time tbh

The editorial standards committee is a bit of a joke at present.

[Thermopylae 15,287]

21 hours ago, Sweetheart said:

Very true. What do they have on Liewell to make them wary?

Probably the fact he has 50,000 rabid tims at his back 

[True Azure 1,414]

On 22/09/2016 at 10:21 AM, Sweetheart said:

The problem Imho lies with the newspapers political leanings. The news media is not legally required to maintain a neutral stance. Where as the television and radio media has a legal obligation to be politically neutral. Newspaper sales are in decline, but the development of the internet has given the opportunity for independent writers to present their own take on the world and Rangers. The SNP, in particular, has been very effective in its new media campaigns The new media is just a internet propaganda tool who’s media laws are forever changing.

http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/category/news/law/

In Scotland, the SNP have control for the political leanings of newspapers. Rangers are seen by the SNP as a symbol of everything that is pro-British, Protestant (Orange Order), and Monarchist. Which goes against their aim is to have an independent republican Scotland, without the trappings of a monarchy.

An example of how governments/influential bodies have influenced the media:

2009ish George Osborne was invited, by Peter Mandelson, to meet a Russian oligarch on board a private yacht. Also present were members of the Rothschild family. When Osborne leaked the information he was bollocked by the Rothschilds. News of the World were told not to print the story, but they did anyway. News of the World no longer exists. Cases of phone hacking by News of the World were suddenly leaked into the public, all papers were doing it, but the fact the News of the World was singled out for attention is down to their refusal to comply with what should and should not be printed.
 

Whoa, hold on a fucking minute here. The News Of The Screws is no longer in existance because it hacked thousands of phones illegally, it lied about it and was caught out. It paid bent coppers for access to Royal Family phones, lied about that and were found out. It hacked the murdered teenager, Millie Dowler's phone, lied about that and were caught out. Thid then led to £millions being paid in damages to those whose phones were hacked, journalists going to jail and ultimately the paper folded. It had fuck all to do with printing stories the "establishment" wished to conceal.

[Sweetheart 8,458]

2 hours ago, True Azure said:

Whoa, hold on a fucking minute here. The News Of The Screws is no longer in existance because it hacked thousands of phones illegally, it lied about it and was caught out. It paid bent coppers for access to Royal Family phones, lied about that and were found out. It hacked the murdered teenager, Millie Dowler's phone, lied about that and were caught out. Thid then led to £millions being paid in damages to those whose phones were hacked, journalists going to jail and ultimately the paper folded. It had fuck all to do with printing stories the "establishment" wished to conceal.

What the News of the World did was wrong but they weren’t the only newspaper that was doing it. All the papers involved in reporting the story about the meeting between Osborne, Mandelson, and Deripaska, at the invitation of Nathaniel Rothschild, were sent ‘warning’ letters from the Rothschilds explaining their side of the story. 

The Times etc didn’t publish ANYTHING else about the meeting. Of the 63 or so journalists arrested and questioned or charged, only two of them spent any length of time in prison. The News of the World was singled out and exposed for their refusal to comply with what should and should not be printed.
 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/oct/21/mandelson-georgeosborne

[True Azure 1,414]

1 hour ago, Sweetheart said:

What the News of the World did was wrong but they weren’t the only newspaper that was doing it. All the papers involved in reporting the story about the meeting between Osborne, Mandelson, and Deripaska, at the invitation of Nathaniel Rothschild, were sent ‘warning’ letters from the Rothschilds explaining their side of the story. 

The Times etc didn’t publish ANYTHING else about the meeting. Of the 63 or so journalists arrested and questioned or charged, only two of them spent any length of time in prison. The News of the World was singled out and exposed for their refusal to comply with what should and should not be printed.
 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/oct/21/mandelson-georgeosborne

The fact that the Times didn't publish the story is neither here nor there, it's OWNED by Rupert Murdoch, the same cunt who owned TNOTW, HE decides what stories go in or stay out. Osborne and Mandelson are two cheeks of the same arse, out for everything they can get for themselves. For only two journalists to get banged up for the phone hack scandal just goes to show how much influence the likes of Murdoch, the Barclay twins (Telegraph) or Richard Desmond have on politics in this country. You can believe whatever you like about the Rothschilds or anyone else for that matter, the News of the Screws folded on the back of the phone hacking scandals, one, in a long line of dubious scandals perpetrated by this scummy paper and scummy owner going back decades.