Irish Daily Star and pictures of Kate

Birroc said:
Rosanna wont be too happy. She wanted those headlines.
Click to expand...


Funnily enough I thought the same. Hubby showed me the photos last week and I didn't recognise her at all, he asked me who it was and I'd no idea.
 
cashier said:
I can't help but feel sory for William and Kate, such a lovely couple. I think this rag paper were scum for publishing those pictures, no one has the right to invade the privacy of another human being, its disgusting what this newspaper did.
Click to expand...

It's kind of funny really; people calling the paper scum, it's readers garbage, yet its the paper that gets blamed for sensationalism.
 

You can hardly be hounded from a 1/2 km away.
 
Leper said:
You can't have a garbage newspaper without garbage readers.
Click to expand...

Newspapers are aimed at different demographics. If someone reads The Star, in doesn't make them inferior in morality or intellect to someone who reads a broadsheet.
 
MrMan said:
Newspapers are aimed at different demographics. If someone reads The Star, in doesn't make them inferior in morality or intellect to someone who reads a broadsheet.
Click to expand...

Well if anyone bought the Daily Star to look at the pictures then I would have to question their intelligence, given that the pics were freely available on the great inter-web!
 

Have you ever read it? It's totally Irish unlike the other tabloids that have 1 or 2 Irish stories tacked on.
 
DB74 said:
Well if anyone bought the Daily Star to look at the pictures then I would have to question their intelligence, given that the pics were freely available on the great inter-web!
Click to expand...

I'd question their taste in women.
 
MrMan said:
Newspapers are aimed at different demographics. If someone reads The Star, in doesn't make them inferior in morality or intellect to someone who reads a broadsheet.
Click to expand...
Maybe not inferior in morality (how to define/measure...) but very likely inferior in intellect - for the exact reason you state - they are aimed at different demographics.
 
dereko1969 said:
Have you ever read it? ...
Click to expand...
I did once and like stepping in dog poo, there was nothing about the experience that made me want to repeat it.
dereko1969 said:
... It's totally Irish unlike the other tabloids that have 1 or 2 Irish stories tacked on.
Click to expand...
I see, so publishing pictures of a topless minor British Royal on her holliers in France qualifies as some of this "totally Irish" content does it?

Forgive me if I point out that you have like totally failed to convince me dude.
 

But she was not on a beach in the Canaries, fully aware that she was in publice view.

What people are objecting to is the fact that Kate Middleton was on private property and some scummy photographer used a long lens to take a picture of her topless which has now been published in various publications. This is not about being 'uninhibited' and 'open minded'. It's about recognising someone's right to privacy and to not be photographed topless in a private place without their consent.
 

You stated it was nominally Irish, I stated having read it on a few occasions (barber shops mostly, it wouldn't be a paper I'd buy) that it is mostly Irish content.

By the way totally Irish to any sane person does not mean only having Irish content. If you were going by that yardstick then none of our papers are Irish.

The fact that they published these photos is neither here nor there in the context of whether the paper is Irish or not.
 

She is famous, and just like most other famous people that appear in all of the papers, she isn't Irish, so what difference does that make?
 
orka said:
Maybe not inferior in morality (how to define/measure...) but very likely inferior in intellect - for the exact reason you state - they are aimed at different demographics.
Click to expand...

So if I read the Star and you read the Irish Times, you would assume that you have a superior intellect than me?
 
Lets call a spade a spade - the pictures weren't great to look at. She needs a few more hot dinners!

Now, Ms. Davison's on the other hand...
 
dereko1969 said:
... I stated having read it on a few occasions (barber shops mostly, it wouldn't be a paper I'd buy) that it is mostly Irish content. ...
Click to expand...
I'm sorry but I can't seem to find any of that purported content of yours posted in this thread.
dereko1969 said:
... By the way totally Irish to any sane person does not mean only having Irish content. If you were going by that yardstick then none of our papers are Irish. ...
Click to expand...
But I'm not the one defining what "totally Irish" is, you are with this comment - "It's totally Irish unlike the other tabloids that have 1 or 2 Irish stories tacked on."So following your logic, the more Irish content a tabloid features the more Irish it is. Therefore, by your own definition, to be "totally Irish" it must only feature Irish content otherwise it is not "totally Irish".

Nominally Irish means it features the word "Irish" in its masthead but is owned by an English pay-per-view TV pornographer and dirty magazine publisher, Mick Desmond, and O'Reilly's INM
dereko1969 said:
... The fact that they published these photos is neither here nor there in the context of whether the paper is Irish or not.
Click to expand...
You have this This post will be deleted if not edited to remove bad language-about-face IMHO; if the paper was not nominally Irish, they would not have published the pictures.
 
MrMan said:
So if I read the Star and you read the Irish Times, you would assume that you have a superior intellect than me?
Click to expand...
If you read the Star and I read the Irish Times, it is more likely than not that I have a superior intellect to you. But it is obviously not the case that every single Irish Times reader is more intelligent than every single Star reader.

There are various studies looking at IQ by social class (easily found on t'internet and there seems to be little dispute about the findings/general concept) - one showed that the highest social class had an average IQ of 115, compared with the overall average of 100 and an average of 90 in the lowest social class (the lack of symmetry caused by there being a greater chance of someone of higher intelligence being in the lowest social class (through lack of opportunity or choice) than of someone of lower intelligence being in the highest social class).

Tabloids are more likely to be read by lower social classes therefore tabloid readers are more likely to have a lower IQ. But again, these are all averages - you can't form a judgement about a single person based on what they read...
 
If it was a Sweedish Princess I dont think the English tabloids would have hesitated to publish.
 

I dont understand how this happened at all.

Yes, she was in a private place, but she is a figure in the public eye, a member of the british royal family, and fully aware that scummy photographers exist. So, when in a private place, if its within sight of a public road (and by sight, I mean, long lens sight), then why on earth did she go topless! In her position, I wouldnt have done it.

I think it was Princess Anne who said before, people allow themselves to be photographed, there are enough private estates and residences available to the royal family, if you do not wish to be photographed in your private time you do not have to be.

It is not her fault that there exists a scummy photographer - but it is certainly her fault that she was dumb enough to go topless on a pool terrace where she could be seen and photographed from a public road.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register