Showing posts with label double standards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label double standards. Show all posts

Tuesday, 13 July 2010

Jon "Nazi" Gaunt Invokes Arch-Enemy in Failed Effort to Save His Own Ass

You couldn't make it up.

It's hypocrisy gone mad don't you know.

Jon Gaunt, if you don't no, is a monstrous tit and an awful bore of a man, a vile mouth on a stick perpetuating myths and faux man-in-the-street bigoted ideologies and passing them off as entertainment. He also works for the Sun, on their Sun Talk radio station, which is billed as, I fucking kid you not: "The home of free speech."

What kind of home I wonder? A care home? A mental home? Anyway, I digress...

Back in 2008 he called a Redbridge councillor a Nazi and was sacked, something that surprised and upset him a great deal, indeed he was so vexed he came over all bemused by it all. The daft racist, being a sore loser and no doubt believing his listeners fevered sycophancy awarded him some kind of special status, decided to challenge the ruling and failed.

Not one to be deterred, Gaunty (as the rabid bigot is jauntily titled) went to the High Court in order to challenge the OFCOM ruling, perhaps rightly sniffing some sort of martyrdom status amongst the particularly thick and myopic individuals that make up his fan base.

Jon Gaunt was crying freedom of speech and here is where the hypocrisy comes in.

His defence of his ridiculous outburst was centred on Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, a piece of legislation created by the Council of Europe, a precursor to the very European Union that Gaunty despises and a body that strives for similar goals with regards to European unity and integration. Goals that Jon Gaunt spends a great deal of time frothing at the mouth at and hectoring.

So let me get this straight Mr. Gaunt. You hate Europe with every inch of your corpulent frame but when it suits your own aims, you thrash about in its legislation like an oil stricken whale?

You'll be glad to know that he lost the case but no doubt, hiding behind yelps about freedom of speech, he will keep appealing.

Wednesday, 25 November 2009

Thatcher, sick pics, some contempt and 40 years as the Eye sees it.

Wednesday. The easiest day of the fortnight for the Media Watch editor of this place.

This fortnight, after a bit of a drought recently, Private Eye has served up a couple of juicey bits.

First of all shocking pictures...

This being the story in question.

The next is an example of the Sun showing contempt for the Contempt of Court Act 1981...

...with a nice little dig at the Met Commissioner, too.

PE couldn't let 40 years of the sun go by without it's own little corner, either...

That last headline is a cracker, isn't it? There was an apology, in the only place it should've been for headline as wrong in every way as 'Straight sex cannot give you AIDS - Official': page 28. /sarcasm

Adam Macqueen, in 2006, writes about a similarly scarey, and dangerous, headline "Killer Plagues", about AIDS & HIV riddled Bulgarians and Hungarians invading Britian.

And to finish with, something a little lighter...

Thursday, 17 September 2009

Pssst! Wanna make some money?

From this week's Private Eye, we have two items appearing in the Street of Shame from the Sun, both featuring money-making opportunities.

The first concerns the double standards produced by the Sun's firewall (again) and...

...and the second, about a different way to make money...

Friday, 28 August 2009

Should the Sun carry a health warning?

The Media Blog has an excellent spot in the Sun this morning...

Just what I needed yesterday on a long driving day. A big can of energy drink.

But why would that make it into the Sun Lies? Surely there can't be any hypocrisy going on with a drinks promotion, can there? Especially a non-alcoholic drinks promotion?

There has been a little controversy in the past about these types of drinks. All that concentrated caffeine and what-not can't be good for you, really. Just like any responsible company, The Sun and News Corp wouldn't want to do anything that might harm their customers, so maybe The Sun/News Corp didn't know about that side of it.

ENERGY drinks like Red Bull can cause heart attacks and strokes...

ENERGY drink Red Bull may claim to give you "wings" but it could also give you a heart attack

RESTLESSNESS, headaches, agitated behaviour and chest pains.
These are some of the symptoms of caffeine addiction, a growing problem among Britain's schoolkids.

Consumption of caffeine-enriched drinks such as Red Bull and Diet Coke is soaring among youngsters.

THE father of an 11-year-old boy found hanged has blamed his death on energy drinks.
Lee Johns said son Tyler had mood swings after becoming hooked on popular caffeine-filled drinks

...a worrying study at the Cardiovascular Research Centre in Adelaide, Australia, showed a single can of sugar-free Red Bull could have a damaging effect on the heart within 60 MINUTES.

None of these articles name Relentless, but as The Media Blog point out...
one can of Relentless contains 160 mg of caffeine. That's twice the amount of caffeine in a can of Red Bull

Wednesday, 5 August 2009

More double standards.

The latest Sun editorial is disgusted at the silencing of one of our most venerable judges:

THE knives are out for Judge Ian Trigger who spoke so searingly last week about our abject immigration controls.

Judge Trigger lashed out in exasperation about the "hundreds of thousands" of illegal immigrants who abuse our welfare system.

"In the past 10 years the national debt has risen to extraordinary heights, largely because central government has wasted billions of pounds," he said.

Like Army Chief Sir Richard Dannatt's damning words about our armed services, this is the unvarnished truth from an expert witness.

Yet the Lord Chief Justice has ordered a probe into whether Judge Trigger's remarks were "too political".

There can be only one verdict: NOT guilty M'lud.

As Tabloid Watch pointed out last week, Judge Trigger's comments, rather than being the "searingly unvarnished truth", were abject nonsense. Illegal immigrants don't get benefits, as should be painfully obvious, while those who apply for asylum receive almost derisory amounts until their application is accepted, while if their application fails they don't receive money at all, rather vouchers which can be redeemed in exchange for goods and services.

The Sun is as usual letting its prejudices get in the way of its thinking. When judges make rulings and decisions which they disagree with, especially when they give out "soft" sentences, they're outraged, and in the past have demanded that "bad" judges be suspended. Political comment on the other hand, which goes beyond the case which the judge is dealing with, is perfectly all right as long as the paper agrees with it. Nothing quite like double standards, is there?