campaign to get firms NOT to advertise with the NoTW.. sorry, S*n on Sunday..

[desprateseagull]

Avaaz - News of the World is back?!

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

As a member of the NUJ, and someone who has been made redundant by a Murdoch paper in the past so has no loyalty to News International whatever, I'd like people to consider the fact that the NotW employed a lot of good people who never hacked a mobile phone in their lives and lost ther jobs when it closed. A few - not enough - have been taken back on to help staff the Sunday Sun

The newspaper industry is in enough trouble thanks to competition from free digital content of dubious quality without the knee-jerk anti-Murdoch agenda of people like Avaaz. They'd like to force News Corp to sell off its UK papers, under the illusion that it would create a more pluralistic press.

In fact, it would mean that The Sun would be bought by Desmond, and the loss-making Times and Sunday Times would close. Fine if that's what you want ....

 

[Tooting Gull]

That is the reasonable and cogent case argued by NAN. Now here's mine. Why don't you, and the other bored, faux-radical student internet vigilante cretins, just f**k off and do something worthwhile with your pathetic, ignorant lives rather than try and lose any other innocent journalists their jobs from a paper that hasn't started yet. I'd say rant over, but there's plenty more where that came from.

 

[jackanada]

I'm going to have to recommend my mums hobby here - of a morning she'll scuttle into the local shop and shuffle the papers around to hide any copies of the NOTW/Sun behind other papers. Not much of a barrier to purchase but enough of one to frustrate most of the target market.

 

[BensGrandad]

Did anybody ever doubt that he stopped publishing the N of The W purely to gain publicity and be seen to be doing right and and that he would start a new paper soon after, probably with the name of The Sun on Sunday.

 

[philsussex]

Well I'm glad the NOTW is back. Nice easy Sunday read.

 

[Mr Burns]

That is the reasonable and cogent case argued by NAN. Now here's mine. Why don't you, and the other bored, faux-radical student internet vigilante cretins, just f**k off and do something worthwhile with your pathetic, ignorant lives rather than try and lose any other innocent journalists their jobs from a paper that hasn't started yet. I'd say rant over, but there's plenty more where that came from.

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter

 

[John Bumlick]

I'm going to have to recommend my mums hobby here - of a morning she'll scuttle into the local shop and shuffle the papers around to hide any copies of the NOTW/Sun behind other papers. Not much of a barrier to purchase but enough of one to frustrate most of the target market.

your mum's a f***ing loser who needs to get a life, to be fair.

 

[Beach Seagull]

Did anybody ever doubt that he stopped publishing the N of The W purely to gain publicity and be seen to be doing right and and that he would start a new paper soon after, probably with the name of The Sun on Sunday.

I think Murdoch withdrew the NOTW for perfectly genuine reasons and that he was pretty shocked at the hacking scandal that enveloped his organisation. Lets face it he could have ridden out the storm last summer........yeah there would've been 'readers boycotts' and advertisers 'not wanting to put their name to the tainted brand' but that would've soon passed as after a few weeks the hacking story would've been fish and chip wrappings and the circulation and advertising revenue would be back to pre hacking revelation levels.

As for the Sunday Sun, its a free market and is Murdochs (or indeed anyones perogative) to launch a newspaper and the ultimate boss is the consumer who can make it by buying it or break it. Nobody is being forced to buy it, but my guess is that given our love for an easy Sunday am read it will be a success and will fill the void left by the demise of the NOTW.

 

[chez]

Thank god its coming back. Ive missed having a decent paper to read on Sunday. I'd shifted to The Mail on Sunday but it's nowhere near as good.

 

[GreersElbow]

Thank god its coming back. Ive missed having a decent paper to read on Sunday. I'd shifted to The Mail on Sunday but it's nowhere near as good.

Can't tell if serious...

 

[Big G]

That is the reasonable and cogent case argued by NAN. Now here's mine. Why don't you, and the other bored, faux-radical student internet vigilante cretins, just f**k off and do something worthwhile with your pathetic, ignorant lives rather than try and lose any other innocent journalists their jobs from a paper that hasn't started yet. I'd say rant over, but there's plenty more where that came from.

Could not have put it better myself.......well said!!!!

 

[jackanada]

your mum's a f***ing loser who needs to get a life, to be fair.

"Your mum may wish to consider taking up a more entertaining pastime" would be fairer and less needlessly offensive or are we wishing to turn this into a Yo Mama thread?
If so:
Yo mama is so nasty that when you were being delivered, the doctor was wearing the oxygen mask.

 

[clapham_gull]

That is the reasonable and cogent case argued by NAN. Now here's mine. Why don't you, and the other bored, faux-radical student internet vigilante cretins, just f**k off and do something worthwhile with your pathetic, ignorant lives rather than try and lose any other innocent journalists their jobs from a paper that hasn't started yet. I'd say rant over, but there's plenty more where that came from.

mmmmm......

I seem to recall Murdoch papers having the "freedom" (that word journalists love) to campaign to against individuals, companies, political parties and even other papers that they er... don't like very much.

So why have a problem with some people campaigning against a newspaper they don't like very much, even if it leads to the some people potentially losing their jobs ?

Thousands of hard working innocent employers lost their jobs in the city recently but......

Worth remembering that rights extend beyond people working for tabloid newspapers.

 

[Aseros]

I fail to see what NAN done wrong :/

 

[John Bumlick]

"Your mum may wish to consider taking up a more entertaining pastime" would be fairer and less needlessly offensive or are we wishing to turn this into a Yo Mama thread?
If so:
Yo mama is so nasty that when you were being delivered, the doctor was wearing the oxygen mask.

fair point. apologies. and my mum does stink a bit....

 

[Gritt23]

That is the reasonable and cogent case argued by NAN. Now here's mine. Why don't you, and the other bored, faux-radical student internet vigilante cretins, just f**k off and do something worthwhile with your pathetic, ignorant lives rather than try and lose any other innocent journalists their jobs from a paper that hasn't started yet. I'd say rant over, but there's plenty more where that came from.

While I understand the opinion regarding innocent journos, the issues with Murdoch are not as easily dismissed. Maybe you should have canvassed opinion around the ground on Sunday, and you may have seen the the other side of the argument is not just about "bored, faux-radical internet vigilante cretins".

 

[Tooting Gull]

mmmmm......

I seem to recall Murdoch papers having the "freedom" (that word journalists love) to campaign to against individuals, companies, political parties and even other papers that they er... don't like very much.

So why have a problem with some people campaigning against a newspaper they don't like very much, even if it leads to the some people potentially losing their jobs ?

Thousands of hard working innocent employers lost their jobs in the city recently but......

Worth remembering that rights extend beyond people working for tabloid newspapers.

Couple of very silly comments in there. Firstly, I don't think you have a clue what real press freedom is, or more importantly, what it would be like if you didn't have it. And secondly, I honestly can't think of one group of people more likely to campaign for the rights of other workers than journalists.

 

[clapham_gull]

I don't think you have a clue what real press freedom is.

Bit arrogant that ?

 

[Kumquat]

I think there are some very serious questions here and the problem is how you prioritise them

1) Are the jobs and livelihoods of hundreds of journalists the key priority?
2) Are the sensibilities of the hundreds of people whose lives were intruded upon the key priority?
3) Is it too fresh in the memory and should Murdoch have waited until the whole tawdry affair was put to bed?
4) What will be the impact for companies advertising in the new paper?

But above all I can't help thinking that everyone is missing the key point.

Will there be a page 3?