Page 8 of 11

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 9:43 am
by Fflaps
How odd, as I passed my local newsagent this morning at least 2 other papers were claiming it was all down to them.

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:10 am
by Tom_UK
Some highlights so far:
Well done DM! Thanks entirely to your esteemed organ our world is a better place by far. Global warming, famine, political social and economic injustice will be your next major victory, I confidently expect

- ribbit, hong kong , 9/2/2011 9:40
So now my flat's car park can be used illegally by commuters who are too tight to pay for a public car park with impunity? Well done DM!! Anyway the AA and RAC campaigned on this issue, so it's a bit rich for you to claim victory here.

- Sidewalker, London, 9/2/2011 9:48
Heaven help us if newspaper workers are able to change the laws of elected governments. Still I suppose civilization as we know it would crumble without the likes of The Mail providing us with quality journalism.

- Ivan Robins, Auckland New Zealand, 9/2/2011 9:32
And what about the 'Freedom' to own and manage your own property as you think fit. Where do you live Mr Slack and Mr Massey - and the bosses/owners of the DM and Ms Featherstone for that matter. Think I might just come and park in your driveways and see how you like it.

- Richard, Perth WA, 9/2/2011 9:09
Well done you! WE, had nothing to do with it. Of course.

- Robin, Of Croxley, 9/2/2011 8:33
I must be missing something. How can anybody feel they have a right to park on someone else's private property without permission?

- Alice Trout, Richmond, UK, 9/2/2011 8:23
Congratulations to the Daily Mail. Congratulations to the Daily Mail.Congratulations to the Daily Mail.Congratulations to the Daily Mail.Congratulations to the Daily Mail.Congratulations to the Daily Mail. I hope these cowboys all go broke. Clamping should be banned totally.

- James , Ascot Surrey, 9/2/2011 5:43
Haha. I bet James's copy of the DM is looking rather limp and soggy today!

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:20 am
by Fozzy
Unmoderated comments on there - wonderful opportunity to apply the boot. My contribution:
Nothing to do with the Mail. As you grudgingly acknowledge a long way down the report, these are mainly due to the work of civil liberties groups. You know, those left wing Guardian reader types.

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:30 am
by Tubby Isaacs
I can't in the least understand the Mail's stance on this. Seeing they decide policy by anecdote, wouldn't a "Mr X always has yobs parking on his front yard" work better?

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:32 am
by Daley Mayle

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:11 pm
by ezinra
Nice to see the Mail putting its expert correspondents on such an important story. C Slack's most recent articles include one about garden sheds, another about an award-winning t-shirt, and 'Not a scaredy cat: Fearless feline fights off two alligators'. He'll go far.

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 12:31 pm
by Danson's Forehead
James Slack has surpassed himself by managing to blame the riots on the furore over the phone hacking scandal. Yes, you heard me right. Be prepared for a quite gob-smacking degree of cynicism.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... alism.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, I would highlight the list of people the Mail has asked to give their verdict on who is behind the riots. Youth workers, able to judge the mood on the ground? The rioters themselves? Local police or political officials? No, the following politically wide-ranging characters:
Norman Tebbit, Katherine Birbalsingh, Douglas Murray and Lord Digby Jones. And, for reasons I don't understand, Desmond Morris, who I have to admit I thought was dead.

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 12:33 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Desmond Morris thinks he's dead.

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 1:16 pm
by davidjay
And Katharine Birbalsingh makes a good point lost in a cloud of over-simplification and downright bigotry.

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 1:20 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Birbalsingh's point is nonsense and usually trotted out by the right on these occasions. In one aspect (look, Katherine, there may be more than one cause for an event - History National Curriculum KS3 Level 4) the riots are probably about inequality and lack of dignity, comparative wealth, not absolute levels of consumer spending.

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 3:02 pm
by crabcakes_windermere
Danson's Forehead wrote:James Slack has surpassed himself by managing to blame the riots on the furore over the phone hacking scandal. Yes, you heard me right. Be prepared for a quite gob-smacking degree of cynicism.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... alism.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Got this in in reply:
What an absurd article. It more or less says it is actually fine to help yourself - you just have to be in a position of privilege for it to be socially acceptable. And "lust for media blood"? Well why would that be happening - oh yes, because unscrupled newspaper journalists hacked the voicemail of murdered young girls looking for gossip. Had you forgotten that particular snippet in your desperation to frame this whole thing as a left-wing conspiracy, Mr Slack? Because I'm pretty certain that that's the reason people were rightly outraged and are rightly demanding press regulation with real teeth to stop it happening again. Perhaps the utter lack of morality shown by parts of the press, coupled with "stories" full of racial scaremongering and demonisation of the young and the poor that have oozed from the tabloids for the best part of 20 years, should shoulder some of the blame for what's happened in our cities too, eh?
Last line was edited though. At the end it originally said "Or is that a bit too close to the truth for you?".

Also: sterling reply from Dave from Edinburgh as well (is he on Mailwatch? If not, he bloody well should be).

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 3:23 pm
by Timbo
I agree. Definitely nail on head:
How do you expect the unemployed underclass to have moral substance when you want to excuse it in the chief of police, the media, the politicians.... If you really want to see what's gone wrong in this country, it's written in every word of your article - don't worry about the copper accepting bribes, don't worry about the media systematically breaking the law, don't worry about politicians using expenses as some kind of limitless petty cash box, don't worry about the bankers using tax payers money to pay themselves billions in bonuses, don't worry about the rich who pay less tax than a cleaning woman - just know your place and do as we say, not as we do! You're the problem, Mr Slack, you're like a Catholic priest lecturing on morality while abusing the choir boys!
- Dave, Edinburgh, Uk, 10/8/2011 11:24

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Wed Aug 10, 2011 8:27 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Dave from Edinburgh is consistently very good.

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 6:58 pm
by Messianic Trees
The end of the great British passport giveaway?

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... z1ZkLqJH1U" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Labour took an astonishingly relaxed attitude to the issuing of citizenship to foreign nationals.

During the party's last full year in power, 203,790 immigrants were given passports – or one every three minutes.
Come now, let's look at it from a Labour point of view. This wasn't ''giving'' away 203,790 British Passports: This was ''gaining'' 203,790 Labour voters.
- cassius, britannia, 3/10/2011 15:09
I could break down and weep, what will become of the England I knew, loved and respected as a child?
- DB1, Nottingham ENGLAND, 3/10/2011 18:54

Re: James Slack - journo c**twad

Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:03 pm
by Tubby Isaacs
Usual failure to break down figures. How many people are we talking about?