The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
After another shocking case of blaming crimes on Video Games in several newspapers, I'd like to raise the issue of controlling newspaper headlines again, but this time from a different angle.
We all know that the Government has been looking in to the control of Newspapers (and pretty much failed to do anything other than letting them run themselves), but what about the more immediate affects and the immediate solution to this problem?
Take this example;
An impressionable adult with no real idea about Video Games picks up their daily newspaper and, as they so often do, reads everything as gospel. They spot a front page or 2 page article that then goes on to fabricate a story about games affecting a recently publicized killing.
Now this person may not be the brightest button, and unfortunately there are a lot of them about, but they can vote and they can make a difference (which is a scary thought in itself).
My point is that the only immediate affect that anyone can provide in righting this obviously fictitious news story is to provide a counter headline saying they were wrong.
Is that what happens? No. If (and then only after a fairly long battle) the newspaper admits they were wrong, there is a small, virtually insignificant retraction somewhere hidden in the back of the paper under the ads.
Surely there should be a law that retractions for stories are forced to take up the same space as the original article?
Thoughts?
We all know that the Government has been looking in to the control of Newspapers (and pretty much failed to do anything other than letting them run themselves), but what about the more immediate affects and the immediate solution to this problem?
Take this example;
An impressionable adult with no real idea about Video Games picks up their daily newspaper and, as they so often do, reads everything as gospel. They spot a front page or 2 page article that then goes on to fabricate a story about games affecting a recently publicized killing.
Now this person may not be the brightest button, and unfortunately there are a lot of them about, but they can vote and they can make a difference (which is a scary thought in itself).
My point is that the only immediate affect that anyone can provide in righting this obviously fictitious news story is to provide a counter headline saying they were wrong.
Is that what happens? No. If (and then only after a fairly long battle) the newspaper admits they were wrong, there is a small, virtually insignificant retraction somewhere hidden in the back of the paper under the ads.
Surely there should be a law that retractions for stories are forced to take up the same space as the original article?
Thoughts?
Ha ha, very good! :)
DL, not much to tell really it was at a time there were a quite a few of these type of bands just starting to appear, I got a tap on my shoulder during the gig and when I turned round a saw a group (of mainly girls) surrounding this bloke and it was him. As his (for the record rather lame excuse for a metal band) were not really that well known (outside of the Kerrang readers circle) at that time I was quite surprised he appeared to be considering himself some kind of rock god!
The bloke has clearly got serious issues but as I have yet to read any reports of this 1 year old baby thing anywhere else it could it be that The Daily Mirror are simply doing their usual job of trying to sensationalise this already rather unpleasant episode by printing stuff like this?
DL, not much to tell really it was at a time there were a quite a few of these type of bands just starting to appear, I got a tap on my shoulder during the gig and when I turned round a saw a group (of mainly girls) surrounding this bloke and it was him. As his (for the record rather lame excuse for a metal band) were not really that well known (outside of the Kerrang readers circle) at that time I was quite surprised he appeared to be considering himself some kind of rock god!
The bloke has clearly got serious issues but as I have yet to read any reports of this 1 year old baby thing anywhere else it could it be that The Daily Mirror are simply doing their usual job of trying to sensationalise this already rather unpleasant episode by printing stuff like this?
Considering that my granddaughter is now just over 8 months old and the poor wretch in question was 12 months...I suggest you contact the senior investigating officer, Detective Inspector Peter Doyle and tell all. Please!
Not sure if the Daily Mirror are trying to make an already rather unpleasant story even worse but not read any reports about his plans to rape a 1 year old baby anywhere else?
Ian Watkins was at a gig about 10 years ago (can't remember which band it was), he was in the crowd near me and a bunch of friends. Seemed a bit of a tool back then (right up himself) but quite shocked he's apparently into sick stuff like this.
Ian Watkins was at a gig about 10 years ago (can't remember which band it was), he was in the crowd near me and a bunch of friends. Seemed a bit of a tool back then (right up himself) but quite shocked he's apparently into sick stuff like this.
SONIC CHRIS MAKES COMMENT
Passers-by are left disappointed.
Passers-by are left disappointed.
pb wrote:
Surely there should be a law that retractions for stories are forced to take up the same space as the original article?
There have been examples in the past where a court has not only forced a retraction but also specified it's size. It doesn't happen often enough for my liking.
Surely there should be a law that retractions for stories are forced to take up the same space as the original article?
There have been examples in the past where a court has not only forced a retraction but also specified it's size. It doesn't happen often enough for my liking.
Hmmm... wrote:
1/ I just thought it was Machie :¬P
2/ Don't read newspapers!
1. We knew it was!
2. I don't buy them, but I see them!
1/ I just thought it was Machie :¬P
2/ Don't read newspapers!
1. We knew it was!
2. I don't buy them, but I see them!
After another shocking case of blaming crimes on Video Games in several newspapers, I'd like to raise the issue of controlling newspaper headlines again, but this time from a different angle.
We all know that the Government has been looking in to the control of Newspapers (and pretty much failed to do anything other than letting them run themselves), but what about the more immediate affects and the immediate solution to this problem?
Take this example;
An impressionable adult with no real idea about Video Games picks up their daily newspaper and, as they so often do, reads everything as gospel. They spot a front page or 2 page article that then goes on to fabricate a story about games affecting a recently publicized killing.
Now this person may not be the brightest button, and unfortunately there are a lot of them about, but they can vote and they can make a difference (which is a scary thought in itself).
My point is that the only immediate affect that anyone can provide in righting this obviously fictitious news story is to provide a counter headline saying they were wrong.
Is that what happens? No. If (and then only after a fairly long battle) the newspaper admits they were wrong, there is a small, virtually insignificant retraction somewhere hidden in the back of the paper under the ads.
Surely there should be a law that retractions for stories are forced to take up the same space as the original article?
Thoughts?
We all know that the Government has been looking in to the control of Newspapers (and pretty much failed to do anything other than letting them run themselves), but what about the more immediate affects and the immediate solution to this problem?
Take this example;
An impressionable adult with no real idea about Video Games picks up their daily newspaper and, as they so often do, reads everything as gospel. They spot a front page or 2 page article that then goes on to fabricate a story about games affecting a recently publicized killing.
Now this person may not be the brightest button, and unfortunately there are a lot of them about, but they can vote and they can make a difference (which is a scary thought in itself).
My point is that the only immediate affect that anyone can provide in righting this obviously fictitious news story is to provide a counter headline saying they were wrong.
Is that what happens? No. If (and then only after a fairly long battle) the newspaper admits they were wrong, there is a small, virtually insignificant retraction somewhere hidden in the back of the paper under the ads.
Surely there should be a law that retractions for stories are forced to take up the same space as the original article?
Thoughts?