Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Why the Guardian is going down the pan!

(from Private Eye)

Number Crunching:
£1.4million - total corporation tax paid by GMG, despite £549million profit from sale of Auto Trader

£1.4million - Bonus paid to GMG Chief Executive Andrew Miller for selling Auto Trader.


Stories not covered by the Guardian:
a shareholder revolt at a certain large media company, where shareholders objected to the Chief Exec trebling their salary (inc bonus) whilst demanding pay restraint from their workers. Shareholders were no doubt reassured tho by the fact that the Auto Trader windfall is being wisely invested - in some of those very hedge funds the paper regularly lambasts.
 
A quite ludicrous piece about how even nice people have tattoos nowadays http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...wave-tattoos-prejudice-nice-people-evan-davis
Curses, I just came to this thread to post that! At one level the piece is dripping with crude social prejudice, but there might be an intention we should read it ironically. Trouble is it's so badly written you can't really take it that way - and the only thing that is really obvious is her tedious prejudice. As you say, ludicrous.
 
Before I even click that and earn them advertising revenue, I want to see proof that Rusbridger has had a full facial cobweb done. Because Comment is Free, but Facts are Sacred.
You are missing out - it links to another story that lets you know Evan Davis has a Prince Albert. I know which bit of the screen I'll be looking at next time he's on Newsnight! As it says on their electronic masthead, "The Guardian Newspaper Newspaper and website of the year | Winner of the Pulitzer prize"
 
A quite ludicrous piece about how even nice people have tattoos nowadays http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...wave-tattoos-prejudice-nice-people-evan-davis
Nice people meaning private school oxbridge girls like Kathryn. She is the person who started off her review of the recent book by Rachael Holmes on the political life of Eleanor Marx by talking about the latters taste in men. She strikes me as someone stuck in the 1920s - a world of maids and oh have you seen virginia's latest?
 
Before I even click that and earn them advertising revenue, I want to see proof that Rusbridger has had a full facial cobweb done. Because Comment is Free, but Facts are Sacred.

A full cobweb is a bit OTT, I'd settle for him having "cunt" tattoo'd on the inside of his bottom lip.
 
Curses, I just came to this thread to post that! At one level the piece is dripping with crude social prejudice, but there might be an intention we should read it ironically. Trouble is it's so badly written you can't really take it that way - and the only thing that is really obvious is her tedious prejudice. As you say, ludicrous.

I wouldn't say "ludicrous," it's very revealing. Blatant class prejudice is usually a bit better disguised these days. The best bit is how she believes that only socially marginal people had tattoos in the '70s, when in fact they were perfectly normal among the working class. Evidently "socially marginal" and "working class" are co-terminus for some.

"Naturally it goes back to the fact that in my 1970s childhood tattoos were worn by a different kind of person. Not necessarily wicked or criminal – although that’s how they seemed to me. These sailors, lorry drivers and Hell’s Angels of the postwar world marked themselves as living outside the social norms where the rest of us quietly resided. They looked like members of a dangerous tribe that might surround the stockade in the middle of the night."

Yep, those lorry drivers are well outside the social norms.
 
I wouldn't say "ludicrous," it's very revealing. Blatant class prejudice is usually a bit better disguised these days. The best bit is how she believes that only socially marginal people had tattoos in the '70s, when in fact they were perfectly normal among the working class. Evidently "socially marginal" and "working class" are co-terminus for some.

"Naturally it goes back to the fact that in my 1970s childhood tattoos were worn by a different kind of person. Not necessarily wicked or criminal – although that’s how they seemed to me. These sailors, lorry drivers and Hell’s Angels of the postwar world marked themselves as living outside the social norms where the rest of us quietly resided. They looked like members of a dangerous tribe that might surround the stockade in the middle of the night."

Yep, those lorry drivers are well outside the social norms.
Fuck me she actually said that? My Grandad had a tattoo, that was totally normal for his age and class. He was hardly living outside social norms ffs.
 
if you look closely, this glover character looks like the illegitemate child of michael gove :oops:

GoveDM0603_228x326.jpg
who hatched the Lizards egg?
 
These are the same t-shirts as philosophy football (mark perryman - frequent guardian writer). Big up the RAF, big up that poison gas being sprayed over the old ottoman empire. 20 quid to "mark the centenary of the first year of the conflict."

CC_1105.jpg
 
CC_1106.jpg


wtf does this drivel mean?

One of a series of Philosophy Football's 1914 designs to mark the centenary of the first year of the conflict. T-shirts as 'Testaments of War' to remember the courage and the sacrifice, to resist the deadly causes and lethal consequences.
 
It means we like money so give us 20 quid for this tat that a partially sighted Bangladeshi child was paid 2p to make. The colours are wrong for an RFC roundel as the blue and red are too saturated. It looks more like a post 1928 Type A roundel albeit with a 1917-8 white ring.

Not going into t-shirt design issue, but afaik Philosophy Football has the shirts made in factories with full TU rights and paying a decent wage, with their market they would be crazy not to.
 
These are the same t-shirts as philosophy football (mark perryman - frequent guardian writer). Big up the RAF, big up that poison gas being sprayed over the old ottoman empire. 20 quid to "mark the centenary of the first year of the conflict."

CC_1105.jpg

I e-mailed them last week after seeing an ad (think it was last week's New Statesman for their "commemorative" range. Not sure that I'll get an answer, though, as the sum of my text was "Are you enjoying making money off of the back of the deaths of millions of members of the working class, you cunts?".

I was a bit annoyed.

I bet ern buys one.
 
Back
Top Bottom