Media Discussion - 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
jrb said:
When was the last time a City article in the Daily Mail football page stayed at the top of the page all day? Never!

Can’t be arsed reading the 943 comments, as they will be from Liverpool, United, Arsenal, Spurs, and City hating fans.

View attachment 100120
Click to expand...
Did they claim the rags and Everton were put on trial? I suppose it gets the gutter crawlers frothing.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Whenever I ask this question someone posts a link to an article supporting the allegation that he cheated on his wife.

I actually know this to be true because a girl I was seeing about twenty years ago, a former Virgin air stewardess, had a mate, a former colleague, who had been shagging Ferdinand behind his then girlfriend’s (subsequently wife) back for years, so I know what he was/is like. But there is an overwhelming difference between that and doing so when his wife was dying of cancer, which I am yet to see a substantive proof of, despite it being repeatedly presented as fact on here.
Click to expand...
What difference does it actually make?
The guy is a not nice person. He is the epitome of an uncaring, selfish, egotistical, scoundrel. Lob on 'drugs cheat' to that and you have the triple crown of a complete wanker.
For him to be so unfaithful to his partner(s), and THEN to make out on a fucking documentary that he is heartbroken, is beyond disgraceful.
The speed at which he replaced his dead wife was the final nail in his distasteful reputation coffin.
He should be nowhere near tv punditry, same as that spitting scouse prick.

Maybe there is no proof he was carrying on when his wife was near the end, but the damage was already done, and I don't believe his agent didn't have a word with him to stop "just in case you get rumbled. It won't go down well at all with your fan base. Have a break for a couple of months"
 
jrb said:
The culture and media secretary has intervened to scrutinise a sale of the Daily Telegraph and the Spectator magazine to a company backed by the Abu Dhabi ruling family.

Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, best known in the UK for his ownership of Manchester City football club, has thrown his considerable financial heft behind RedBird IMI, the investment consortium looking to take control of the Telegraph and the Spectator.

As the BBC reported on Wednesday, the Secretary of State, Lucy Frazer, did not feel it appropriate to intervene in a debt repayment transaction.

However, as she has previously indicated and now confirmed, the transfer of the politically important titles to what is essentially a foreign power is a matter the UK government and other regulators need to scrutinise.

But former editors, senior politicians and grassroots Conservatives have voiced grave concerns about the deal.

Simply put, the Barclay family, who have twisted and turned for many years from Lloyds to preserve their ownership of the Telegraph, have now replaced their Lloyds debt with a debt to the Abu Dhabi royal family.

Sheikh Mansour is taking a financial risk in wiring the money to Lloyds when it is unclear whether he will ever get to take control of the assets he is paying for, but as someone close to the deal said, that seems to be "a risk he's willing to take".

www.bbc.co.uk

Government intervenes in Abu Dhabi's bid to buy Telegraph

The sale of the newspaper to Gulf investors has been referred to the competition and media regulators.
www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
He must like Barclay's. Second time he's bailed them out.
 
At-Swim-Two-Birds said:
He must like Barclay's. Second time he's bailed them out.
Click to expand...
The laugh of this is the son of a former member of the KGB has previously owned the Telegraph but, if that's not bad enough, a man convicted of fraud has.
The difference appears to be skin tone (and religion ?) rather than anything else.
Further, Lloyd's bank currently stand to lose 1 billion pounds in unpaid loans. No other potential (white skinned) buyer has offered to repay that. Our (light brown - muslim) owner has.
 
burning blue soul said:
What difference does it actually make?
The guy is a not nice person. He is the epitome of an uncaring, selfish, egotistical, scoundrel. Lob on 'drugs cheat' to that and you have the triple crown of a complete wanker.
For him to be so unfaithful to his partner(s), and THEN to make out on a fucking documentary that he is heartbroken, is beyond disgraceful.
The speed at which he replaced his dead wife was the final nail in his distasteful reputation coffin.
He should be nowhere near tv punditry, same as that spitting scouse prick.

Maybe there is no proof he was carrying on when his wife was near the end, but the damage was already done, and I don't believe his agent didn't have a word with him to stop "just in case you get rumbled. It won't go down well at all with your fan base. Have a break for a couple of months"
Click to expand...
The difference is significant and very simple. People routinely assert it on here as accepted fact when there is absolutely nothing to support it. Don’t you think there’s something a bit weird about that?

Not defending his character at all, and as I’ve said it wouldn’t shock me as being true, it’s simply curious to me that something that appears to be completely untrue is so widely accepted as fact, seemingly because people want it to be.

Probably the right thread for it tbf!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.