The Harry and Meghan fuss

Brewster's millions said:
Didn’t make any point at all, and nor could it given that it was a photo of some sheep.
Click to expand...

The only ones posting snippets from the daily mail and Twitter are the ones telling other people how shit it is ;)

This thread is an echo chamber and YOU are not welcome unless you're frothing.
 
mexico1970 said:
The only ones posting snippets from the daily mail and Twitter are the ones telling other people how shit it is ;)

This thread is an echo chamber and YOU are not welcome unless you're frothing.
Click to expand...
They must keep GB News in business with all the clicks they give it. All done of course to prove how other people are triggered by it.

They certainly seem to have lined up behind the picture of the sheep though. Couldn’t make it up.
 
Phone hacking is illegal Harry writting his biography is not, earning a living out of his birthright or background is his to sell, how many books and articles have been written about Harry and Meghan without permission earning billions for the publishers.?

Sky news special programme each evening is bizarre Prince Harry played by an actor. The judge and jury of opinion one hour of recreating courtroom activity is a “fiction“ presented as fact. none of them have been in court so let’s have a week of making it up
How do you prove phone hacking now it’s all on Mobile
 
Kirkstall Blue said:
Phone hacking is illegal Harry writting his biography is not, earning a living out of his birthright or background is his to sell, how many books and articles have been written about Harry and Meghan without permission earning billions for the publishers.?

Sky news special programme each evening is bizarre Prince Harry played by an actor. The judge and jury of opinion one hour of recreating courtroom activity is a “fiction“ presented as fact. none of them have been in court so let’s have a week of making it up
How do you prove phone hacking now it’s all on Mobile
Click to expand...
He sued a newspaper for publishing a private letter sent to his father in law, then published a private conversation with his sister in law.

Rank hypocrisy.
 
Brewster's millions said:
That’s right, I’m thick because I don’t think your photo of a few sheep and the glib words next to it made any sort of compelling point.

More boorish behaviour from yourself.
Click to expand...

I thought it made a good point.
Daily Mail and tabloids tell the public who to hate and target them with constant misleading stories and many sheep lap it up.
Like they do with the hate on Harry & Meghan.
 
Brewster's millions said:
He sued a newspaper for publishing a private letter sent to his father in law, then published a private conversation with his sister in law.

Rank hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
Finally after thrashing about trying to find fault with every single thing that they’ve ever done you’ve stumbled upon a point that has a tiny bit of merit, although the comparison of publishing a 5 page handwritten letter with a couple of dozen words in a text is a bit of a stretch. It’s like saying someone’s a hypocrite for reporting an armed bank robbery when they didn’t report them for pinching some sweets from Woolworths.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
I thought it made a good point.
Daily Mail and tabloids tell the public who to hate and target them with constant misleading stories and many sheep lap it up.
Like they do with the hate on Harry & Meghan.
Click to expand...
TBH I thought it portrayed a form of elitism which I hate. An inference that anyone who reads the Mail is a sheep and totally thick, without the intelligence to think for themselves.
I know people who read the Mail along with other news outlets and they're not like that at all.
I don't like this kind of snobby categorisation.
It's insulting.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
I thought it made a good point.
Daily Mail and tabloids tell the public who to hate and target them with constant misleading stories and many sheep lap it up.
Like they do with the hate on Harry & Meghan.
Click to expand...
If people are too thick to make their own minds up more fool them, written and tv media try to steer people in certain directions but it’s up to us not to be sucked in.The only thing I believe is the weather forecast and that is only very occasionally
 
Bill Walker said:
TBH I thought it portrayed a form of elitism which I hate. An inference that anyone who reads the Mail is a sheep and totally thick, without the intelligence to think for themselves.
I know people who read the Mail along with other news outlets and they're not like that at all.
I don't like this kind of snobby categorisation.
It's insulting.
Click to expand...

It's worse than that mate it really is, what some on here are saying is that they can watch GB news post on Twitter and read the daily mail because they can decipher the bullshit that Sheep can't.

Sheep being the buzzword for people who don't support their particular narrative.
 
mexico1970 said:
It's worse than that mate it really is, what some on here are saying is that they can watch GB news post on Twitter and read the daily mail because they can decipher the bullshit that Sheep can't.

Sheep being the buzzword for people who don't support their particular narrative.
Click to expand...

Nellies left peg said:
If people are too thick to make their own minds up more fool them, written and tv media try to steer people in certain directions but it’s up to us not to be sucked in.The only thing I believe is the weather forecast and that is only very occasionally
Click to expand...

Murdoch under oath says he doesn’t care about truth and only cares about money.

Anyone partaking in his media is clearly thick.
 
If anyone who comes on Bluemoon behaved the way the press do to Harry and Meghan you'd be facing charges of stalking - as a slimy reporter you can claim "public interest" and get away with it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top