janee
Fur half
This made me think......and I concluded that the Sun would still do this if the same circumstances were around today (demonisation of football fans, miners etc) were around today.
So it's fine
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Liverpool Football Club ban Sun journalists
- Thread starter TomandJerry
- Start date
This made me think......and I concluded that the Sun would still do this if the same circumstances were around today (demonisation of football fans, miners etc) were around today.
So it's fine
I have no idea if Nuttall was or was not there, and don't care. But the Guardian has lost the plot in the last year or so, and should be read with caution IMHO. Not a lot better than the Daily Mail, just the opposite side of the political spectrum.
W.C.
New member
- Oct 31, 2011
- 4,927
Doesn't he have an office far beyond what any other columnist would have too? I'm sure I read that somewhere.
nicko31
Well-known member
He's one of Rupert's poodles, pretty obnoxious individual, I don't believe he was really sorry.
It is true that this is a very late decision. However I think it reflects the strong feelings that have been refocused by the inquests. Even people who knew what really happened feel empowered by the fact that it has been clearly proven in the courts and public enquiry that the fans were not to blame. There is a growing and more confident movement to stop shops selling the Sun in Liverpool. Many taxis have ban the Sun stickers. I'd never want to read that rag anyway!
Neville's Breakfast
Well-known member
In the Sun ?
W.C.
New member
- Oct 31, 2011
- 4,927
I don't know, wondered if El Pres knew. Thought I read once that despite only being a columnist Rupert has set him up nicely with his own office.
Apologies for the tone of my reply yesterday. I was outraged. What I should have said is that when you're cross you'll usually feel better in the morning. Grudges, however, last forever. All the best.
Stato
Well-known member
- Dec 21, 2011
- 6,583
Weird response. Everyone knows that The Guardian is left leaning. It doesn't pretend anything else. However, there is a marked distinction between its columnists and editorials which, with the odd exception, are left wing, and its news reporting which is internationally recognised for its depth and reliability. You need to make a distinction. The Daily Mail has been removed as a source from Wikipedia because of it's lack of reliability in terms of news reporting, but it's football reporting, I have always found more in depth and reliable than that of the other tabloids. It's dangerous not to understand the subtleties because there is a massive difference between a news outlet choosing its focus or angle for reporting the truth and one that just tells lies.
The article about Nuttall gives equal opportunity to both sides of the story. You may not care, but a good part of the rest of the country cares enough for me to believe that, should it be proven that he lied about Hillsborough for political gain, his career will be finished.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
His career should be finished in any case, as he believes in getting rid of the NHS.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ukip-leader-paul-nuttall-words-9351835
Sorry, "news" reporting? From memory, the headline is "Nuttall denies lying". Which rather proves the point that the Guardian is suggesting he IS lying.
Well, was he there or not? That is the real story. I suggest if the Guardian's intrepid and renowned reporters had proven he wasn't there, they would have said so. They have a non-story based on the unproven allegation that he wasn’t. Which they are running because they don't approve of UKIP.
Southern Scouse
Well-known member
- Jul 21, 2011
- 2,023
No idea why it took LFC so long to dump the reporters from thar rag. Nice to see even the blue half calling for them to be banned as well. I think it must be difficult for people from outside the city or non LFC/Everton supporters to really understand pure unadulterated hatred for that paper. I think you must also add in the total contempt of the government at the time and its support by that paper. Many thought the cover up was also government sponsored not to make things worse.
Some posts about the club using it to hide the clubs poor form on the pitch may have some truth, but FSG need to be careful. The fans are far from stupid and the owners are not that popular and stop looking like a money making machine for the Red Sox.
Time is a good healer and I sincerely hope that all the people who were there that day and everyone who lost loved ones and friends are able to move on, but never forget.
Some posts about the club using it to hide the clubs poor form on the pitch may have some truth, but FSG need to be careful. The fans are far from stupid and the owners are not that popular and stop looking like a money making machine for the Red Sox.
Time is a good healer and I sincerely hope that all the people who were there that day and everyone who lost loved ones and friends are able to move on, but never forget.
Stato
Well-known member
- Dec 21, 2011
- 6,583
Journalists asking questions of the veracity of politician's claims happens all the time. The UK's political discourse is almost entirely based on journalists saying to politicians 'Justify yourself' or 'Why should we believe you?' The rules don't change because it's UKIP. The adversarial approach has things wrong with it, but it does rather prevent the election of outright charlatans or unqualified braggarts like the one the Americans now have.
BrianWade4
Well-known member
I agree.
As long as they're banned.
Disgraceful lies from the Sun at a stadium tragedy.
Innocent people went to a football match and never came home.