The end of Page 3 girls

[Chris in London]

The reason for starting this thread was that the issues raised by it seem to me to be exactly the same, in terms of the limits society imposes on a free press, as are raised by the Paris shootings. I watched the treatment of the page 3 issue on Newsnight last night, however, and listened to further repayment of it on the radio this morning, and was struck by the difference in 'narrative' between the two stories.

In dealing with page 3 issues, the overwhelming sense I got was that ending topless page 3 shots was a good thing because the images published were offensive (to some), and I heard very little about the press's right to publish offensive things. There was however a lot about 'objectifying' and 'degrading'. During the reaction to the Paris shootings I heard an awful lot about the Press's right to publish offensive things and a lot less about the offensive nature (to some) of the images published. There was however a lot about 'liberties' and 'principles'.

There are of course cogent arguments that can be made either way in each case - the inconsistency between the ways in which the same issues were presented in different contexts was what struck me.

 

[jimharri]

Id agree that this is nothing more than a publicity stunt by Murdoch. Page 3 is hardly offensive compared with some material available in this day and age. Id rather that a teenage boy get his kicks from a page 3 picture which, it could be argued, doesn't objectify women but rather encorages an adoration of an attractive young girl with great tits than from some of the stuff available online which promotes the humiliation of either sex.
Im all in favour of a bit of objectification whether this takes the form of art through the centuries or the sorely missed gratuitous lads lasses thread :-)

Fixed that for you bg!

 

[bobmcfc]

Since most of you swear never to buy the sun because it's a rag infested pile of garbage ... Why do you care ? Freedom of press ?? Don't make me piddle in my pants ;) you don't argue freedom of press when they are shafting city up the back end

 

[Barcon]

Are they all semi-literate?

One of them has just printed out a sheet of A4 from the works printer and stuck it on a lollipop.

Another one has made a sign of PG3 which sounds like a movie rating, and despite having a landscape piece of cardboard, decided to make a circular motif on the sign which is obviously a road to nowhere as its become an oblong. Oh and despite having the biggest sign she was the only one who felt the need to shorten that far too verbose word of "page".

Finally, the middle one has ripped a cardboard box off, and obviously wanted to write "NO MORE" on one line and "PAGE 3" on the other line. Unfortunately she has the artistic ability of a spatula and started the word PAGE far too high which left her in the quandary of then having an obviously uncentered word on her second line or a completely blank half of the cardboard. She then had the genius solution of putting on the word THREE on the third line and then had the same problem of either having an uncentered word or centering it and making it look like the second line was a fuck up. She went with the blaggiest option of lining it up in a "I totally meant to do it" type of way. Then she realised that maybe having four signs that all say the exact same thing might not challenge the intellectual elites and spark a debate about their point so quickly wrote in "MORE MEDIA EQualITY" because making two signs is hard when you have to spend time putting on makeup and putting jewelry into your mutilated ears in the name of fashion. I'm certain that the irony of doing this whilst attending a rally about female inequality and the objectification of beauty never once crossed her mind.

She was so distracted that she also somehow forgot how to write the letter E. It's a simple letter is E, the most common letter in the English alphabet actually so most people have lots of practice in it. You see the top and bottom caps of the E are generally always the same size and the middle one is shorter. We've done this for quite a while actually though in many fonts the middle line of E is now becoming the same size as the other two. Thus calligraphy and language marches on. What is absolutely not acceptable though is to start drawing a proper E and make the caps in descending order of length. That isn't an E, it's an F that has shit itself. The fucking rftard. Also her O seems to be anorexic which is a disgrace that it felt pressured to conform to the O like standards of society and a rounded, more full figured O should have been used to show solidarity with all O shapes in the world the O-jectifying bitches.

I wouldn't trust that lot to make a brew based on their signage. You would have thought that in a display about a national issue that they would have put a bit less though into their snazzy RELAX based fashionable t-shirts and more about the way that their message is presented wouldn't you?

They've lost my vote. Poor calligraphy and a failure to appreciate negative space in graphic design is my wedge issue in politics.

That's probably the funniest post I have read in a long time, which is surprising as I was starting to think you might be a bit of a **** lately :) Nice work.

 

[ColinBellsjockstrap]

Sad day, how will I know what Tiffany, 22 from Bournemouth thinks about the situation in the Middle East.

"Errr, I fink that's where them Arab's come from ain't it?

Has anyone seen my mascara?"

 

[Anonymous]

The simple fact is, who needs page 3 when you have Google?

The only people I can think would buy The Sun are a) people who like Michael Bay, and let's be honest, they're not human and b) South Yorkshire Police.

who needs a news paper when you have google

You can't wipe your arse on Google son.

 

[Barcon]

Since most of you swear never to buy the sun because it's a rag infested pile of garbage ... Why do you care ? Freedom of press ?? Don't make me piddle in my pants ;) you don't argue freedom of press when they are shafting city up the back end

You underestimate the power of breastisis Bob.

 

[Anonymous]

The reason for starting this thread was that the issues raised by it seem to me to be exactly the same, in terms of the limits society imposes on a free press, as are raised by the Paris shootings. I watched the treatment of the page 3 issue on Newsnight last night, however, and listened to further repayment of it on the radio this morning, and was struck by the difference in 'narrative' between the two stories.

In dealing with page 3 issues, the overwhelming sense I got was that ending topless page 3 shots was a good thing because the images published were offensive (to some), and I heard very little about the press's right to publish offensive things. There was however a lot about 'objectifying' and 'degrading'. During the reaction to the Paris shootings I heard an awful lot about the Press's right to publish offensive things and a lot less about the offensive nature (to some) of the images published. There was however a lot about 'liberties' and 'principles'.

There are of course cogent arguments that can be made either way in each case - the inconsistency between the ways in which the same issues were presented in different contexts was what struck me.

 

[Anonymous]

Since most of you swear never to buy the sun because it's a rag infested pile of garbage ... Why do you care ? Freedom of press ?? Don't make me piddle in my pants ;) you don't argue freedom of press when they are shafting city up the back end

;-)

 

[BlueHammer85]

This needs to be posted on this thread.

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bEGLbCNRqw[/video]

Very good