"As a black teenager, I loved Morrissey. But heaven knows..." - Guardian article by Joshua Surtees

Going by how many anti-Corbyn articles the Guardian managed to publish after he was first elected leader, I suspect they've got about another 150 of these anti-Morrissey pieces in the pipeline...

As a black teenager, I loved Morrissey. But heaven knows I’m miserable now - Opinion / The Guardian
By Joshua Surtees
I used to defend Morrissey against accusations of racism. Now I feel betrayed by his support for bigots like Tommy Robinson

(And it's some top class trolling, using "Heaven Knows..." in the article title, given how much they know Morrissey hates that and "Bigmouth" being used in headlines.)

This is never going to end unless Morrissey backtracks/apologises. Which means: this is never going to end.

---

Related item:

• Here's how it felt to grow up as a black indie fan in 90s Britain by Josh Surtees - NOISEY - Mar. 3, 2016

 

[GodEmperorMorrissey]

After Birmingham parents protested schools for teaching their kids trans agenda, UK is being taking over by progressive zealots. It needs brave men like Morrissey

 

[Deleted member 28251]

I once thought of The Guardian as a serious, very respectable news paper and news outlet. One that you could trust. They have now resorted to the pesky means reminiscent of the Sun or the Daily Mail. They are ruining their own reputation.

I abandoned it c.1995 after some celebratory CBI related article (probably). It has been the pond life of the gutter press for many, many years. I suspect, much like the NME, it will end its days as a sad, sorry, website pushing the literary equivalent of Soylent Green.

 

[Ugly Devil]

Yawn... another tedious Guardian article.

 

[Anonymous]

After Birmingham parents protested schools for teaching their kids trans agenda, UK is being taking over by progressive zealots. It needs brave men like Morrissey

Do this new nazi troll even know that Morrissey is not straight?

 

[Famous when dead]

It will end when the papers find when the clicks on these stories drop and some new story gets more clicks. That will be true for the anti-Moz and the pro-Moz articles. The websites/papers exist to make money. People can only read so many op-ed pieces about the same topic before it becomes a rehashing of things we already know. We are at a point in America where the killing of black people by cops is not first page reading anymore. It's been pushed to the back and that's an issue that actually matters unlike what badge some singer wore on his lapel.

This and the previous anon's observations regarding similar are well made here.
Please indulge my broader point:
Yes, the digital revolution has helped create this reporting style we now often see.
Especially when underpinned by a 'reach' mechanic / popularity algorithm that thrives on 'traffic'/throughput/'click throughs'/comments/ad revenue et al.
I noticed this creep in to local rags with things like "snowmageddon", "hottest summer since..." or specifically adding a religious descriptor where it isn't necessarily needed... all to gain and provoke a reaction.
This has been reinforced and catalysed by the changes happening around social media as it evolves too.
Obviously, with a physical paper, the outraged/concerned types did not have a real vehicle to vent, but here we are now years later and the more established press are now exploiting the same type of thing and it has become their economic survival tool.
It's beyond pantomime at times.
They actually seek to polarise the arguments, get people going back and forth with each other and they use every conceivable tactic to do so - the bigger the response the better it is for them.
This has rendered even trivial things like online weather reporting utterly redundant as you will only see exaggerated stories designed to prompt comments & traffic where interested types descend upon a topic to say how wrong or right it is (sound familiar?).
This style of 'journalism' is only going to expand and increase all the anger you see online.
It has become genuinely difficult to see where the passion, truth and strength of feeling are in someone's writing if you always have to consider if you are being 'baited'.
It will be interesting to see how this all impacts on future generations. Perhaps it's our destiny to reduce arguments down to binary choices of right/wrong, left/right etc, but life is never really that simple is it?

Algorithmically yours,
FWD.

 

[Anonymous Bread]

Can we just stop posting Guardian articles on here for a while, please? This guy, a self-proclaim fan, no doubt reads this site, as does the guy who wrote the other article which sparked PK to get angry about. Let's just stop feeding this fire and move on once the ashes settle.

Thanks.

 

[joe frady]

This and the previous anon's observations regarding similar are well made here.
Please indulge my broader point:
Yes, the digital revolution has helped create this reporting style we now often see.
Especially when underpinned by a 'reach' mechanic / popularity algorithm that thrives on 'traffic'/throughput/'click throughs'/comments/ad revenue et al.
I noticed this creep in to local rags with things like "snowmageddon", "hottest summer since..." or specifically adding a religious descriptor where it isn't necessarily needed... all to gain and provoke a reaction.
This has been reinforced and catalysed by the changes happening around social media as it evolves too.
Obviously, with a physical paper, the outraged/concerned types did not have a real vehicle to vent, but here we are now years later and the more established press are now exploiting the same type of thing and it has become their economic survival tool.
It's beyond pantomime at times.
They actually seek to polarise the arguments, get people going back and forth with each other and they use every conceivable tactic to do so - the bigger the response the better it is for them.
This has rendered even trivial things like online weather reporting utterly redundant as you will only see exaggerated stories designed to prompt comments & traffic where interested types descend upon a topic to say how wrong or right it is (sound familiar?).
This style of 'journalism' is only going to expand and increase all the anger you see online.
It has become genuinely difficult to see where the passion, truth and strength of feeling are in someone's writing if you always have to consider if you are being 'baited'.
It will be interesting to see how this all impacts on future generations. Perhaps it's our destiny to reduce arguments down to binary choices of right/wrong, left/right etc, but life is never really that simple is it?

Algorithmically yours,
FWD.

Kudos.

In summary, Modern Life is Rubbish. í am off to suck on my Spangles...

.

 

[Jeffrey7777]

He holds a lot of pent up anger. Find someone else to love. It's as easy as that.

 

[ZOOM FROM GLOOM]

This and the previous anon's observations regarding similar are well made here.
Please indulge my broader point:
Yes, the digital revolution has helped create this reporting style we now often see.
Especially when underpinned by a 'reach' mechanic / popularity algorithm that thrives on 'traffic'/throughput/'click throughs'/comments/ad revenue et al.
I noticed this creep in to local rags with things like "snowmageddon", "hottest summer since..." or specifically adding a religious descriptor where it isn't necessarily needed... all to gain and provoke a reaction.
This has been reinforced and catalysed by the changes happening around social media as it evolves too.
Obviously, with a physical paper, the outraged/concerned types did not have a real vehicle to vent, but here we are now years later and the more established press are now exploiting the same type of thing and it has become their economic survival tool.
It's beyond pantomime at times.
They actually seek to polarise the arguments, get people going back and forth with each other and they use every conceivable tactic to do so - the bigger the response the better it is for them.
This has rendered even trivial things like online weather reporting utterly redundant as you will only see exaggerated stories designed to prompt comments & traffic where interested types descend upon a topic to say how wrong or right it is (sound familiar?).
This style of 'journalism' is only going to expand and increase all the anger you see online.
It has become genuinely difficult to see where the passion, truth and strength of feeling are in someone's writing if you always have to consider if you are being 'baited'.
It will be interesting to see how this all impacts on future generations. Perhaps it's our destiny to reduce arguments down to binary choices of right/wrong, left/right etc, but life is never really that simple is it?

Algorithmically yours,
FWD.

Nail on the head.

case closed.




Edit, guess @Trill doesn’t like FWD’s post.

 

[klaus]

The story is old - I know
But it goes on

 

[Anonymous]

Do you think people's opinions should be fixed in time, unchanged by events as the years go by? Yes or no?

Yes,hopefully.
Sadly,as an ex Guardian journalist which i was proud to be in the 80s/90s, my opinion IS changing about The Guardian.
The newspaper is still ok,considering the opposition but Guardian online is another thing completely.
Some of its coverage is now on a par with Fox News .
And that is a cause for concern.

When "the left" thinks it can defeat "the right" by adopting their tactics,it just doesn't work.

 

[Anonymous]

This and the previous anon's observations regarding similar are well made here.
Please indulge my broader point:
Yes, the digital revolution has helped create this reporting style we now often see.
Especially when underpinned by a 'reach' mechanic / popularity algorithm that thrives on 'traffic'/throughput/'click throughs'/comments/ad revenue et al.
I noticed this creep in to local rags with things like "snowmageddon", "hottest summer since..." or specifically adding a religious descriptor where it isn't necessarily needed... all to gain and provoke a reaction.
This has been reinforced and catalysed by the changes happening around social media as it evolves too.
Obviously, with a physical paper, the outraged/concerned types did not have a real vehicle to vent, but here we are now years later and the more established press are now exploiting the same type of thing and it has become their economic survival tool.
It's beyond pantomime at times.
They actually seek to polarise the arguments, get people going back and forth with each other and they use every conceivable tactic to do so - the bigger the response the better it is for them.
This has rendered even trivial things like online weather reporting utterly redundant as you will only see exaggerated stories designed to prompt comments & traffic where interested types descend upon a topic to say how wrong or right it is (sound familiar?).
This style of 'journalism' is only going to expand and increase all the anger you see online.
It has become genuinely difficult to see where the passion, truth and strength of feeling are in someone's writing if you always have to consider if you are being 'baited'.
It will be interesting to see how this all impacts on future generations. Perhaps it's our destiny to reduce arguments down to binary choices of right/wrong, left/right etc, but life is never really that simple is it?

Algorithmically yours,
FWD.

I agree.
One example of Guardian Online's "journalism" :

 

[ZOOM FROM GLOOM]

Racism is common sense In fact, artificial intelligence has to be specifically programmed not to be racist because a purely rational program will naturally gravitate towards racism unless you specifically program it not to.

https://www.theguardian.com/inequal...ots-how-ai-is-learning-all-our-worst-impulses

‘Racism is common sense In fact,’

Nah.



‘artificial intelligence has to be specifically programmed not to be racist because a purely rational program will naturally gravitate towards racism
unless you specifically program it not to.’

What is a ‘purely rational program’?

AI is a program, garbage in garbage out, it’s ‘common sense’ is based on the common sense of it’s programmer or the information that’s being fed into it to make it what it is.

There is nothing natural about racism.

 

[GodEmperorMorrissey]

Do this new nazi troll even know that Morrissey is not straight?

You are anonymous and calling me new? Get a name and stop hiding you retard.

And what exactly does Morrissey's sexual preferences have to so with indoctrination of children you dumb f***

 

[Mope]

After Birmingham parents protested schools for teaching their kids trans agenda, UK is being taking over by progressive zealots. It needs brave men like Morrissey

Crawl back into whichever foetid reddit/4chan anus you emerged from, you knuckle-dragging, slack-jawed, racist glob of sputum.

 

[GodEmperorMorrissey]

Crawl back into whichever foetid reddit/4chan anus you emerged from, you knuckle-dragging, slack-jawed, racist glob of sputum.

Oh so you have no argument like most of your kind and resort to a string of lame insults that weak people like you could never back up anyways. If you support the child trans movement , you support child abuse

 

[Anonymous]

You are anonymous and calling me new? Get a name and stop hiding you retard.

And what exactly does Morrissey's sexual preferences have to so with indoctrination of children you dumb f***

haha keep posting your chemtrails vids, nazi troll

 

[GodEmperorMorrissey]

haha keep posting your chemtrails vids, nazi troll

\
Yeah exactly as i thought. You have no opinion, you are a lame troll that cries Nazi at everything you disagree with

 

[Anonymous]

with "fans" like GodEmperorMorrissey he doesnt need enemies at all

 

[reelfountain]

Racism is common sense In fact, artificial intelligence has to be specifically programmed not to be racist because a purely rational program will naturally gravitate towards racism unless you specifically program it not to.

https://www.theguardian.com/inequal...ots-how-ai-is-learning-all-our-worst-impulses

True. Also, dogs are suspicious of and bark more at black people than at whites. Could be the colour of the skin, body language, who knows. But they seem to know something. So I suppose they're evil Nazis too.