Peel Headstone

[Steve]

My own response to this worthless piece of shit can be found here
<http://festivefifty.blogspot.com/2008/02/stupid-useless-bastard.html> 
.


--- In peel@yahoogroups.com, "thebarguest" <thebarguest@...> wrote:
>
> sorry ken, i wasn't getting at you....
>
> uk media/society has changed greatly since the 80's - thatcherism
> is integrated into the political status quo. all popular media has
> decided on a mandate of 'sell copy or else' (thatcherism).
>
> we have had thatcherite governance since 1979 - that's democracy.
> that's also the major flaw of "democracy" - you only need 51 percent
> of the people to decide the government.
>
> like you i'll view any intelligent media regardless of historic
> allegiance.......
>
> ps only a very severe recession would get rid of thatcherism.....
> but who could step in .....
>
>
>
> --- In peel@yahoogroups.com, "ken garner" ken_garner@ wrote:
> >
> > er, not entirely sure what you're implying there, mate, but,
> boring /
> > pompous polytechnic media studies lecturer point coming up, do not
> > make the mistake of conflating the party political position of any
> > newspaper with that of its readers, who may buy it or read it for a
> > whole variety of reasons. Nearly as many Sun readers through the
> 80s
> > and early 90s when asked described themselves as Labour voters as
> > Tory voters, for example. There is a significant minority of
> > Telegraph readers from the liberal left, while the political
> > positions of both the Financial Times and (most recently) The
> Times,
> > have often been to the left of their traditional readership. At any
> > level, the Telegraph remains a provocative, generally well-written
> > and entertaining newspaper, though not the force it once was. I
> like
> > to read things I disagree with, keeps me on my toes. I may buy The
> > Guardian sometimes for the soduko and the sports section (the
> > Scottish papers, including those of my first choice daily read, the
> > Glasgow Herald, are all full of Scottish football), but its Op-ed
> > pages - with honorable exceptions like Timothy Garton Ash and Ian
> > Jack - are totally up themselves.
> >
> > sorry will shut up and go to bed now
> >
> > k
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In peel@yahoogroups.com, "thebarguest" <thebarguest@> wrote:
> > >
> > > reminds me of the early 80's when mark e smith said in interviews
> > > that he supported thatcher - the nme were flumoxed, they loved his
> > > music but ........
> > >
> > > --- In peel@yahoogroups.com, "ken garner" <ken_garner@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > sorry, there was a leader too, true, but both pieces have
> > produced
> > > > some comments and letters already on the Telegraph site, some
> > > nutty,
> > > > most supportive of John and critical of the paper. It does seem
> a
> > > > particularly easy and mean target to go for on Valentine's
> Day...
> > > >
> > > > PS. I think I should at this point point out that the single
> > > greatest
> > > > number of factual errors I spotted about Peel around his death
> > > > appeared in the Telegraph. Their page 3 report on the day after
> > the
> > > > funeral was particularly remiss. I have always enjoyed shocking
> > my
> > > > journalism students by saying that the Telegraph is one of the
> > two
> > > > national papers I enjoy most, and yet which also drives me
> crazy,
> > > but
> > > > I must say my feelings about the Telegraph have changed
> > > dramatically
> > > > since those days in late 2004. You could always trust its
> foreign
> > > and
> > > > business coverage, for example, whatever you thought about
> other
> > > > stuff. Now, I'm not so sure...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In peel@yahoogroups.com, "ken garner" <ken_garner@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the offending column, by Michael Henderson, in
> > Saturday's
> > > > > edition:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?
> > > > > xml=/opinion/2008/02/16/do1603.xml
> > > > >
> > > > > I was tempted to write but what's the point
> > > > >
> > > > > k
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In peel@yahoogroups.com, "grang354" <colin_ellis@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And here's a piece from the Torygraph, which provoked a
> > > response
> > > > > from a
> > > > > > fogeyish leader writer:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?
> > > > > > xml=/news/2008/02/13/npeel113.xml
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In peel@yahoogroups.com, "Rob Brewer" <lists@> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Feb 12, 2008 3:18 PM, Julian Porter <spiggytopes55@>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7240623.stm
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There's a picture here:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/norfolkodyssey/2223211584/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Of *course* someone's left a demo for him.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Rob Brewer rob@ http://www.rbrwr.org
> > > > > > > "The [central limit theorem] would have been personified
> by
> > > the
> > > > > Greeks
> > > > > > > and deified, if they had known of it." -- Francis Galton
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>