hypocrisy of the media

[icowden]

Who'd actually sign up to be British currently, who has the wealth to be somewhere much nicer in the world, less crime, lower tax regime.

Quite right. They should fark off and be banned from owning newspapers. Imagine newspapers without Rothermere, Murdoch, the Barclay weirdos etc

Imagine if they were owned by British Taxpayes who actually had a vested interest in the country.

 

[CXRAndy]

There probably wouldn't be many papers left. These papers are being propped up financially and erm.

No wonder people don't believe the 'MSM' anymore.

 

[BoldonLad]

Quite right. They should fark off and be banned from owning newspapers. Imagine newspapers without Rothermere, Murdoch, the Barclay weirdos etc

Imagine if they were owned by British Taxpayes who actually had a vested interest in the country.

Nationalised Newspapers, great idea

However, if PE is to be believed, they would be a “good fit”, not profitable, and, with a selection of fat cats.

 

[icowden]

No wonder people don't believe the 'MSM' anymore.

That's just you and people who find thinking a challenge.

 

[Stevo 666]

Nobody has said that it's illegal. What they have said is that it's immoral to own a paper and take the editorial line that the Mail takes (patriotic humbuggery) whilst paying no tax in the UK. If Rothermere was truly a patriotic Brit he'd pay some sodding tax.

We have the ridiculous situation that most of our Newspapers are owned by people who aren't British or don't want to be.

And who gets to decide what's moral or immoral? Because it's not tax law.

 

[Stevo 666]

Quite right. They should fark off and be banned from owning newspapers. Imagine newspapers without Rothermere, Murdoch, the Barclay weirdos etc

Imagine if they were owned by British Taxpayes who actually had a vested interest in the country.

Nasty rich people, eh? Going around creating jobs and wealth. Lucky we've got Labour in charge to put a stop to all of that nonsense.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Does The Guardian still have it's headquarters overseas for tax purposes? They take donations from organisations to promote specific types of journalism, as do other outlets. As far as I'm concerned it's just a question of degree between the different news outlets as to whose interests they seek to serve. None of them are truly independent.

 

[Ian H]

Does The Guardian still have it's headquarters overseas for tax purposes?

You mean Manchester? No, they moved to London some years ago.

 

[CXRAndy]

No wonder people don't believe the 'MSM' anymore

That's just you and people who find thinking a challenge.

No its because of these types of stunts


View: https://x.com/JohanTLinde/status/1916434306630910185?t=RkUGS_8XbSsLJywANjl7Qg&s=19

 

[icowden]

No its because of these types of stunts

Since when is being factually accurate a stunt?

No-one claimed that no-one else wore blue instead of black. You will note though that the other people wearing dark blue (as opposed to Trump's blue suit), wore black tie.

The Vatican's funeral dress code was clear: men were expected to wear dark suits, long black ties, and a button on the lapel to accommodate Vatican honours. Women were advised to wear long black dresses with closed-toe shoes, gloves, and a veil — with a string of pearls the only permitted jewellery.

Remind us again though - which person recently made fun of a world leader for not wearing the appropriate dress code? Is it the same person wearing a blue suit with a blue tie?

 

[CXRAndy]

Here is some prince wearing a blue suit too

 

[icowden]

Here is some prince wearing a blue suit too

With a black tie. Remind me - how many people has he criticised and ridiculed for not wearing the correct clothing recently?

 

[icowden]

Nasty rich people, eh? Going around creating jobs and wealth.

But they aren't doing that. Retch has cut huge numbers of jobs and closed down local papers. The Mail has cut jobs as has News Internationl (Murdoch). Their tax doesn't create jobs because they don't pay it.

The only "wealth" they are creating is their own. Offshore.

 

[Psamathe]

The only "wealth" they are creating is their own. Offshore.

The trouble with wealth being "offshore" or vice versa is that these days investing money "offshore" is as easy as investing domestically (in UK). Investors chose wherever the investment opportunities they seek happen to be (security/risk vs income/growth, etc.). Same applies to non-Doms, they talk about what a benefit it is to them living here where reality is that they can live in UK yet invest significant amounts overseas. Living in UK does not mean those people will be investing in UK.

Ian

 

[CXRAndy]

With a black tie. Remind me - how many people has he criticised and ridiculed for not wearing the correct clothing recently?

My god, did anyone check his socks, handkerchief?