Friday, July 08, 2005

Words?



This mask picture freaks me out.



The Mail predicts the number of dead is 52, official figures are 38.
Just 1 is too many.

The Star never let cold, hard, facts get in the way of a good BASTARD front page.



1. The Met are keen to point out that there is no evidence as yet that this was the work of suicide bombers. They are also quick to point out that they have no official work as to who carried out these sickening acts of violence.

2. 60 Dead? It was 38 last time I checked. Do they WANT it to go up? I dont.

3. Ken Bigley's killers. What the fuck is this supposed to mean?

The Star has gone beyond reproach with this page.

Comments are open.

13 Comments:

Anonymous nate said...

Answers:

1. It's who everyone wants to think it is. And probably actually is, due to the nature of the attacks.

2. The Star sensationalising again.

3. Trying to incite hatred, as per usual. Linking together two incidents as if to say "Hey, it was them, again!"

7/08/2005 07:35:00 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"My thoughts are with the people affected by today's events - I very much doubt the DM's and DE's are. They're thinking about what picture they will print tomorrow and what word will spread panic around the rest of the UK. "

No your thoughts are on how you can all voice your own opinions which from all that I have read on this web site are as small minded as any of the banners and headlines displayed on the newspapers that you dislike.

People have died as a result of the incidents that happenned yesterday. Rememeber that.

Frankly I could chose to voice my own opions of this site to the owners of the copyrighted material that you use on this site and then see how their lawyers react to this sort of tasteless crap.

7/08/2005 09:09:00 am  
Blogger Gary said...

And the Star's front page isn't at all tasteless?

7/08/2005 09:33:00 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It would perhaps have made sense to comment on the Mail's sensitive front page, and the Express's thankfully small sensationalist headline. The Star headline is unnecessary here and it's inclusion makes me think you're completely addicted to muckraking.

7/08/2005 10:13:00 am  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sensitive front page today, sensationalism in days to follow

7/08/2005 11:14:00 am  
Blogger BigDaddyMerk said...

"No your thoughts are on how you can all voice your own opinions which from all that I have read on this web site are as small minded as any of the banners and headlines displayed on the newspapers that you dislike."

Do shut up. You have no idea.

"Frankly I could chose to voice my own of opinions this site to the owners of the copyrighted material that you use on this site and then see how their lawyers react to this sort of tasteless crap."

yadda yadda yadda, go ahead or fuck off. I'm not in the mood to be lectured to by someone who posts anonymously.

"The Star headline is unnecessary here and it's inclusion makes me think you're completely addicted to muckraking."

I thought I would include it because I think it's disgusting and will only stir up more trouble. It's an insult to everyone caught up in yesterdays tragedy.

7/08/2005 12:02:00 pm  
Anonymous Rich. said...

I'm with you Merk. I think the Stars front page is both inaccurate and offensive. As such it deserves to be held up to ridicule. I think most of us who visit your site are mature enough to seperate the reporting of the press fom the actual incident and understand that our comments in no way belittle the suffering of those involved or belittle our sympathy for them.

7/08/2005 12:25:00 pm  
Anonymous Dobbin said...

Pretty sure that newspaper front pages are in the public Domain. Will check but I think your ok to reproduce them providing you don't alter them or claim them as your own work.

Not going to judge the papers today, They are probably in shock as much as the rest of us and I have to say that my initial reaction was Bastards. And who knows, tommorrow they may provide accurate, factual reporting and reasoned debate. Although I suspect not.

7/08/2005 12:34:00 pm  
Anonymous Paul said...

I think that this whole mess is an opportunity for the print media just for once, to print the facts without endless speculation and commentery as to who dunnit.We are being overwhelmed with information and "breaking news" from the likes of Sky interviewing experts in the studio from locations like Kings Cross.The print media have an opportunity to redeem themselves with some serious in-depth reporting. I doubt they will rise to the challange. The DM have mad Max Hastings taking his usual swipe at Blair & Bush.Give it a few days and there will be a lot of hand wringing and stories about the failures of the Govt, Police and all.

7/08/2005 03:59:00 pm  
Anonymous Sarah said...

I would have gone with 'death-worshipping scumbags'. Gah.

The newspapers have their hacky reactions - they are no more or less human than yesterday. DM is comparable to the Indie or Guardian in style today, surprisingly. The mask picture is being used sensationally. The putrid thing about the Star's lead is not 'bastards', but the details and the scary notice. Every fucking knew not to go near it by today.

Keep it up Merk - no-one should change their routine for this. As the Guardian pointed out, before the ministerial statement, the MPs still made piss poor jokes...

7/08/2005 07:05:00 pm  
Blogger BigDaddyMerk said...

thanks for your support Sarah. In all the emotion I did start to question it all.

7/09/2005 02:23:00 am  
Blogger littlemissprincess_86 said...

And the Star's subs can't spell al-Qaeda

7/10/2005 04:10:00 pm  
Anonymous nate said...

Johnb; Because the word Al-Qaeda comes from an arabic word, it can potentially have lots of different spellings in English, none is more right than another simply because it was they don't use the 26 letter A-Z alphabet.

Al-Qaeda, Al-Qaida, Al-Quida etc.

7/11/2005 11:51:00 am  

Post a Comment

<< Home