Australia correctly clamps down on rampant press

[mrswdk]

The Australian government has reminded the nation's press that no-one is above the law and that no-one - including journalists - is free to just do whatever they want, whenever they want regardless of the consequences. The Australian press has reacted in the typical petulant manner of a naughty child that has gotten used to doing whatever it wants and has finally had its pocket money stopped after its latest episode of stuffing cakes into the VCR player.

Australia's biggest newspaper rivals have made a rare showing of unity by publishing redacted front pages in a protest against press restrictions.

The News Corp Australia and Nine mastheads on Monday showed blacked-out text beside red stamps marked "secret".

Prime Minister Scott Morrison said press freedom was important to Australia's democracy, but added the "rule of law" needed to be upheld.

"That includes me, or any journalist, or anyone else,'' he said on Sunday.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-50119559

[NomadPatriot]

wait what..
they want to censor the truth.. ?

shocking...

[mrswdk]

The shocking harms a rampant Anglo press wreak on all around them have been laid bare after senior UK royal family members have laid bare the extent to which their lives have been 'destroyed' by the relentless hounding and lies of the UK tabloid press:

Meghan (Marple), 38, said adjusting to royal life had been "hard".

"When I first met my now-husband my friends were really happy because I was so happy," she said.

"But my British friends said to me, 'I'm sure he's great but you shouldn't do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life'.

"Part of this job is putting on a brave face but, for me and my wife, there is a lot of stuff that hurts, especially when the majority of it is untrue."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50128683

[mrswdk]

A reminder that an unrestrained press = illegal press theft and spying, as demonstrated by the UK's Prince Harry currently suing several UK news outlets for exactly that:

The Duke of Sussex has begun legal action against the owners of the Sun, the defunct News of the World, and the Daily Mirror, in relation to alleged phone-hacking.

Documents have been filed on behalf of Prince Harry over the alleged illegal interception of voicemail messages, Buckingham Palace has confirmed.

His wife Meghan this week began legal action against the Mail on Sunday.

It is accused of unlawfully publishing a private letter to her father.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49940905

[NomadPatriot]

The shocking harms a rampant Anglo press wreak on all around them have been laid bare after senior UK royal family members have laid bare the extent to which their lives have been 'destroyed' by the relentless hounding and lies of the UK tabloid press:

Meghan (Marple), 38, said adjusting to royal life had been "hard".

"When I first met my now-husband my friends were really happy because I was so happy," she said.

"But my British friends said to me, 'I'm sure he's great but you shouldn't do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life'.

"Part of this job is putting on a brave face but, for me and my wife, there is a lot of stuff that hurts, especially when the majority of it is untrue."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50128683

Ma'aM's thought process: --> it's important because it's Anglo.. <--

[jimboston]

The shocking harms a rampant Anglo press wreak on all around them have been laid bare after senior UK royal family members have laid bare the extent to which their lives have been 'destroyed' by the relentless hounding and lies of the UK tabloid press:

Meghan (Marple), 38, said adjusting to royal life had been "hard".

"When I first met my now-husband my friends were really happy because I was so happy," she said.

"But my British friends said to me, 'I'm sure he's great but you shouldn't do it because the British tabloids will destroy your life'.

"Part of this job is putting on a brave face but, for me and my wife, there is a lot of stuff that hurts, especially when the majority of it is untrue."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50128683

Do you really believe this bullshit?

You’re comparing legitimate newspapers to Tabloids.
You’re comparing articles about Government abuse of power to articles about what the “princess” is wearing or who she’s seen with?

These are not equivalent.

One is an important discussion about the public’s right to know what it’s government is doing.

The other is entertainment, and a ridiculous debate about the “right to privacy” of people (“royals”) who by the very nature of their existence are NOT private citizens.

——-

Obviously the public needs some government oversight in order to be informed voters.

The idea ‘royals’ even exist in 2019 seems silly to me. Personally I don’t care what they do or don’t do... I think the Tabloids are a bit intrusive, but at the same time I feel if the ‘royals’ don’t want the attention they should dissolve the Monarchy and refuse all titles, privileges, and cash.

Please don’t try to confuse two very unrelated subjects again. It’s beneath you mrswdk. You’re better than that. Those tactics are for others with less brain power.

[NomadPatriot]

It’s beneath you mrswdk. You’re better than that.

[mrswdk]

The other is entertainment, and a ridiculous debate about the “right to privacy” of people (“royals”) who by the very nature of their existence are NOT private citizens.

So are we to take it you are fine with the news media snooping on people's voicemails and publishing their private correspondence with family members if those people happen to be famous?

Obviously the public needs some government oversight in order to be informed voters.

Stealing and publishing classified intelligence documents = oversight?

jim appears to be on the 'the press should be able to do anything they want' side of the argument, then.

[jimboston]

The other is entertainment, and a ridiculous debate about the “right to privacy” of people (“royals”) who by the very nature of their existence are NOT private citizens.

So are we to take it you are fine with the news media snooping on people's voicemails and publishing their private correspondence with family members if those people happen to be famous?

Obviously the public needs some government oversight in order to be informed voters.

Stealing and publishing classified intelligence documents = oversight?

jim appears to be on the 'the press should be able to do anything they want' side of the argument, then.

You appear to be on the “take things to extremes” side of the question.

Did you actually red what I wrote?

OK... so don’t take my comments to extremes when you know they aren’t intended as such...

Also, do address the point, which is Tabloid reporting and legitimate Newspapers are two different beasts.

The news does play a vital role in democracies and the many Gov’ts (Including the US and Australia it seems) are happy to suppress them without thinking about the long term consequences.

The British Royal Family (BRF) is a special case of ‘famous’... they aren’t actors or athletes or musicians. They are granted some special status because their ancestors were stronger than your ancestors and they were better at oppressing people and taking their stuff. Facts! Read a bit about the history of kingship in the UK... especially the early rulers. I specifically don’t have any sympathy for the BRF. That said, I do believe (and stated as much earlier) that the Tabloids go to far. So no... I don’t think it’s OK for Tabloids to snoop into people’s private conversations. I do think though the easiest solution to this problem for the BRF is to simply dissolve the Royal Family and recognize the fact that they really aren’t special.

Snooping to uncover government misdeeds or mismanagement = Good

Snooping to uncover what Princess So and So thinks about Princess Such and Such = Not Good
(addendum... but I don’t really care because it doesn’t affect me)

Again, mrswdk... I believe you are better than your remarks make you appear, and I don’t think you really believe half of what you’re implying you do believe in your OP.

[mrswdk]

Did you actually red what I wrote?

OK... so don’t take my comments to extremes when you know they aren’t intended as such...

Oh, it's the old 'I said it but I didn't actually mean it so stop taking me literally' merry-go-round. We've been here before haven't we.

That said, I do believe (and stated as much earlier) that the Tabloids go to far.

So we can the bizarre ranting about what Henry VIII did to his wives in the 1500s and stick to the present day? Sounds good to me.

I do think though the easiest solution to this problem for the BRF is to simply dissolve the Royal Family and recognize the fact that they really aren’t special.

Did somebody say ViCtIm BlAmInG???

Snooping to uncover government misdeeds or mismanagement = Good

What about accessing classified government documents because you think they might possibly contain evidence someone did something wrong but you won't know until you've taken them and had a read?

[jimboston]

Did you actually red what I wrote?

OK... so don’t take my comments to extremes when you know they aren’t intended as such...

Oh, it's the old 'I said it but I didn't actually mean it so stop taking me literally' merry-go-round. We've been here before haven't we.

Not what happened and you know it.

It’s the old ‘take what I said and make it extreme’ game.

That said, I do believe (and stated as much earlier) that the Tabloids go to far.

So we can the bizarre ranting about what Henry VIII did to his wives in the 1500s and stick to the present day? Sounds good to me.

Unrelated... I’m talking about the whole reason for the existence of the Monarchy in the UK.

I do think though the easiest solution to this problem for the BRF is to simply dissolve the Royal Family and recognize the fact that they really aren’t special.

Did somebody say ViCtIm BlAmInG???

Not blaming... just saying. Why is there a Monarchy? It seems they want the good side of fame but not the negative side.
You can’t eat your cake and have it too... even if you’re a prince.

Snooping to uncover government misdeeds or mismanagement = Good

What about accessing classified government documents because you think they might possibly contain evidence someone did something wrong but you won't know until you've taken them and had a read?

Sure... and if you find the documents don’t pertain to the corruption/story your investigating, then it’s your journalistic duty to destroy the documents and forget what you saw.

[mrswdk]

I do think though the easiest solution to this problem for the BRF is to simply dissolve the Royal Family and recognize the fact that they really aren’t special.

Did somebody say ViCtIm BlAmInG???

Not blaming... just saying. Why is there a Monarchy? It seems they want the good side of fame but not the negative side.

jb logic: if you are famous and don't like having your phone hacked or private communications published for the whole world to read, the solution is to stop being famous. There is no point in trying to change the behaviour of the press because everyone knows they behave like that and we are powerless to change their nature.

Also jb logic (probably): if you are a woman and don't like being groped on public transport, stop wearing such revealing clothing!

Anyway if it would help stop you fixating on the monarchy and going off on all these sideshow rambles about what William the Conqueror did at the Battle of Hastings, the monarchy were only one example of the long list of people who have been illegally intruded upon and smeared by a press that thinks it can get away with behaving like that: Hugh Grant, Steve Coogan, George Clooney, etc.

Snooping to uncover government misdeeds or mismanagement = Good

What about accessing classified government documents because you think they might possibly contain evidence someone did something wrong but you won't know until you've taken them and had a read?

Sure... and if you find the documents don’t pertain to the corruption/story your investigating, then it’s your journalistic duty to destroy the documents and forget what you saw.

that's a good one

jim: 'an unregulated press can be trusted to just snoop around whatever documents, file servers and meeting rooms they feel like. If they don't see evidence of anything illegal, we can trust them and their rigorous self-governing code of ethics - they will simply destroy all information they have gathered and never speak of it again!'

[NomadPatriot]

by mrswdk on Thu Oct 03, 2019 2:52 am

jim hit the nail on the head... Trust jimboston!

[jimboston]

mrswdk...

your continuing to extermize (is that a word) my posts... and you continue to intentionally misrepresent my points.

Therefore I am done discussing this subject with you further.

I made a few attempts to have a reasonable discussion... but a discussion takes two.

laters

[mrswdk]

At least when jim was rambling on about how all people in Asia are on ethnicity he continued to assert that even when challenged, rather than the distinctly-less-impressive smoke and mirrors game he's playing in this thread.

[Dukasaur]

At least when jim was rambling on about how all people in Asia are on ethnicity he continued to assert that even when challenged, rather than the distinctly-less-impressive smoke and mirrors game he's playing in this thread.

You can try, but you won't dethrone the King.

[mrswdk]

At least when jim was rambling on about how all people in Asia are on ethnicity he continued to assert that even when challenged, rather than the distinctly-less-impressive smoke and mirrors game he's playing in this thread.

You can try, but you won't dethrone the King.

How dare you make those sorts of insinuations.

[mrswdk]

It's not my fault if jim keeps playing a game called 'make stupid statements and then when challenged tell people you obviously didn't mean what you said and they're in the wrong for taking you literally'.

[jimboston]

It's not my fault if jim keeps playing a game called 'make stupid statements and then when challenged tell people you obviously didn't mean what you said and they're in the wrong for taking you literally'.

[mrswdk]

The lying rampant press are at it again. This time publishing smear stories about a senior politician that they knew to be false prior to publishing:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50265137