https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-m ... r-51420844

Wonder how this will pan out for the monarch of the gutter press.

A disgrace and one which I suspect United will make the rag pay for regarding access to matches, players and staff.
If there's any truth in the story, there must surely be grounds for a conspiracy charge for the hack involved ?

That's what I was thinking. If this was you or I, the police would be looking into this to see if there are grounds to bring an accessory charge. Us mear plebs live under different rules, or so it seems.

Absolutely, the normal person around town would be rightly investigated for being involved in something like this.
They could/would/should be charged with complicity at the very least.
Highlights the length these bum-wipes will go to for a story.
They'd no idea what would or could have happened.

Buxton makes reference to the gutter press but they are way lower than any gutter. Why on earth do people subscribe to this appalling publication?

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 08, 2020 12:56 pm

Buxton makes reference to the gutter press but they are way lower than any gutter. Why on earth do people subscribe to this appalling publication?

Freedom of choice, I don't like the mirror (they would have done exactly the same had they been given the chance) but I would never object to people buying it as its their choice

Full facts of this aren't known.

If the journalist knew it would turn nasty then they're in the wrong. If the journalist was under the impression it was to be a peaceful protest they've done nothing wrong.

Truth is probably -though we don't know- somewhere in between.

It's not even as bad as what the BBC (that bastion of virtue) did to Cliff Richard.

The Sun has been doing stuff like this for years.

Dropping off bottles of Vodka on Gazza's doorstep.
Paying English football hooligans to start fights abroad etc..

Anything for a story.

Grumps wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 08, 2020 1:14 pm

Freedom of choice, I don't like the mirror (they would have done exactly the same had they been given the chance) but I would never object to people buying it as its their choice

It is freedom of choice but I only have to think back to 1989. I wouldn’t wrap my chips in it.

It's not even as bad as what the BBC (that bastion of virtue) did to Cliff Richard.


Yes, let's never ever criticise The Sun because they're not as bad as (pulls strawman out) etc.

I'll raise you Milly Dowler's phone hacking, rowls...

evensteadiereddie wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 08, 2020 2:03 pm

I'll raise you Milly Dowler's phone hacking, rowls...

Wasn't that The News of the World and The Sunday People?

If The Sun encouraged this or were silent about crimes they knew were to be committed, they should be severely punished.

Otherwise, it gets into a greyer area. There's a good argument Woodward isn't a figure whose home address could ever be legitimately targeted but next time Extinction Rebellion hold a protest, are the press to refuse to cover it in case it gets nasty?

Billy Balfour wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 08, 2020 1:32 pm

It's not even as bad as what the BBC (that bastion of virtue) did to Cliff Richard.


Yes, let's never ever criticise The Sun because they're not as bad as (pulls strawman out) etc.

You don't understand the point being made.

Have a look again and decide what you think might have been might point:

A) The Sun is bad
B) The BBC is bad
C) Wait for all the evidence before rushing to make a judgment. Just because it's an establishment you don't like doesn't necessarily make the accusations true.

evensteadiereddie wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 08, 2020 2:03 pm

I'll raise you Milly Dowler's phone hacking, rowls...

You've misunderstood eddie.

My point isn't "the Sun is good" or "the Sun is bad".

My point is available (for those who look hard enough) in my post above.

And in case you're wondering, the comparison with the BBC was making this point:

Just because a media organisation has -generally- very high standards does not mean that these standards sometimes slip and it does very improper and distasteful things.

Obviously, if this holds true, then reverse applies just as much: Just because a media organisation is a disreputable tabloid does not mean that everything it does is unworthy and that every allegation made against it should be taken without discrimination or thought.

thatdberight wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 08, 2020 2:08 pm

Wasn't that The News of the World and The Sunday People?

And it might also be worth mentioning here (as I'm making a point about not jumping immediately onto bandwagons) that the allegations against the News of the World that led to that paper being disbanded (namely, the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone) were later proven to be false.

It did plenty of other completely tasteless stuff, some of it downright nasty and dispicable, but no more than the Sunday People (which I believe is still available) and all the other tabloids. Oh, and a few broadsheets too.

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story"

That would appear to hold just as much to your post as it did to the News of the World.

I think the tidal wave of scandal concerning the hacking of the phones of service families, Milly Dowler, Sarah Payne's parent and so on showed the level of News International's standards very clearly. Even Murdoch recognised the game was up.
The Cliff Richard fiasco was, arguably, far less hurtful and an isolated,if idiotic incident.


Anyway, back to the OP, as I said earlier, if there is any truth in this story, United will kick the Sun's arse.

At least the scousers and mancs can agree now on something, the Sun is disgusting.

For years the Sun was the number one paper for sports coverage.... THEN I could understand people turning the other cheek to the rest of the Take a Break level news coverage. However with so much available in seconds I really struggle as to why The Sun could possibly be anyone’s choice of ‘paper’.

For me people would be far better served saving their cash to buy a Broadsheet that at least offers some incite to the reality. But each to their own, but if I hear anything interesting in passing I check it out on more reliable and less idiotic sources.

Rowls wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 08, 2020 2:24 pm

And it might also be worth mentioning here (as I'm making a point about not jumping immediately onto bandwagons) that the allegations against the News of the World that led to that paper being disbanded (namely, the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone) were later proven to be false.

It did plenty of other completely tasteless stuff, some of it downright nasty and dispicable, but no more than the Sunday People (which I believe is still available) and all the other tabloids. Oh, and a few broadsheets too.

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story"

Are you sure that the allegations were false?

In his report Sir Brian Leveson wrote: "The fact remains that the News of the World had hacked the phone of a dead schoolgirl."

At least one of the allegations was false. Perhaps the allegation that they hacked and deleted messages?

That wasn't the main point I was making though.

You can spend your time googling stuff, my friend.

I, on the other hand, have more important stuff to do today.

Come off it, rowls. They were found as guilty as hell and Murdoch acted the only way he could.
The OP talks about the Sun and what one of its hacks has been up to. If it's true then I fear attempting to defend his/her action by citing earlier ahem, cases will prove to be futile.

If yoonitid do curtail The Sun's access to the club, players, news etc and it's therefore free
of any news about yoonitid hitting you in the face everyday, then I would say that is
a jolly good reason to consider reading it.

Every cloud and all that.

evensteadiereddie wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 08, 2020 4:03 pm

Come off it, rowls. They were found as guilty as hell and Murdoch acted the only way he could.
The OP talks about the Sun and what one of its hacks has been up to. If it's true then I fear attempting to defend his/her action by citing earlier ahem, cases will prove to be futile.

Again eddie, you're arguing against something I haven't said.

This isn't about that.

It's about the current complaint of Man Utd to the press regulator and the ensuing reaction on here.

Please don’t buy the Sun!

Spike wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 08, 2020 4:49 pm

Please don’t buy the Sun!

Don't worry, I wouldn't give them the steam off my poo !!!!!

Those defending the Sun are probably the same ones who believed the Sun's headlines on Brexit!

perhaps they'll just rebrand.

that way the bottom-feeders who consume that crap will not have to bother with issues such a morality or guilt.

Rowls wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 08, 2020 4:17 pm

Again eddie, you're arguing against something I haven't said.

This isn't about that. It's about the current complaint of Man Utd to the press regulator and the ensuing reaction on here.

I thought you said you had more important stuff to do? Or did you get that as wrong well?