actually, i read that article toohe's a vile journalist and I can see that this challenge is not simply about attacking him for his opinions, but for his general sensationalist fraud etc. I don't know what to think about this challenge, I dislike the guy intensely, but as I said below this is on the back of only a couple of articles. I'm still foaming at the mouth about Janet Street-Porter's depression article, so I'm having a self-imposed ban from the daily mail for a while, as I think my rants alienated my apathethic friends.
There is also a part of me which says that, be his opinions abhorrent or not, the onus is on the public to be able to tell fact from fiction and educate themselves beyond shitty newspapers. Such action would neutralise him. I am fully aware of the utopian nature of this fantasy.
(There is also a part of me which says that, be his opinions abhorrent or not, the onus is on the public to be able to tell fact from fiction and educate themselves beyond shitty newspapers. Such action would neutralise him. I am fully aware of the utopian nature of this fantasy.
drbroon abloooobloobloo,
Thu 24 Jun 2010, 8:47,
archived)