The Scum 'newspaper'. A depraved, tawdry rag.

Printed this vile front page deliberately to smear Corbyn. The editor knew there would be a backlash, but presumably  thought some of the smear would stick.

They left this foul leader in print for as long ad they dared.

It seems it may be boycotted in Manchester as well as Liverpool from now on.

.
https://www.change.org/p/andy-burnham-ban-boycott-the-sun-newspaper-in-manchester?recruiter=59734181&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-no_msg

Andy,
your hate will kill you soon, Heart Attack, Stroke,even Dementia,---wait,you are Demented, and consumed with hate for anyone who is a Tory !

No mate. Hatred of Murdoch. Even when he funded and supported Bliar.

Angry Andy wrote:Printed this vile front page deliberately to smear Corbyn. The editor knew there would be a backlash, but presumably  thought some of the smear would stick.

They left this foul leader in print for as long ad they dared.

It seems it may be boycotted in Manchester as well as Liverpool from now on.

.
https://www.change.org/p/andy-burnham-ban-boycott-the-sun-newspaper-in-manchester?recruiter=59734181&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-no_msg

You sleep with dogs you get fleas. Shit sticks. Etc. I do think that headline is a bit harsh and not in good taste but when you've had your dirty IRA panties wrung out in public, what do you expect.

I have no time for The Sun's style of journalism, but their fellow "red top" tabloid the Daily Mirror has in the past published some pretty vile stuff about Tories, too. It's the sort of thing that happens when tabloids commit themselves to a particular faction to the point of obsession, particularly when an election is in the offing.

It was no coincidence that when Labour Party officials Whelan and McBride were caught deliberately inventing scurrilous and completely fabricated "stories" about Conservative politicians aimed not only at destroying their political careers but also their marriages and relationships, the three principal national media outlets actively canvassed were the Daily Mirror, The Guardian and the BBC.

(Note to Andy: Please don't try to tell me that it didn't happen; I know far, far more about that particular unsavory episode that you ever will.)

Trade scuttlebutt at the time was that the Beeb and the dear old Guardian would have absolutely nothing to do with the offered "exposes" (apologies; don't know how to include an acute accent but at least I know one is there) and that the Mirror was dissuaded only by the knowledge that one of the "targets" was known to be particularly litigious and that the "revelations" offered were easily proved to be a complete load of bollocks and were being circulated with malicious intent.

Corbyn, I'm afraid, does have "form" for his, er, tolerant attitude to overtly terrorist organisations and he and his followers can now hardly complain when past statements and actions are dragged up as "reminders" of it.

I can't see that link, so I don't know what the front page said.

The link to the headline has now been pulled - possibly  by thdcSun.

But it showed a picture of Corbyn. And a headline "Corbyn. Its your blood on their Hands". Inferring he killed the 22 victims.
Burnham was instrumental in getting it removed.

Not surprised they removed it. That's a crappy thing to say.

Raggamuffin wrote:I can't see that link, so I don't know what the front page said.

Fake news again on FB

When are people going to leave that crap site?

Even the petition is a sham

Not a scam.
Another smearing lie by Thorin

Angry Andy wrote:Not a scam.
Another smearing lie by Thorin

What has happened to the petition page?

There never was one

It reached it's  desired 10k and has been submitted.  I think readers of the Scum in Manchester will now find it as difficult to obtain a copy as the residents of Liverpool.
If it carriea on like this it soon wont have anywhere to sell it.

Angry Andy wrote:It reached it's  desired 10k and has been submitted.  I think readers of the Scum in Manchester will now find it as difficult to obtain a copy as the residents of Liverpool.
If it carriea on like this it soon wont have anywhere to sell it.

Really, show the link??

The link worked very early this morning. Perhaps you were to stoned/drunk/hungover  to get up and read it it.

Angry Andy wrote:The link worked very early this morning. Perhaps you were to stoned/drunk/hungover  to get up and read it it.

So because your link was a lie, you now look to slander me.

So why does it not work now, being as it would still be a valid request for Government to discuss?


Is it not the case you are one right gullible retard?

Care to explain this comment Andy?


Iif I seduced Eds, God forbid, would be like shoving an anaconda into an anthole.
It wouldn't be exciting enough for rigor mortis to afflict the old python.

http://electricsky.forumotion.co.uk/t4230p50-monkey-boy-and-his-extremists-running-nf-neo-fascists#57165


I tell you what, how about you and that fuckwit brigade over on electric, stop getting a hard on over the fact, you cant have eddie, because none of you have been laid in years. Where your only sexual relief has been humping your pillows.

Get a life and stop acting like two year olds being complete twats or man up and say what you think to Eddie's face.

As I am sure the whole forum will tell you exactly what a bunch of twats you are.


Night everyone

It is called course and vulgar humour Tho. Read my profile.
In any case I don't  have sexual fantasies.

I AM one

The serious point is that the Sun, for a while printed a grotesquly offensive front page knowing full well it would be condemned.
They went ahead anyway.
It soon got castigated, then pulled.
Burnham complained, a petition was launched , signed and su submitted, and like Liverpool , it will be hard to find a hard copy in Manchester from now on.
Folk have long memories.

Angry Andy wrote:It is called course and vulgar humour Tho. Read my profile.
In any case I don't  have sexual fantasies.

I AM one

I think its called you masturbate to much, as I fail to find how Eddie or anyone here would find it funny

So why do you not say it here?

I will tell you why, because you need attention and an audience that likes you

Bless you petal

You need a safe place where you can be a right prime twat where your hate is welcome

Seriously, you could be the Trumps Vice President.

I hear there is an opening

Why would you say that about me Andy? I don't understand why you would do that.

I come to realise that I don't seem to think like other poeople.

Still adding to you post tally Thor. 6500 in 5 months. Thats is frenetic .You'll  soon be on a par with an old adversary called Hugh Jardon/Bliar/Durham. He made thousands of posts every month for years.
And you call ME an attention seeker..

Thorin wrote:Care to explain this comment Andy?


Iif I seduced Eds, God forbid,  would be like shoving an anaconda into an anthole.
It wouldn't be exciting enough for rigor mortis to afflict the old python.

http://electricsky.forumotion.co.uk/t4230p50-monkey-boy-and-his-extremists-running-nf-neo-fascists#57165


I tell you what, how about you and that fuckwit brigade over on electric, stop getting a hard on over the fact, you cant have eddie, because none of you have been laid in years. Where your only sexual relief has been humping your pillows.

Get a life and stop acting like two year olds being complete twats or man up and say what you think to Eddie's face.

As I am sure the whole forum will tell you exactly what a bunch of twats you are.


Night everyone

Sassy's place is reminding me of Bitchfest. There's the same nasty level of griping and backstabbing going on and even a Facebook stalker.

Well let's not discuss it anymore. We really don't need to.

Angry Andy wrote:Printed this vile front page deliberately to smear Corbyn. The editor knew there would be a backlash, but presumably  thought some of the smear would stick.

They left this foul leader in print for as long ad they dared.

It seems it may be boycotted in Manchester as well as Liverpool from now on.

.
https://www.change.org/p/andy-burnham-ban-boycott-the-sun-newspaper-in-manchester?recruiter=59734181&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-no_msg

The Sun has been upsetting entire cities yet again? At this rate they will soon run out of customers. The first mistake is calling it a 'newspaper'. It's not.

It's just a cheap populist rag with lewd bits thrown in for the benefit of its target audience. It's a comic, little better than viz.

Jules wrote:

Angry Andy wrote:Printed this vile front page deliberately to smear Corbyn. The editor knew there would be a backlash, but presumably  thought some of the smear would stick.

They left this foul leader in print for as long ad they dared.

It seems it may be boycotted in Manchester as well as Liverpool from now on.

.
https://www.change.org/p/andy-burnham-ban-boycott-the-sun-newspaper-in-manchester?recruiter=59734181&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-no_msg

The Sun has been upsetting entire cities yet again? At this rate they will soon run out of customers. The first mistake is calling it a 'newspaper'. It's not.  

It's just a cheap populist rag with lewd bits thrown in for the benefit of its target audience. It's a comic, little better than viz.

I think not. It has an average daily circulation of 1,755,000 - precisely because it is a "cheap populist rag with lewd bits thrown in...."

I read the SUN and the MAIL. Am I a bad person?

nicko wrote:I read the SUN and the MAIL.   Am I a bad person?

Of course not, Nicko.

People buy a newspaper for all sorts of different reasons...maybe because it reflects their own politics and general outlook on life; the quality of its feature writers, women's sections, travel and leisure information, sports coverage - or even tits 'n' bums!

Some people even buy the Daily Mail (average circulation 1,500,000) just so they can appear in forums and the social media to complain about how "ultra Right" it is!

No matter what some people say about both those newspapers, they sell - and they sell because, like any product, people want to buy them...well over three million people each day, in fact.

The Daily Mirror, in the meantime, has an average daily circulation of 770,000 and that luvvies' favourite, The Guardian, just 171,700.

(Note to any "offended" luvvies: I occasionally buy The Guardian, because in my opinion it is an historically good newspaper, and sometimes I get one of the red top tabloids, the Daily Express, Telegraph or the dear old Thunderer itself, The Times.)

The Daily Mail  is the newspaper that I personally favour, mainly  because IMO it employs some of the best journalists in the UK and, since I no longer have a newspaper shop or delivery in my village, I can read most of it online for free.

For overall quality I'd nominate The Telegraph, but I always found it one of the least easy papers to read - particularly in a hurry.

Why is it that great authors like Max Hastings and Fredrick Forsyth to name just two, prefer to write for the Mail and not the [spit] Mirror?

nicko wrote:I read the SUN and the MAIL.   Am I a bad person?

No, just one dying to be manipulated and lied to.

sassy wrote:

nicko wrote:I read the SUN and the MAIL.   Am I a bad person?

No, just one dying to be manipulated and lied to.

And you are not by the biased sites you read?

Everyone is guilty of confirmation bias, but you happen to be one of the worst for this.

I don't really notice the political spin of The Sun or the Mail, but I find all the guff about celebrities and non-stories about ordinary people a bit off putting.

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Jules wrote:

The Sun has been upsetting entire cities yet again? At this rate they will soon run out of customers. The first mistake is calling it a 'newspaper'. It's not.  

It's just a cheap populist rag with lewd bits thrown in for the benefit of its target audience. It's a comic, little better than viz.

I think not. It has an average daily circulation of 1,755,000 - precisely because it is a "cheap populist rag with lewd bits thrown in...."

A large number. But I hope you rate quality over quantity, young man. *wags finger*

The Sun famously alienated scousers for a whole generation. Not a mistake it would wish to repeat.

Jules wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

I think not. It has an average daily circulation of 1,755,000 - precisely because it is a "cheap populist rag with lewd bits thrown in...."

A large number. But I hope you rate quality over quantity, young man. *wags finger*

The Sun famously alienated scousers for a whole generation. Not a mistake it would wish to repeat.

He does rate quality Jules, but he also recognizes what sells, being has been a journalist and happens to be one of the most knowledgeable people I have come to know. Even when we are at odds. I would happily admit I could stand to learn far more from him. What he does better than most is not allow confirmation bias to effect him, as it does with most of us. 

How did the sun alienate scousers?

It never could have done so, football fans know what a proportion of scouse fans are like and they are the lowest of the low. Most Liverpool or Everton fans are not, but a proportion bring the rest down. I have seen fans have their clothes stolen by scousers. Seen them have food in a restaurant and do runners without paying. How they come begging off everyone. Now most Liverpool fans are not like this, but do you think the sun is not stupid over how people know and hate Liverpool fans for this?

Nobody deserved to die that day at Hilsborough and many were to blame, including the Police and the stewards, but some have gotten away without blame. Those who got in without tickets and any genuine football fan knows this happened, because we have all seen  this happen time and time again with scouse fans.

nicko wrote:Why is it that great authors like Max Hastings and Fredrick Forsyth to name just two,  prefer to write for the Mail and not the [spit]  Mirror?

Because of it's massive circulation, and therefore obvious public appeal and influence, I would say.

It is also far more in a position to pay top writers the fees that they demand.

Jules wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

I think not. It has an average daily circulation of 1,755,000 - precisely because it is a "cheap populist rag with lewd bits thrown in...."

A large number. But I hope you rate quality over quantity, young man. *wags finger*

The Sun famously alienated scousers for a whole generation. Not a mistake it would wish to repeat.

What makes you think I don't? I simply quoted the most recent ABC circulation figures as examples of current national daily paper circulations because, in my opinion, they are relevant and indicate that far from "running out of customers" The Sun steadfastly maintains its traditional huge lead in circulation.

If past records are anything to go by, there will be an initial dip in sales but it will be shortlived and in the meantime the paper's management may huff, puff and make unconvincing apologies...while revelling in the oxygen of publicity which critics like yourself are giving them.

Anyway, I would have thought that my nomination of the Daily Telegraph as my personal choice for journalistic quality might have answered your question.

Thorin wrote:

Jules wrote:

A large number. But I hope you rate quality over quantity, young man. *wags finger*

The Sun famously alienated scousers for a whole generation. Not a mistake it would wish to repeat.

He does rate quality Jules, but he also recognizes what sells, being has been a journalist and happens to be one of the most knowledgeable people I have come to know. Even when we are at odds. I would happily admit I could stand to learn far more from him. What he does better than most is not allow confirmation bias to effect him, as it does with most of us. 

How did the sun alienate scousers?

It never could have done so, football fans know what a proportion of scouse fans are like and they are the lowest of the low. Most Liverpool or Everton fans are not, but a proportion bring the rest down. I have seen fans have their clothes stolen by scousers. Seen them have food in a restaurant and do runners without paying. How they come begging off everyone. Now most Liverpool fans are not like this, but do you think the sun is not stupid over how people know and hate Liverpool fans for this?

Nobody deserved to die that day at Hilsborough and many were to blame, including the Police and the stewards, but some have gotten away without blame. Those who got in without tickets and any genuine football fan knows this happened, because we have all seen  this happen time and time again with scouse fans.

Thorin, don't shoot the messenger.
Instead of asking me to explain this (I may not explain it very well) , why don't you google it yourself and get the story directly from the horse's mouth?

The city of Liverpool has boycotted the sun for 23 years (dunno what %) and the sun itself described it as the worst mistake it ever made.



Here's one account, and no need to thank me >
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-17113382  
''Liverpool's 23-year boycott of The Sun newspaper''
''It was described by The Sun newspaper as the most terrible mistake in its history. ''
'' The Sun will never recover in this city.''
''The apology in 2004 was too little too late, "
''Never forgive!''

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

Jules wrote:

A large number. But I hope you rate quality over quantity, young man. *wags finger*

The Sun famously alienated scousers for a whole generation. Not a mistake it would wish to repeat.

What makes you think I don't? I simply quoted the most recent ABC circulation figures as examples of current national daily paper circulations because, in my opinion, they are relevant and indicate that far from "running out of customers" The Sun steadfastly maintains its traditional huge lead in circulation.

If past records are anything to go by, there will be an initial dip in sales but it will be shortlived and in the meantime the paper's management may huff, puff and make unconvincing apologies...while revelling in the oxygen of publicity which critics like yourself are giving them.

Anyway, I would have thought that my nomination of the Daily Telegraph as my personal choice for journalistic quality might have answered your question.

Lol FM, it was you who approached me, to speak to me.
I simply REPLIED to you, and I did so in the exact generic style that I would have done if you had been talking about anything else.

Eg if you had said places like Ibiza/Teneriffe get far more holidaymakers than classier places like Florence or Bahamas, I would have given the identical 'quality is better than quantity' reply.
Did not read the conversation between you and others, on this occasion so I did not see you stating which paper you prefer.

I entered this thread only to speak about MY own dislike for a particular rag and I spoke directly to Andy, the author of this thread.

I have never concerned myself with what newspapers other members like/prefer.   Not my business, not interested  in what other members read.

Jules wrote:

Thorin wrote:


He does rate quality Jules, but he also recognizes what sells, being has been a journalist and happens to be one of the most knowledgeable people I have come to know. Even when we are at odds. I would happily admit I could stand to learn far more from him. What he does better than most is not allow confirmation bias to effect him, as it does with most of us. 

How did the sun alienate scousers?

It never could have done so, football fans know what a proportion of scouse fans are like and they are the lowest of the low. Most Liverpool or Everton fans are not, but a proportion bring the rest down. I have seen fans have their clothes stolen by scousers. Seen them have food in a restaurant and do runners without paying. How they come begging off everyone. Now most Liverpool fans are not like this, but do you think the sun is not stupid over how people know and hate Liverpool fans for this?

Nobody deserved to die that day at Hilsborough and many were to blame, including the Police and the stewards, but some have gotten away without blame. Those who got in without tickets and any genuine football fan knows this happened, because we have all seen  this happen time and time again with scouse fans.

Thorin, don't shoot the messenger.
Instead of asking me to explain this (I may not explain it very well) , why don't you google it yourself and get the story directly from the horse's mouth?

The city of Liverpool has boycotted the sun for 23 years (dunno what %) and the sun itself described it as the worst mistake it ever made.



Here's one account, and no need to thank me >
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-17113382  
''Liverpool's 23-year boycott of The Sun newspaper''
''It was described by The Sun newspaper as the most terrible mistake in its history. ''
'' The Sun will never recover in this city.''
''The apology in 2004 was too little too late, "
''Never forgive!''

Well that is up to the people of Liverpool
However as I say most football fans know what a core element of Scouse fans are like
We all know the truth

Thorin wrote:.

Well that is up to the people of Liverpool

Yup.
Have a nice day, Thorin!

Jules wrote:

Thorin wrote:.

Well that is up to the people of Liverpool

Yup.
Have a nice day, Thorin!

You too Jules

Jules wrote:

Fred Moletrousers wrote:

What makes you think I don't? I simply quoted the most recent ABC circulation figures as examples of current national daily paper circulations because, in my opinion, they are relevant and indicate that far from "running out of customers" The Sun steadfastly maintains its traditional huge lead in circulation.

If past records are anything to go by, there will be an initial dip in sales but it will be shortlived and in the meantime the paper's management may huff, puff and make unconvincing apologies...while revelling in the oxygen of publicity which critics like yourself are giving them.

Anyway, I would have thought that my nomination of the Daily Telegraph as my personal choice for journalistic quality might have answered your question.

Lol FM, it was you who approached me, to speak to me.
I simply REPLIED to you, and I did so in the exact generic style that I would have done if you had been talking about anything else.

Eg if you had said places like Ibiza/Teneriffe  get far more holidaymakers than classier places like Florence or Bahamas, I would have given the identical  'quality is better than quantity'  reply.
Did not read the conversation between you and others, on this occasion so I did not see you stating which paper you prefer.

Understandable; I frequently do that myself.

I respect your views on The Sun and your reasons for having them. However, in spite of what has been claimed, the Liverpool "boycott" and any similar phenomenon arising from the Manchester tragedy had, and will have, negligible long term impact on the newspaper as a commercial undertaking.

I'm not defending The Sun any more than I would defend any newspaper, simply because professionally I had (and still have) a lifetime of celebration of the freedom and diversity of the British Press.

Dammit, I would even apply Voltaire's mantra to the Daily Worker!

(For the record, my background is the provincial as opposed to the national Press, though I did once work as a "shift" sub editor on the Daily Mail.

Dons armoured codpiece and awaits usual histrionics from certain quarters....)

Angry Andy wrote:Printed this vile front page deliberately to smear Corbyn. The editor knew there would be a backlash, but presumably  thought some of the smear would stick.

They left this foul leader in print for as long ad they dared.

It seems it may be boycotted in Manchester as well as Liverpool from now on.

.
https://www.change.org/p/andy-burnham-ban-boycott-the-sun-newspaper-in-manchester?recruiter=59734181&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-no_msg

what on earth is this all about, you link leads to a non existent petition.

Thorin wrote:

Angry Andy wrote:The link worked very early this morning. Perhaps you were to stoned/drunk/hungover  to get up and read it it.

So because your link was a lie, you now look to slander me.

So why does it not work now, being as it would still be a valid request for Government to discuss?


Is it not the case you are one right gullible retard?

he looks to libel you if anything, he would have to speak the words in public to slander you.

Thorin wrote:Care to explain this comment Andy?


Iif I seduced Eds, God forbid,  would be like shoving an anaconda into an anthole.
It wouldn't be exciting enough for rigor mortis to afflict the old python.

http://electricsky.forumotion.co.uk/t4230p50-monkey-boy-and-his-extremists-running-nf-neo-fascists#57165


I tell you what, how about you and that fuckwit brigade over on electric, stop getting a hard on over the fact, you cant have eddie, because none of you have been laid in years. Where your only sexual relief has been humping your pillows.

Get a life and stop acting like two year olds being complete twats or man up and say what you think to Eddie's face.

As I am sure the whole forum will tell you exactly what a bunch of twats you are.


Night everyone

while we are on the topic of seren's stolen site, anyone know why the first thing they did was delete my account on there that had been active for several years, then they claim that those on the right would be too scared to join up.
anyone got a new irony klaxon, mines taken a hammering over the last few weeks.

Angry Andy wrote:It is called course and vulgar humour Tho. Read my profile.
In any case I don't  have sexual fantasies.

I AM one

it seems rather sinister that you have sexual fantasies about people you have met on forums.

Angry Andy wrote:The serious point is that the Sun, for a while printed a grotesquly offensive front page knowing full well it would be condemned.
They went ahead anyway.
It soon got castigated, then pulled.
Burnham complained, a petition was launched , signed and su submitted, and like Liverpool , it will be hard to find a hard copy in Manchester from now on.
Folk have long memories.

is that because the people of manchester wont buy it or cant buy it, there is a rather large difference you know.
any plans on book burnings in the future?

eddie wrote:Well let's not discuss it anymore. We really don't need to.

so sexual fantasies about women here are ok?