News Of The World- RIP

[alan partridge]

where do i say that? exactly where?

clutching at straws on this one AP. pointless post.

erm, you implied it with your comment 'the snobs all come out the woodwork using it as a chance to put the boot into common thickos'

and anyway, It was a question to you, not a statement.

 

[alan partridge]

Who cares what he has to say. He's just a geeks comedian.

well, he was hacked himself.

You know, I don't care how rich or famous you are, unless you're someone like Rupert Mugabe, the idea of people knowing your passwords, listening in to your private conversations, knowing your girlfriend's details etc. is horrible.

and then we get the news about mudered teenagers/bomb victims

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

I actually said the 1s on here calling NOTW readers Thicko's were the snobs. Not every single person who chooses to read another paper

Fair enough TB,i stand down and agree.(god i made you sound like Tony Bloom then)....Fair enough terry.

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

erm, you implied it with your comment 'the snobs all come out the woodwork using it as a chance to put the boot into common thickos'

and anyway, It was a question to you, not a statement.

AP- did not recognise you-the avatar is rather retro-

 

[The Wookiee]

Oh dear. The "fact" that they are all hacking.


My apologies. There is one word in the above sentence that is more than four letters long.

Who gives you the right to be so patronizing ?

 

[terryberry1]

Fair enough TB,i stand down and agree.(god i made you sound like Tony Bloom then)....Fair enough terry.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I wouldn't know if you are right or not, my point is that the OP implied something similar and he got shot down in flames by lord b. NSC clique at is very best !

He got "shot down in flames", as you put it, because of what I read as his (un-evidenced) assertion that the practice of phone hacking was widespread and involved people outside the News International stable.

If he was confining his allegations to News International, I wouldn't have responded the way I did. If I misread what he was saying, I apologise - although I'm quite happy to reassert my view that people who read only the NOTW probably accept lower standards of accuracy (in what they read and write) than the rest of us.

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

Ride the waves-the ebb and flow of the NSC tides,much fun can be attained.

 

[JonathanLivingstonSeagull]

I have a nasty feeling the Mail on Sunday is going to experience a massive NOTW sized upsurge in it's readership...
ah well.

NOTW was a rag but entertaining. I used to enjoy reading it when I was younger... though I do mean fifteen or so. I can't believe people think it had a superior sport section - maybe compared to it's fellow red-tops where the writing is also simplistic.

I think a big problem people have here (note: the 'snobs') is the combined whammy of the general stink of sensationalist and histrionic hypocrisy... as if that wasn't bad enough... and simply the general low-intellect market it aimed to please.

Now this is patronising maybe... but maybe we (snobs) all wish a little bit that more people would challenge themselves with their choice of read. It winds us up when people are content kicking around in the filth. It's our little bit of Wolfie Smith trying to get out.

Empower yourself. Lose the junk food papers. This includes the Mail. They ALL have an agenda or other admittedly, but at least the 'quality' papers largely TRY to be intellectually honest. I suddenly realise that every person in the UK is not going to read Private Eye... however much we should! Well anyway...

If you want some genuinely excellent sports journalism... try a black top once or twice. I had a mild revelation over this a while back... I used to get the red-tops for the glut of sports gossip they provide (those little snippets... shorter than the blurb on a cereal box!) as I found them entertaining... one monday i tried the Times (not my normal choice of general read) and had a GREAT time on the sport. Less scattergun gossip, yes, but the articles and depth of thought in relation to our favorite game was far superior. Try it for enlightenment.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Who gives you the right to be so patronizing ?

How clever of you to notice.

It's "patronising", by the way.

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

How clever of you to notice.

It's "patronising", by the way.

Classic-my new signature maybe?

 

[The Spanish]

erm, you implied it with your comment 'the snobs all come out the woodwork using it as a chance to put the boot into common thickos'

and anyway, It was a question to you, not a statement.

by implied it you mean that i said nothing of the sort, i said that its a good excuse for snobs to put the boot into other people, then you are spot on.

if i had said everyone criticising the NOTW was a snob as you claim I said that would be spot on too.

but unfortunately i didnt so we better start all over again. you saw my name come up and jumped in a bit quick. lets start again.

right

its a good excuse for a bit of snobbery

nowhere in that is an implication that everyone critical of the news of the world is a snob, either on here, out there in the real world, wherever you would like to draw the line. dont just jump in because i get on your nerves.

 

[terryberry1]

How clever of you to notice.

It's "patronising", by the way.

Its people like you who ruin this site. You are so up yourself

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

I have a nasty feeling the Mail on Sunday is going to experience a massive NOTW sized upsurge in it's readership...
ah well.

NOTW was a rag but entertaining. I used to enjoy reading it when I was younger... though I do mean fifteen or so. I can't believe people think it had a superior sport section - maybe compared to it's fellow red-tops where the writing is also simplistic.

I think a big problem people have here (note: the 'snobs') is the combined whammy of the general stink of sensationalist and histrionic hypocrisy... as if that wasn't bad enough... and simply the general low-intellect market it aimed to please.

Now this is patronising maybe... but maybe we (snobs) all wish a little bit that more people would challenge themselves with their choice of read. It winds us up when people are content kicking around in the filth. It's our little bit of Wolfie Smith trying to get out.

Empower yourself. Lose the junk food papers. This includes the Mail. They ALL have an agenda or other admittedly, but at least the 'quality' papers largely TRY to be intellectually honest. I suddenly realise that every person in the UK is not going to read Private Eye... however much we should! Well anyway...

If you want some genuinely excellent sports journalism... try a black top once or twice. I had a mild revelation over this a while back... I used to get the red-tops for the glut of sports gossip they provide (those little snippets... shorter than the blurb on a cereal box!) as I found them entertaining... one monday i tried the Times (not my normal choice of general read) and had a GREAT time on the sport. Less scattergun gossip, yes, but the articles and depth of thought in relation to our favorite game was far superior. Try it for enlightenment.

I am enlightened i SEE the beauty in it all

 

[Twinkle Toes]

Well obviously I'm in the minority here but I thought the NOTW catered for everybody. It had its showbiz crap for the birds, it had its fair share of news for the people that want that kind of thing and it had the best sports section of all the papers for the blokes. What more could you want?

A rag that doesn't rely on hacking into the 'phones of murdered individuals to get their 'scoops' perhaps?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Its people like you who ruin this site. You are so up yourself

I, too, need to change my signature.

Thanks for the suggestion.

 

[The Wookiee]

He got "shot down in flames", as you put it, because of what I read as his (un-evidenced) assertion that the practice of phone hacking was widespread and involved people outside the News International stable.

If he was confining his allegations to News International, I wouldn't have responded the way I did. If I misread what he was saying, I apologise - although I'm quite happy to reassert my view that people who read only the NOTW probably accept lower standards of accuracy (in what they read and write) than the rest of us.

you really are doing yourself no favours.

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

Its people like you who ruin this site. You are so up yourself

Terry-come now,LB is a true gent a scholar,a large percentage of what he has to say is fact-and it is site by the way.(please note i am not educated as i read or will be soon the News of The World).

 

[The Spanish]

Empower yourself. Lose the junk food papers. This includes the Mail. They ALL have an agenda or other admittedly, but at least the 'quality' papers largely TRY to be intellectually honest. I suddenly realise that every person in the UK is not going to read Private Eye... however much we should! Well anyway...

i think the plan of giving up shit newspapers to read private eye has a tiny flaw in that private eye would shut about a week after they all did.

 

[terryberry1]

you really are doing yourself no favours.

He's not worth replying to. Believe it or not, hes a moderator. Needs to find himself a proper job i think