Who the f*** is Jan Moir and why is she such a horrible ****?

[strings]

#thedailymailisgay is a trending topic too.

Thats clearly not true, if the Daily Mail were gay it would probably have died of 'natural' causes by now.

 

[Pavilionaire]

It's wrong on so many levels.

I'm sure if Gately we're alive to read this piece he's be particularly pissed off about being described as the "Posh Spice" of Boyzone; "decorous addition"? - now I'm not a fan of theirs but even I know that he and Keating WERE the only decent singers, and it's the other 3 that were the filler.

The woman seems to have created links between events where none exist, and she talks about vice in pop music like it's never existed before the turn of the Millennium.

It IS strange that on the same night the Bulgarian is brought back to the apartment Gately dies. For a couple to be in a civil partnership but inviting strangers back to share a bed is not normal behaviour, therefore those friends and family that say he was a clean-living chap probably don't know the half of it.

I think that in some ways this woman has done the Gately family a massive favour by attacking him and thereby turning the spotlight on her and away from what really happened that night.

It's also sad that the Albion have lost a celebrity fan in this way: apparently Gately loved Virgo, he loved Elphick, but above all he loved Cox.

 

[Wozza]

Press Complaints Commission

Relatively simple form, although seems to be having trouble loading at the moment. Anyway, get involved if you've got time.

Thank you for sending us your complaint about the Daily Mail article on the subject of the death of Stephen Gately. We have received numerous complaints about this matter.

I should first make clear that the Commission generally requires the involvement of directly affected parties before it can begin an investigation into an article. On this occasion, it may be a matter for the family of Mr Gately to raise a complaint about how his death has been treated by the Daily Mail. I can inform you that we have made ourselves available to the family and Mr Gately’s bandmates, in order that they can use our services if they wish.

We require the direct involvement of affected parties because the PCC process can have a public outcome and it would be discourteous for the Commission to publish information relating to individuals without their knowledge or consent. Indeed, doing so might unwittingly add to any intrusion. Additionally, one of the PCC’s roles is dispute resolution, and we would need contact with the affected party in order to determine what would be an acceptable means of settling a complaint.

On initial examination, it would appear that you are, therefore, a third party to the complaint, and we will not be able to pursue your concerns further. However, if you feel that your complaint touches on claims that do not relate directly to Mr Gately or his family, please let us know, making clear how they raise a breach of the Code of Practice. If you feel that the Commission should waive its third party rules, please make clear why you believe this.



Yours sincerely

 

[Napper]

Thank you for sending us your complaint about the Daily Mail article on the subject of the death of Stephen Gately. We have received numerous complaints about this matter.

I should first make clear that the Commission generally requires the involvement of directly affected parties before it can begin an investigation into an article. On this occasion, it may be a matter for the family of Mr Gately to raise a complaint about how his death has been treated by the Daily Mail. I can inform you that we have made ourselves available to the family and Mr Gately’s bandmates, in order that they can use our services if they wish.

We require the direct involvement of affected parties because the PCC process can have a public outcome and it would be discourteous for the Commission to publish information relating to individuals without their knowledge or consent. Indeed, doing so might unwittingly add to any intrusion. Additionally, one of the PCC’s roles is dispute resolution, and we would need contact with the affected party in order to determine what would be an acceptable means of settling a complaint.

On initial examination, it would appear that you are, therefore, a third party to the complaint, and we will not be able to pursue your concerns further. However, if you feel that your complaint touches on claims that do not relate directly to Mr Gately or his family, please let us know, making clear how they raise a breach of the Code of Practice. If you feel that the Commission should waive its third party rules, please make clear why you believe this.



Yours sincerely

In other words F off and go and stop some kids riding on the pavements or something

 

[The Large One]

Interesting response, Wozza.

I would argue back to the PCC that there are issues in Moir's article which are not directly related to Stephen Gately, and that do touch on more general views, based upon spurious evidence, regarding homosexuality, homosexual marriages, and the link between homosexuality and 'strange deaths'.

In order for this to be taken further, it looks like one would have to write an entire thesis on why this woman is such a cow.

 

[aftershavedave]

Interesting response, Wozza.

I would argue back to the PCC that there are issues in Moir's article which are not directly related to Stephen Gately, and that do touch on more general views, based upon spurious evidence, regarding homosexuality, homosexual marriages, and the link between homosexuality and 'strange deaths'.

In order for this to be taken further, it looks like one would have to write an entire thesis on why this woman is such a cow.

i read the response slightly differently:

1) we hear what you say, and you're not alone in pointing this out
2) we can't directly act on your complaint because your not directly involved, but
3) don't worry her card is marked

 

[looney]

So somebody refuses to worship at the alter of Political correctness and the response on here is a hysterical hissy fit.

I cant see anything wrong with that article. Maybe the author doesn't like gays or civil partnerships, neither are those a crime. I dont see any innacurate reporting.

I expect a total rebuff by the PCC to you bunch of ideologicly motivated tools, otherwise I will happily put "I am a wanker" in my sig for a month.

 

[The Large One]

i read the response slightly differently:

1) we hear what you say, and you're not alone in pointing this out
2) we can't directly act on your complaint because your not directly involved, but
3) don't worry her card is marked

I'm looking at the last paragraph of their response.

On initial examination, it would appear that you are, therefore, a third party to the complaint, and we will not be able to pursue your concerns further. However, if you feel that your complaint touches on claims that do not relate directly to Mr Gately or his family, please let us know, making clear how they raise a breach of the Code of Practice. If you feel that the Commission should waive its third party rules, please make clear why you believe this.

That invitation is what I was referring to - please let us know what she has done, and which rules she has broken, that marks her out as such a cow.

 

[aftershavedave]

I'm looking at the last paragraph of their response.

On initial examination, it would appear that you are, therefore, a third party to the complaint, and we will not be able to pursue your concerns further. However, if you feel that your complaint touches on claims that do not relate directly to Mr Gately or his family, please let us know, making clear how they raise a breach of the Code of Practice. If you feel that the Commission should waive its third party rules, please make clear why you believe this.

That invitation is what I was referring to - please let us know what she has done, and which rules she has broken, that marks her out as such a cow.

don't get me wrong, i'm not entirely disagreeing with you. i'd say that the point you've highlighted is a veiled request for just that complaint...

 

[looney]

Thank you for sending us your complaint about the Daily Mail article on the subject of the death of Stephen Gately. We have received numerous complaints about this matter.

I should first make clear that the Commission generally requires the involvement of directly affected parties before it can begin an investigation into an article. On this occasion, it may be a matter for the family of Mr Gately to raise a complaint about how his death has been treated by the Daily Mail. I can inform you that we have made ourselves available to the family and Mr Gately’s bandmates, in order that they can use our services if they wish.

We require the direct involvement of affected parties because the PCC process can have a public outcome and it would be discourteous for the Commission to publish information relating to individuals without their knowledge or consent. Indeed, doing so might unwittingly add to any intrusion. Additionally, one of the PCC’s roles is dispute resolution, and we would need contact with the affected party in order to determine what would be an acceptable means of settling a complaint.

On initial examination, it would appear that you are, therefore, a third party to the complaint, and we will not be able to pursue your concerns further. However, if you feel that your complaint touches on claims that do not relate directly to Mr Gately or his family, please let us know, making clear how they raise a breach of the Code of Practice. If you feel that the Commission should waive its third party rules, please make clear why you believe this.



Yours sincerely

In other words.

If we acted every time someone was offended by something, or offended on behalf of someone else, there would be no media left to regulate.

Thats life, the worlds not made up of people who share identical
views on eveything so f*** off and grow a pair and stop wasting our time.

 

[beardy gull]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/16/stephen-gately-jan-moir

Charlie Brooker spot on again.

 

[The Large One]

So somebody refuses to worship at the alter of Political correctness and the response on here is a hysterical hissy fit.

I cant see anything wrong with that article. Maybe the author doesn't like gays or civil partnerships, neither are those a crime. I dont see any innacurate reporting.

I expect a total rebuff by the PCC to you bunch of ideologicly motivated tools, otherwise I will happily put "I am a wanker" in my sig for a month.

It's not about political correctness.

She has made huge assumptions on Gately's lifestyle based on her own belief structure. She doesn't believe something to be true, therefore it's not true. If she'd known about his lifestyle for a fact, she'd be in a position to comment. What is evident from her article is that she isn't.

Also, she associates homosexuality with early deaths, and that the two are linked. It doesn't take a huge leap to infer from it that she is saying he died because he was gay.

 

[Normal Rob]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/16/stephen-gately-jan-moir

Charlie Brooker spot on again.

A brilliant response/comment on the whole sorry saga.

 

[looney]

It's not about political correctness.

She has made huge assumptions on Gately's lifestyle based on her own belief structure.
.

Isn't that what all religions and politicians do? Do you think we can have them all banned by christmas?

It's not about political correctness.

Also, she associates homosexuality with early deaths, and that the two are linked.

Well yes they are linked , its called having lower life expectancies. Probably due to AIDS etc.

It's not about political correctness.

It doesn't take a huge leap to infer from it that she is saying he died because he was gay.

It has everything to do with political correctness.

You can infer that soldiers are more likley to die young because they show up at wars. So why is it wrong to infer you are more likley to die young when gay due to diseases, hostility from general populace, alt lifestyles.

Dont get me wrong here, I have no problem with alt lifestyles. I do have more than a passing interest in BDSM. But by the same token im not going to cloak myself in bullshit about the risks and saftey aspects.

 

[looney]

A brilliant response/comment on the whole sorry saga.

Yea ok.

That idiot has inferred so much about the article I'm noy suprised if he gets reported. or sued for libel.:mendoza:

 

[wellquickwoody]

Reported her to the press complaints committee earlier.

You sad t**t!

 

[Hungry Joe]

Yea ok.

That idiot has inferred so much about the article I'm noy suprised if he gets reported. or sued for libel.:mendoza:

Yet you see nothing wrong with Moir's inferrences? It's just the same old double standards depending on whose politics you prefer.

Peoples disgust at the article has nothing to with PC and everything to do with decency and respect. Homophobia is still a raging fire and that article pours petrol all over it.

 

[beardy gull]

Yea ok.

That idiot has inferred so much about the article I'm noy suprised if he gets reported. or sued for libel.:mendoza:

Charlie Brooker's an idiot you say?

 

[Uncle Spielberg]

Yea ok.

That idiot has inferred so much about the article I'm noy suprised if he gets reported. or sued for libel.:mendoza:

HeE didn't infur anything he just dissected piece by piece HER comments and blew then out of the water and at the same time happily detrpyed her " career " in the process.

 

[looney]

Yet you see nothing wrong with Moir's inferrences? It's just the same old double standards depending on whose politics you prefer.

Yes exactly its ALL politics.

Peoples disgust at the article has nothing to with PC and everything to do with decency and respect. .

Some peoples disgust unless you claim advocacy for all. True it lacks respect for the recently deceased but then I could dig a few articles up about Jade goody, and a few posts on here.

Homophobia is still a raging fire and that article pours petrol all over it.

Nice bit of jargon filled retoric, it is of course the same kind of totolitarian argument used by the religous right. Ban it because it makes people behave badly.


The religous right are on one exstreme, you are on the other.

Most normal people, and I'm alluding to some average here, would think crude tactless bitch, toss the paper and move on.

Not get swept along in politiccly motivate hysteria which ironiclly is undemocratic.


Or am I mistaken? the gaurdian isn't a leftwing paper and charli booker didn't encourage people to contact the PCC?