The Guardian and the Morrissey Vendetta by Fiona Dodwell - tremr

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Anonymous, Jun 2, 2019.

By Anonymous on Jun 2, 2019 at 1:47 PM
  1. Anonymous

    Anonymous Guest

    A new article about the Guardian & Mozza.

    The Guardian and the Morrissey Vendetta. - tremr
    By Fiona Dodwell

    Excerpt:

    "Journalists must not engage in intimidation, harassment or persistent pursuit," states The Guardian's own editorial policy. Rightly so, for the media's power to sway public opinion comes with great responsibility to not only their readers, but to the individuals they write about in their publication.

    Freedom of the press allows journalists to exercise their right to express their opinions freely and without restriction. No art should be immune from being held under the microscope and examined or critiqued - the same goes for the people who create this art. However, when you consider that The Guardian have amassed a whopping 478 Morrissey related content on their website, much of which appears to spew vitriol towards the singer, one can't help but question whether there's an underlying reason behind their obsession.


    UPDATE June 3:

    Link posted on Morrissey Central:

    The Guardian Of Hate.


    Related items:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 3, 2019
    • Like Like x 3
    • Dislike Dislike x 1

Comments

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Anonymous, Jun 2, 2019.

    1. Anonymous
      Anonymous
      Please explain how For Britain are racist if you are ok with controlling immigration? It is illegal for a political party in the UK to have racist policies - For Britain exist legally and are not proscribed. Why is Moz not free to support them if he wishes? It is not For Britain who are being investigated for anti-semitism by the Equalities and Human Rights Commission - it is the Labour Party. Will you condemn pop stars who support the racist Labour Party?
    2. BookishBoy
      BookishBoy
      As with all Dodwell articles, it’s another weakly written piece - although the first time she’s owned up to her own bias, which is a good first step.

      Credit to her, though, for finding the angle re the Guardian’s editorial policy on “intimidation, harassment or persistent pursuit.” There is clearly a pattern of “persistent pursuit” given the recurrence of negative pieces over the years. Intimidation? No. Harassment? Seems to me that the Daniel Dylan Wray article was precisely that: a deliberate attempt to torpedo an artist’s work in advance of release by proactively contacting collaborators and trying to get them to disown their work on the album.

      And on a tangent, interesting to note that the BBC (an institution not without its own bias issues, but nowhere near on the scale of the Guardian) immediately picked up as a news item this example of musicians actually committing hate speech:

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48488732

      ...while the Guardian, of course, hasn't mentioned it at all. (Presumably because this particular hate speech is directed at Tories.)
    3. A Man Escaped
      A Man Escaped
      Has John Riggers had a sex change?
    4. Tingle3
      Tingle3
      The Guardian has 478 articles on its website listed as mentioning Morrissey - they are no means all about him. By comparison the same paper lists 567 articles mentioning Paul McCartney and 184 mentioning Iggy Pop. Many articles are of course news about forth coming releases including an article on "Autumn's 10 best music books" letting us know that Autobiography was coming. Can you imagine if newspapers didn't mention Morrissey?, didn't mention his new releases or anniversaries of Smiths releases? He'd say they had a vendetta in keeping him out of their articles.
      • Like Like x 2
    5. Anonymous
    6. Anonymous
      Anonymous
      I never used the word slander, so I could not have possibly misused it either. You appear to be confusing me with a previous poster. My first message on this thread was a direct reply to your comment below.

      YOU - "Hog wash. If it can’t be taken to court, it’s merely comment, and neither you, Morrissey or anyone else can stop it. All you can do is whine. Tough."
      ME (my first message) - It seems like The Guardian are the biggest whiners here. 400 plus times...
      For the record, just because something doesn't go to court, doesn't automatically make it "merely comment".
    7. Anonymous
      Anonymous
      Haha. Russel Brand and Jonathan Ross for credibility. Hilarious. So Moz gets a supportive comment from those two and he can swan off in to the sunset, victorious. Oh please.
    8. Anonymous
      Anonymous
      I know where I'd rather be. Jonze too, I expect...
    9. Anonymous
      Anonymous
      Surely the same can be said in reverse.
    10. vegan cro spirit 333
      vegan cro spirit 333


      :rolleyes:

      right and the Skinny Soviet sock puppets, including the 'charming couple' of soviet surface
      and oridinaryboicuck have careers other than loitering in the cul de sac, spying for hooky
      and the pooch. noontime is when the pooch needs walking, you can see them all with googy eyes
      then.:thumb:
    11. Anonymous
      Anonymous
      There is an interview with Bowie, where he’s challenged by someone saying something similar to your own words.

      Bowie’s response might enlighten you about your own limitations.
    12. ForgotHowIGotMyName
      ForgotHowIGotMyName
      It's a little more complicated than that.
      Class isn't just about how much money you have. Working, middle, and upper classes have slightly different values, tastes, and look at the world different ways. Sometimes people might move up (or down) in economic class in their life but keep the same class mentality they grew up with. Or sometimes they embrace the values of their new class.
      If Morrissey had a kid, his kid would be upper class. But Morrissey himself sees the world in a different way than people who grew up in wealth.
      • Like Like x 1
    13. Anonymous
      Anonymous
      The point is. You know what the point is. Only his no marks friends and family coming to his defence.
    14. Anonymous
      Anonymous
      I agree with this anonymous comment, above.

      Because it is true.

Share This Page