|
Leveson enquiry
Blah blah blah blah blah
Just as well expected then |
And for most of us, lets be honest, do we really give a toss anyway.
|
I give a toss, yes! The press are out of control in this country and the politicians enjoy a far too cosy relationship with them.
What does really boil my p1ss though is Cameron spends millions of taxpayers money on an enquiry and then wants to ignore the outcome. What the f**k was the point of wasting yet more of our money doing it then? All I need to hear now is 'lessons will be learned' and I will burst a blood vessel :mad: |
I admire Cameron: he was bought by the Murdochs, and he stays bought. That's loyalty for you.
|
Reminds me of this song to be honest, fairly fitting -
|
One thing's for sure. No one is actually going to read the full 2000 page report. Yellow pages would be more exciting :rolleyes:
Enormous waste of money. 1) Lock up the hackers and any bent civil servants 'cos they broke the law 2) Introduce a law that prevents the media from hounding a little old lady at midnight because her hubbie has been arrested for running a whore house or assassinating Nick Clegg We all know nothing will really change. dl |
The thing that hasn't been discussed is the role of the public in all this.
If we didn't buy this rubbish then the papers would HAVE to print something more worthy. Every time we buy a newspaper that has sensationalist stories in it, then we are complicit in the ruining of people lives. |
So...
1. Nothing is going to change. Leveson bottled it to a certain extent. I was hoping for a truly independent panel with real powers. But what we are going to end up with is a reinvention of the PCC. With members decided by the press and rules decided by the press. The only caveat is that MPs have to ratify the rules. But since none of them want to touch it with a barge pole they will usher it through with the minimum of fuss 2. If Cameron was never going to go for a legislation backed solution, why on earth put it on the table? He has wasted tax payers time and money , around £7million for a solution that was pre-ordained. Despite his assurances last week on the Andrew Marr show that he would "implement in full any recommedations provided they weren't bonkers he clearly was never going to implement anythign requiring legislation. 3. Why on earth do people think that the answer to failed self-regulation is to have more of it. 4. When MPs tell us the reason for no legislation is because it might give Goverments the power to control the media, what are they actually saying, that they can't be trusted with power? 5. Apparently, the Mother of all Parliaments would struggle to find a solution to the problem of coming up with legilsation to oversee the press, because its very tricky to find a balance. So, Governments can come up with policy that decide life and death, health, defence, the Economy, transport, education, Welfare, social issues etc etc no problem -But press regulation? Whew, that's a toughie. In 5 years time we are going to back to square one. With the gutter press stil printing lies and ruining lifes. The Sun, the Mail, the Express, the Mirror - all the tabloids prime objective will be to make money at any cost. Total and utter scum. |
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 10888999)
So...
1. Nothing is going to change. Leveson bottled it to a certain extent. I was hoping for a truly independent panel with rela powers. But what we are goign to end up with is a reinvention of the PCC. Which members decided by the press and ruiles decided by the press. The only caveat is that MPs have to ratify the rules. But since none of them want to touch it with a barge pole they will usher it through with the minimum of fuss 2. If Cameron was never going to go for a legislation backed solution, why on earth put it on the table? He has wasted tax payers time and money , around £7million for a solution that was pre-oprdained. Despite his assurances last week on the Andrew Marr show that he would "[b]implement in full any recommedations provided they weren't bonkers[/i] he clearly was never going to implement anythign requiring legislation. 3. Why on earth do people think that the answer to failed self-regulation is to have more of it. 4. When MPs tell us the reason for no legislation is because it might give Goverments the power to control the media, what are they actually saying, that they can't be trusted with power? 5. Apparently, the Mother of all Parliaments would struggle to find a solution to the problem of coming up with legilsation to oversee the press, because its very tricky to find a balance. So, Governments can come up with policy that decide life and death, health, defence, the Economy, transport, education, Welfare, social issues etc etc no problem -But press regulation? Whew, that's a toughie. In 5 years time we are going to back to square one. With the gutter press stil printing lies and ruining lifes. The Sun, the Mail, the Express, the Mirror - all the tabloids prime objective will be to make money at any cost. Total and utter scum. |
Originally Posted by Martin2005
(Post 10889003)
There's a simple answer, if you want the newspapers to change their behaviour then don't buy them. They'd so come up with some effective self-regulation then
|
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 10888999)
So...
1. Nothing is going to change. Leveson bottled it to a certain extent. I was hoping for a truly independent panel with rela powers. But what we are goign to end up with is a reinvention of the PCC. Which members decided by the press and ruiles decided by the press. The only caveat is that MPs have to ratify the rules. But since none of them want to touch it with a barge pole they will usher it through with the minimum of fuss 2. If Cameron was never going to go for a legislation backed solution, why on earth put it on the table? He has wasted tax payers time and money , around £7million for a solution that was pre-oprdained. Despite his assurances last week on the Andrew Marr show that he would "[b]implement in full any recommedations provided they weren't bonkers[/i] he clearly was never going to implement anythign requiring legislation. 3. Why on earth do people think that the answer to failed self-regulation is to have more of it. 4. When MPs tell us the reason for no legislation is because it might give Goverments the power to control the media, what are they actually saying, that they can't be trusted with power? 5. Apparently, the Mother of all Parliaments would struggle to find a solution to the problem of coming up with legilsation to oversee the press, because its very tricky to find a balance. So, Governments can come up with policy that decide life and death, health, defence, the Economy, transport, education, Welfare, social issues etc etc no problem -But press regulation? Whew, that's a toughie. In 5 years time we are going to back to square one. With the gutter press stil printing lies and ruining lifes. The Sun, the Mail, the Express, the Mirror - all the tabloids prime objective will be to make money at any cost. Total and utter scum. |
Originally Posted by PeteBrant
(Post 10889006)
I don't, But milllions do and will continue to do so. And who is to say that in order to boost sales they won't sink to even worse tactics? What guarantee is there that the change in behaviour will be for the better?
You describe the complete hypocrisy of the British public, who feign shock and horror at press tactics, but still go out and buy this garbage |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:20 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands