Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: qazwsx on April 14, 2013, 08:57:38 am
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2308344/Petronella-Wyatt-Its-hell-posh-poor.html
Just found this, I still can't believe these sort of people exist. :\
-
no surprises there.
edit also Daily Mail nuff said
-
The thing that enrages me is that thousands read this bloody abortion of a newspaper.
-
this is, like 4 on a scale of 1 to utter daily mail ****headedness
-
what in the flying **** is this ****, seriously?
-
The Daily Mail makes all its money from making people outraged. Either it's the racist ****heads who actually read the Daily Mail getting bent out of shape about immigrants or it's normal people who they get to flock to their website with drivel like this.
It's basically a giant troll at this point. Ignore the site and it will go away.
-
still remember the Iraq war prisoners scandel lol
-
Wait a minute. How can she even have to make these "sacrifices" on that kind of money? Shouldn't she be able to afford such things and still have thousands left over? Where's the money going? £80,000 - £100,000 salary? Any Londoners around think they could do better than her and live more comfortably on that money?
-
Lorric seriously shut up and stop pandering the the Dail Mail's sensational BS, their editorial scrutiny has a history of being so lax that if 25% of that article is presented in an accurate and non maximise sensationalist fashion I will fall off my chair.
seriously, they are that bad they should have a red top.
-
Lorric seriously shut up and stop pandering the the Dail Mail's sensational BS, their editorial scrutiny has a history of being so lax that if 25% of that article is presented in an accurate and non maximise sensationalist fashion I will fall off my chair.
seriously, they are that bad they should have a red top.
Where do you get the idea I am pandering to it? I just asked a question.
-
/me points Lorric at Karajorma's post.
-
/me points Lorric at Karajorma's post.
So you're saying the article itself is lies. I thought the "outrage" was someone moaning when on such a salary.
I've also found some answers anyway in the comments section now:
"Is this for real? I live in London, earn half of what she earns and I consider myself to be doing very well. I don't stay in 5 star hotels or wear designer clothes but my life is a good one and I cannot complain at all. I live within my means, no credit cards, no loans. I have a mortgage and I have savings. I just cannot understand at all how this woman can say she's broke when she earns twice what I do - what is she spending her money on???? £80k may not go as far in London as it does elsewhere but I do live in London and can say it still goes a long, long way to a very, very nice life. This woman's a complete imbecile."
"I am stunned by this - i earn roughly the same as her, i have no dependents, i own my own house, which will be mortgage free in four years due to me overpaying the mortgage, and i pay a substantial amount of my salary into a pension each month. I buy most of my clothes from calvin klein, ralph lauren, tommy hilfiger and gant on sale, and have at least two long haul holidays a year as well as trips to tenerife and short haul weekend breaks. I get my hair done every month, and usually have a massage, facial or pedicure once a month. I eat out at least twice a week and pay for myself. I pay off my credit card each month and always have spare cash left over from my salary. How can she not survive on that salary its a huge amount. There are people out there surviving on much much less. I would suggest she needs to downsize her lifestyle expectations. Boo hoo she can't buy a chanel suit - really? Is that such a big deal. I have a fantastic life."
That second one being along the lines of what I'd expect you'd be able to do on that kind of money. If the article is a lie, well, so be it. I don't understand why you'd lie about your own life though in this context. If it's true, I wonder where the money goes.
-
Since Lorric needs me to spoon-feed him the relevant quote:
It's basically a giant troll at this point. Ignore the site and it will go away.
Don't feed the trolls.
-
Since Lorric needs me to spoon-feed him the relevant quote:
It's basically a giant troll at this point. Ignore the site and it will go away.
Don't feed the trolls.
Well, don't worry. I do know it's not a place to go for reliable news, and that is a kind way of putting it. I'm not sure what all the fuss has been about here, but I got what I wanted from the comments section on there anyway.
-
i live on less than 2000 a year and food stamps. you rich whore!
learn to redneck!
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2308344/Petronella-Wyatt-Its-hell-posh-poor.html
What kind of dumb **** pays 370 pounds for a pair of lobos? :confused:
*totally seriously my first reaction*
-
The text seems serious, but the pictures make me think satire...
-
Let's not all dogpile onto Lorric on every thread please.
Yes we know the story is bull**** but whether it's deliberately lies or the vacant prattle of a socialite with no sense of how to spend her money sensibly is a fair question.
Just don't go to the website while talking about it. They do this for page views after all.
-
Let's not all dogpile onto Lorric on every thread please.
Yes we know the story is bull**** but whether it's deliberately lies or the vacant prattle of a socialite with no sense of how to spend her money sensibly is a fair question.
Just don't go to the website while talking about it. They do this for page views after all.
Thank you Karajorma. I really appreciate that.
How would you avoid going to the webpage though? You can't find out what it is otherwise, can you?
-
Simple. You look at the url. If it contains the string www.dailymail.co.uk, you do not go to it. Should you find yourself on that site, close the tab and apply kitten picture.
-
Simple. You look at the url. If it contains the string www.dailymail.co.uk, you do not go to it. Should you find yourself on that site, close the tab and apply kitten picture.
But then you don't get to see what it is. He didn't say just don't go there, he said don't go there while talking about it. You can't talk about it if you don't know what it is.
-
Yes, in this case you can.
By recognizing the address as linking to the Daily Mail, you can already infer that the article on the other end will be trollish, factually inaccurate, and probably badly written.
What more would you need to know?
-
Yes, in this case you can.
By recognizing the address as linking to the Daily Mail, you can already infer that the article on the other end will be trollish, factually inaccurate, and probably badly written.
What more would you need to know?
That's a dodge. I would want to know why it "enrages thousands". Or I wouldn't have had a look.
I'll let Karajorma answer. You are just messing with me.
-
I'm saying don't go there at all. But since you've already gone there, discuss the subject if you must but don't go there again or encourage anyone else to go there.
-
in short the british printed press have earned a reputation for being sensation mongers to the point that the Daily Mail, the Sun and the likes dont print news as such any more, while their storys usually start off with some degree of truth*1 the finished article is often twisted and abused to the point it barely resembles this truth with facts and figures distorted by several orders of magnitude in order to promote outrage, for example two celebrities go for a drink together and a reporter/"source" spots them and asks the bartender what they have had, the bartender might say a few beers, a couple of shots of vodka and some wine, by the time it's printed this will have become 15 pints, 12 shots of vodka and 8 bottles of wine.
*1 stoiries arn't always based in fact thoug, Daily Mail chief editor at the time Piers Morgan lost his job as after not fact checking a bull**** story about British troops abusing Iraqi POW around the time the Americans were being accused the same just because it was a story he wanted to run for his own agenda.
-
I'm saying don't go there at all. But since you've already gone there, discuss the subject if you must but don't go there again or encourage anyone else to go there.
Ah, I see.
Thanks.
-
stoiries arn't always based in fact thoug, Daily Mail chief editor at the time Piers Morgan lost his job as after not fact checking a bull**** story about British troops abusing Iraqi POW around the time the Americans were being accused the same just because it was a story he wanted to run for his own agenda.
I'm fairly sure that was The Mirror, not The Daily Mail.
The broadsheets are generally fairly trustworthy. It's the tabloids and tabsheets that are the problems.
-
ahhh yes so it was the Daily Mirror, my mistake
-
That's the trio right there, people. The Sun, The Daily Mail and The Mirror. Avoid these like the plague. Fish and chip wrap is all they're good for.
-
I hate the tabloids. There sensationalist and opinionated. The daily sport has pictures of boobs so that's okay to read.
-
So on the topic of the Daily Mail being ****, I see the completely needless measles epidemic precipitated by their MMR scare has now killed someone.
-
Yeah but none of the tabloids will ever take responsibility for their part in that nonsense.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wales-22146173
Dr Marion Lyons, director of health protection at Public Health Wales (PHW), said at one stage, 45% of children in the Swansea area had not been vaccinated against measles.
That figure had since fallen to 10-15% but it is still considered too low to stop the spread of the highly infectious disease.
But Mr Edwards, who was editor of the Evening Post at the time of the MMR scare, said the newspaper was not responsible for the low uptake of the vaccine.
"As I saw it, their [the readers] concerns were totally genuine," he told BBC current affairs series The Wales Report.
"What were we supposed to do? Tell them to go away?
"That isn't what newspapers do. Newspapers listen to their readers, report what they say, and then they go to the relevant people and say 'what have you got to say about this?'
"And then they publish that response."
He added: "It's impossible to have regrets. I'm certain that if we wound the clock back and started again, I can't imagine any reason why we wouldn't do it the same way.
-
How the **** is getting an MMR vaccine not like... the law in the UK like it is in the US?
-
Well, even Wakefield was responsible enough to say that you should still give your kids the component vaccines separately. Nobody actually did this.
-
Well, even Wakefield was responsible enough to say that you should still give your kids the component vaccines separately.
Of course he did. He had applied for patents on an alternative vaccine.
Yeah.....most people don't realise what a thoroughly nasty piece of **** Andrew Wakefield really is.
-
Whoa whoa, wait a second, The Sun has Page 3. It's worth getting for that reason alone.
Okay, yeah, it's still horrible and if you use the excuse "I only read it for the articles" someone's likely to shoot you.
-
Whoa whoa, wait a second, The Sun has Page 3. It's worth getting for that reason alone.
We have the internet now. You can get your boobies for free. No need to pay for a ****ty newspaper. :p
-
How the **** is getting an MMR vaccine not like... the law in the UK like it is in the US?
Because it's not the law in the US either?
Much as I would like to see mandatory vaccination in certain applications (public school, for instance), I'm not aware of any democracy that has successfully required all persons to be forced to receive vaccination with legal penalties in place, USA included. Most States require proof of MMR vaccination to attend public school, but there are exemptions in place.
Don't get me wrong, I fully think the US has the right idea on this issue, let's just not confuse the framework in the US with mandatory forced vaccination of every person.
-
I've stopped reading any kind of news site ending with .co.uk (or the occasional British newspaper left behind by an international student back at college). I can't help but feel that the majority of them either twist around words, tell lies or have nothing better to write about. Here on the 'continent' such articles usually go in glossy magazines, usually with the face of badly photoshopped (read de-wrinkled) former celebrity on the cover; they do not end up in newspapers.
-
I don't read any news but BBC and Joystiq.
Over here we make it a point to avoid CNN and Fox like the plague.
-
The article's writing is shoddy
The writer is shoddy
Everything about it is shoddy
I also was laughing while reading it because I have nothing else to do except read shoddy articles
Also where the hell did the word shoddy come from anyways
Why not just say ****ty? Course shoddy sounds far more sophisticated
And holy crap it's -Sara-