Media thread 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nails said:
I've worked for both and you're effing crazy if you think the Mail is no worse than the Guardian. The Mail routinely lies and doesn't give a monkey's. The Guardian has its flaws, for sure (its coverage of City, for instance), but it generally tells the truth about current affairs.

en.wikipedia.org

Daily Mail - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
I respect your opinion but (without going into details on here) I also have inside knowledge of both publications and I believe both of them report issues through their own biased political filters which means most (not all) of what they publish, including current affairs, is distorted.
 
Blue Mist said:
If you look at the bbc site today there is not one mention of us.
Our owners have 2 choices fight the bbc (imo they'd lose) or ensure other NEW media outlets had everything about City. Newspapers, printed or online are dying out and Sky is a dinosaur. Most under 30's don't go to the daily express for football coverage. You fight battles you can win City are doing that.
Click to expand...
Pretty decent match write-up this morning
 
jrb said:
It gets worse by the day.

As expected, Scousers agreeing with Wright in the comments section.

View attachment 53507

But when Arsenal won the PL season after season with Wright in the team, it was great for the PL and English football.
Click to expand...
He (Ian Wright) seems to be popular but I've always thought he talks and writes total bollocks - like the bloke down your local pub would come out with.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I respect your opinion but (without going into details on here) I also have inside knowledge of both publications and I believe both of them report issues through their own biased political filters which means most (not all) of what they publish, including current affairs, is distorted.
Click to expand...
And one of these papers is in serious financial shit, whilst the other is doing pretty well. Both are horrible publications
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I respect your opinion but (without going into details on here) I also have inside knowledge of both publications and I believe both of them report issues through their own biased political filters which means most (not all) of what they publish, including current affairs, is distorted.
Click to expand...
Of course there's a certain amount of bias. One is a liberal newspaper, the other is a right-wing newspaper. You expect subjectivity in the op ed pages and in the slant of news stories. But one publishes outright lies, the other does not. Why else would Wikipedia announce its ban on using the Mail as a news source?
www.cnbc.com

The Daily Mail has 'mastered the art of running stories that aren't true', Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales says

Jimmy Wales' comments come as he attempts to tackle fake news with his new site Wikitribune.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
 
Don Karleone said:
Why shouldn't I?

Racist/xenophobic shit like this should be highlighted.
Click to expand...
You could spend all day posting examples of that shit from anywhere across the internet. It doesn't need 'highlighting' as it's already on a platform where several million people can see it. I presume you've been on his twitter to call him out, or even re-tweeted it?
The gimp will be very pleased that his shit opinion has now made it onto bluemoon and will probably take great pleasure from it. You've done exactly what he wanted.
 
stonerblue said:
You could spend all day posting examples of that shit from anywhere across the internet. It doesn't need 'highlighting' as it's already on a platform where several million people can see it. I presume you've been on his twitter to call him out, or even re-tweeted it?
The gimp will be very pleased that his shit opinion has now made it onto bluemoon and will probably take great pleasure from it. You've done exactly what he wanted.
Click to expand...


Haven't said anything to him or retweeted it. I have reported it though and if more people see it and do that, it may make him think twice about posting crap like that.
 
Nails said:
Of course there's a certain amount of bias. One is a liberal newspaper, the other is a right-wing newspaper. You expect subjectivity in the op ed pages and in the slant of news stories. But one publishes outright lies, the other does not. Why else would Wikipedia announce its ban on using the Mail as a news source?
www.cnbc.com

The Daily Mail has 'mastered the art of running stories that aren't true', Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales says

Jimmy Wales' comments come as he attempts to tackle fake news with his new site Wikitribune.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
Click to expand...
For the same reason Twitter closed the New York Post account down. They only want all to hear their truth, and nothing that goes against their agenda.
 
stonerblue said:
You could spend all day posting examples of that shit from anywhere across the internet. It doesn't need 'highlighting' as it's already on a platform where several million people can see it. I presume you've been on his twitter to call him out, or even re-tweeted it?
The gimp will be very pleased that his shit opinion has now made it onto bluemoon and will probably take great pleasure from it. You've done exactly what he wanted.
Click to expand...
Probably got his dog licking his balls as he knocks one out.
 
Newman Noggs said:
I wish him all the best for a full recovery. But I'd suggest, in future, being a little less consumed by hatred. It isn't doing you any good Nick.
Click to expand...

He and his have been through some pretty crappy stuff the last few years, so the best of luck to him, but I can't help thinking he should be channeling into something positive to help himself through it all, rather than the hate-fuelled nonsense he comes out with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top