The Moderators head has imploded.

The guy in that photograph is a model they regulary use.

Here he is with glasses
http://photoshopdisasters.blogspot.com/ ... major.html

They tend to use him a bit in articles. I see alot of models used for "real" stories being reused.

I think that's Max Hastings in the pic. He's not a model but a shit columnist on The Mailignant and an ex-Telegraph editor.

He will happily knock out a 1000 word pile of crap on such weighty matters as 'Why I Hate Bank Holidays', 'Why I Love The Snow' then the following year, 'Why I love Bank Holidays'... you get the picture.

Haha. Explains alot then. I do think they probably get their journalist to pose for them quite a bit.

Notice two things...

A. They haven't done it when Richard Littlejohn has a column
B. The use of the word "inconvenience", who could find it inconvenient?

I really hope something big happens half-way through, like the Queen dies or summat. That'll show 'em.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/artic ... broad.html

May just be me, but the first picture comes up as a BADLY pixellated image icon

Not just you

New Zealand looks like its suffering from some serious forest fires

Maybe the problem with the pic is that the story is there by mistake and the link has been lost.

Check out the date of the article.


This is the original story run in September 2008.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... itain.html

Still bollocks though.

Probably the only advantage of astigmatism is that, if you take your glasses off, you can see what pixellated images are meant to be relatively clearly. In this case it seems to be a fairly bog standard moody sunset shot, though I still couldn't tell you what the blackish/brownish blob on the left is - but it doesn't correlate with any of the pictures on the original September 2008 article.

I think it's the standard Windows Vista jpg icon.

Maybe their page make-up system has a placer image to indicate where a photo is going to drop. I would guess they had a license to use the beach photo that was time limited.

The bigger questions are why the old story appeared in the first place (could it be they're now recycling old crap?) and why the page wasn't pulled... don't they even look at their own web site?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/ar ... ening.html

The picture at the top of the story is captioned: "Not what the fans want: Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) kisses Cho Chung (Katie Leung) in Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince" only that's a photo of Harry about to kiss Ginny Weasley (Bonnie Wright).

How can anyone read a paper that is written by people who don't who Harry Potter kisses in each of the books, and therefore each of the films? (This is essential life knowledge, after all.) Especially when the characters/actors are of different races.

The story also then quotes what people have written on the Internet, presumerably because the hack who wrote this piece, one Rosalind Ryan, couldn't find a better story to write, so just reported what she'd read on the Internet today.
Apparently she hasn't even been reading recent postings, as one quote begins "[The film producers] have almost a year before this film is released..." yet the Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince film is to be released this July, as the article itself mentions a couple of lines below it.

Um...no it isn't, Ginny Weasley is not of Chinese stock as the girl in that photo clearly is

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/ar ... ingle.html



Why bother with the asterisks?



"Celebrity stalking"?




and all fed by morons like you making a comment on the site.

aside from the obvious cries of "who the fuck cares anyway?" its also worth pointing out that the opinions of people who attend test screenings represent only the opinions of people who attend test screenings, and thus the same group who thought blade runner would be better if the protagonists rode into the sunset together to a voiceover that explained the movie to you, and that brazil was better with a happy ending and a rock soundtrack.

and anyway, that aside the entire point of a test screening is you work out what's wrong with a movie and fix it before it goes on general release.

...bloody hell, i don't even like harry potter, it's just such a crap artical.