|CrimsonHyperSloth - 2011-07-10 |
Oh my heart bleeds for you The News of the World!
Almost kept a straight face.
|riedquat - 2011-07-10 |
Coogan comes over as a bit of a dick here. I suppose being in the presence of that horrible shitbag journalist will do that to a man.
The shitbag may be right in theory. But I think once your paper starts bribing those in power, you can't claim to be keeping the establishment honest.
I drive a car (biodiesel even!) and pay taxes, but I'm not Steve Coogan or Matt Groening. Being either Steve Coogan or Matt Groening would give me plenty of leeway to make decisions based less on money and more on what I thought was right. I see very little basis for whining if you already have millions of dollars. It's hypocritical to me.
|Spastic Avenger - 2011-07-10 |
7:20 - 'you've got to get rid of the emotion so you can think about it rationally'
'-get rid of the emotion so you can think about it rationally'
*checks headline histories for News Of The World*
HARRY RACIST VIDEO SHAME
HUNTLEY IN HIS CELL
|StanleyPain - 2011-07-10 |
Fuck tabloid journalists. I'm tired of their exhausted, ancient, crumbling excuse that just because people read their shit that somehow justifies their existence. Lots of people like child porn...doesn't make it something that everyone needs to get behind because it somehow "serves a public need." Fuck this logic of "oh well we write shit because then once every 500 years we can then use our money made making shit to BRING DOWN SOMEONE EVIL." Absolute fucking rubbish and these fuckers, as with most tabloid papers, have never done SHIT to actually forward any real causes. They might piggyback onto something that real journalists have already started, but give me a break. Fuck these people.
"Child porn" is the "Hitler" of free speech debates. Child pornogrophy is illegal in free society.
People being awful is part and parcel of free speech. The argument isn't that they're justified because people buy it, the argument is that they're going to continue to do it because people buy it. It's not all George Orwells and Martin Luther King jrs that come in when you throw the doors of free speech open; the rats come in as well. If you want the door open for the people you like, you're going to have to deal with the peole you don't like.
Furthermore, I find it ironic that, on a website dedicated to laughing at people for making public embarassments of themselves, there's all this sanctimonious finger-wagging at people who report on other people making public embarassments of themselves.
usually the things we laugh at are uploaded by the people we're laughing at, and they did it voluntarily, and we didn't infiltrate their personal property to make it visible
Yeah, Chris-Chan is clearly not being exploited and has only himself to blame.
look at us here rakin' in that sweet Chris-Chan moola
Right. I didn't say anything about profiting, so I take it you've changed your argument from "people who upload videos of themselves are open season" to "if nobody is profiting from it, ridiculing people is okay"?
|memedumpster - 2011-07-10 |
Weasel McTabloid is a raging douchebag right out of the gate.
|chairsforcheap - 2011-07-10 |
Clarky Cat! You know, the grass stuff you chew!
|THA SUGAH RAIN - 2011-07-10 |
LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE!
|cognitivedissonance - 2011-07-10 |
He is defending the maintenance of an AXE MURDERER ON THE NEWSCORP PAYROLL.
And that axe murderer isn't Glenn Beck, who raped and murdered a girl in 1990, no less.
|Jet Bin Fever - 2011-07-18 |
I support Coogan on this. I think personal lives and privacy for all people, no matter their level of fame, should be protected and respected. While I agree with baleen above that people shouldn't buy this garbage, they're effectively manipulating the public with sensational headlines making it a lot less possible to resist purchase. People are easily manipulated, and if you read an eyegrabbing headline about some salacious royal affair, you probably will find it that much harder to resist purchasing the scandal rag.
You know, free speech is one thing, but this isn't an argument about free speech. This is an argument about the theft of personal information through wire-tapping and hacking... if these people made that information available (like the Weinergate photos) it is a whole different story... but what they do in private shouldn't be up for sale.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|