Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Good for you Harry

  1. #1

    Default Good for you Harry

    I have never been a fan of the royals, I'm not a believer in monarchy. But the statement Harry has had issued about his new girlfriend is pure class.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/prince-...rkle-1.3841280
    Last edited by moahunter; 08-11-2016 at 05:33 AM.

  2. #2

    Default

    Would agree.

    The context of this should also be understood and how this mans life has been impacted by the media involvement for instance in his mothers death. Who on the planet could possibly be more aware of how the media does impact? Its despicable anybody questions why he would be concerned and the media stating that "its part of the game". Some game. Some of the media should be taken behind the tool shed. Its gotten far worse since clickbait internet and social media. Its like media, and people figure they should have any right to the most private details and any degree of ongoing and continual harassment to get that.

    Not sure what the answer is.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  3. #3
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,543

    Default

    Ultimately the media is providing a product that it's customers pay for or at least support through page views and the like. I've never been a big fan of blaming "the media", when the media is very much a reflection of our society as a whole. Many of the people tut-tutting about the intrusion in to Harry's life are the same ones buying Us Weekly, People, and watching TMZ.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Ultimately the media is providing a product that it's customers pay for or at least support through page views and the like. I've never been a big fan of blaming "the media", when the media is very much a reflection of our society as a whole. Many of the people tut-tutting about the intrusion in to Harry's life are the same ones buying Us Weekly, People, and watching TMZ.
    Not convinced this is the case entirely. One can view this either as a push/pull relationship. I daresay a compromised media pushes this junk. With internet and social media adding to that. These are dynamic influences wherein tabloid type reporting has won, not because its the best thing for media to do, but that its the easiest. I realize that can be turned full circle on people that buy tabloids but most people, I would think, were not reading the star or National Examiner for the news. Present day media has made that tabloid junk the new brave world with ***** Presidents like Donald Trump in tow. One could argue the media is creating the news at this point and demarking what is news.

    Look no further than the internet becoming largely click bait junk. What consumer would really want that? That's a pushed, rather than pulled dynamic. The media giving us what THEY want for click bait advertising and proceeds, not what the consumer actually wants.

    Further its the tired Quentin Tarentino argument that he is just reflecting the present day world in his movies. Its absolute bs, and just adulterated crap stated to try to get past the censors and ratings control. I'm not sure anybody even takes that angle seriously. The media has made this bed. Its not like people have much choices in present day media as everything from CNN on has been subverted into the new garbage type "postmedia (ironic name) universe.
    Last edited by Replacement; 08-11-2016 at 10:49 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  5. #5
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Crawford Plains, Millwoods since 1985
    Posts
    2,687

    Default

    I've never understood the fascination with rich people although the royals are a little different for obvious reasons. Myself, I could give a rat's arse about "rich people's problems" and have absolutely no initiative to keep tabs on the latest, I think many of the average person tries to mimic the lifestyle of the rich, especially through social media. Wanna truly feel good about yourself? Quit trying too hard, quit paying attention to irrelevant rich peoples issues and don't try to fool everybody that you're some upper elite douche.

  6. #6
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Ultimately the media is providing a product that it's customers pay for or at least support through page views and the like. I've never been a big fan of blaming "the media", when the media is very much a reflection of our society as a whole. Many of the people tut-tutting about the intrusion in to Harry's life are the same ones buying Us Weekly, People, and watching TMZ.
    Demand is not the sole determiner of whether something is right or not. These people should be able to have lives free of constant harassment and abuse. That people are drawn to watch the harassment and abuse of these people is comparable to how people slow down to look at a car wreck. The answer isn't more car wrecks to satisfy the demand.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  7. #7

    Default

    Media today has many facets. You have people like the Kardashians who seem to go out of their way to attract it then others who get totally freaked (Alex Baldwin) when they come across it. What with todays smart phones etc. it seems anyone anywhere can be filmed doing just about anything. The media today that get's paid to get stories out to the public is a shadow of it's past. They seem to think we want to hear the smallest of details in famous and semi-famous peoples lives. If anything Harry making a statement on this will probably only make it worse. What he has done is basically solidified it as a serious relationship. It's the first time he has issued a statement like this on any of his girlfriends. The pressure will now be ramped up. Next the media will be trying to interview her teachers, her next door neighbors, her dry cleaner. Maybe there should be some kind of law past to stop media from stalking these people. No harassment type laws with hefty fines.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  8. #8

    Default

    In this instance especially I can conclude nothing other than that the media created the firestorm around Harrys GF, that she's in Toronto and saturation bombed this as if was some kind of news that we should care about. Its exhibit A of what media now thinks the news is.

    The whole time I'm thinking who on Earth cares about this, why should I, and why should it be front page news. I don't think I'm alone in thinking this either. The media, which doesn't even comprehend what legitimate news is these days created this as a story. They made it a story. They manufactured this entirely as a newsworthy event.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  9. #9

    Default

    Most national papers worldwide that once were respected reads are now basically a couple of rungs up from The National Enquirer. Unfortunately they take a lot of stock on what celebrities have to say. We just have to look at some of the stories out there. Global warming has a following of high profile (and D lister) celebs talking about it. Same as politics. Celebs with no political acumen talking like they are experts. It's a two way street. Celebs thinking they are more than just celebs and a media that believe these celebs actually talk sense, as if their opinions really do have merit.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  10. #10

    Default

    ^ one needs political acumen to discuss scientific concepts?
    Let's make Edmonton better.

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JayBee View Post
    ^ one needs political acumen to discuss scientific concepts?
    No, apparently not as plenty of celebs talk about a number of scientific and political subjects of which they have no scientific or political expertize. The only difference from them and us is that they get a wider audience because they are celebs.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  12. #12
    C2E Stole my Heart!!!!
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Downtown Edmonton
    Posts
    9,543

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Demand is not the sole determiner of whether something is right or not. These people should be able to have lives free of constant harassment and abuse. That people are drawn to watch the harassment and abuse of these people is comparable to how people slow down to look at a car wreck. The answer isn't more car wrecks to satisfy the demand.
    I never said that demand justifies the means, and I fail to see how you came to that conclusion based on what I posted. But I do think it's shortsighted to simply pin the blame on the media, when there is obviously such a massive demand for this kind of reporting.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Most national papers worldwide that once were respected reads are now basically a couple of rungs up from The National Enquirer. Unfortunately they take a lot of stock on what celebrities have to say. We just have to look at some of the stories out there. Global warming has a following of high profile (and D lister) celebs talking about it. Same as politics. Celebs with no political acumen talking like they are experts. It's a two way street. Celebs thinking they are more than just celebs and a media that believe these celebs actually talk sense, as if their opinions really do have merit.
    I don't think its a new thing, if you go back and look at old newspapers, the royals always made a big part of all the stories (at least in the Commonwealth), even in respected newspapers. I like what Harry did here, and how it was worded. I dread Charles being our king though, hoping eventually we become a republic and the right to vote for our head of state like the US does, or just have appointed by the PM like now, but formally cut the link to the UK family. Harry seems the only good one, but then, that's not surprising given the stories that he doesn't really have royal parents (Dianna and Hewitt).
    Last edited by moahunter; 08-11-2016 at 11:51 AM.

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Gemini View Post
    Most national papers worldwide that once were respected reads are now basically a couple of rungs up from The National Enquirer. Unfortunately they take a lot of stock on what celebrities have to say. We just have to look at some of the stories out there. Global warming has a following of high profile (and D lister) celebs talking about it. Same as politics. Celebs with no political acumen talking like they are experts. It's a two way street. Celebs thinking they are more than just celebs and a media that believe these celebs actually talk sense, as if their opinions really do have merit.
    I don't think its a new thing, if you go back and look at old newspapers, the royals always made a big part of all the stories (at least in the Commonwealth), even in respected newspapers. I like what Harry did here, and how it was worded. I dread Charles being our king though, hoping eventually we become a republic and the right to vote for our head of state like the US does, or just have appointed by the PM like now, but formally cut the link to the UK family. Harry seems the only good one, but then, that's not surprising given the stories that he doesn't really have royal parents (Dianna and Hewitt).
    At one time newspapers used to hire investigative reporters who actually had knowledge and an aptitude for investigating and putting out a story that was worth reading. Now the media is nothing more than people with iphones that can string two words together. Social media has turned reporting into second by second encounter. It does not take a day anymore to put a story together when you can record it as it happens. No need to write the story if you are filming it as it happens. Years ago news reporters were more respectful of the people they were reporting on as newspapers wanted to be know as being fair in it's content. Now the media actively asks anyone if they have info or pictures of events. Usually what they get is some bystander who has taken pictures with their iPhone. It's like that TMZ show (Thirty Mile Zone) it could be called SMZ (Sixty Mile Zone) and it would still be crap. It's not reporting it's just dudes acting as reporters.
    "The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain

  15. #15
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Westmount, Edmonton
    Posts
    5,326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcel Petrin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Turnbull View Post
    Demand is not the sole determiner of whether something is right or not. These people should be able to have lives free of constant harassment and abuse. That people are drawn to watch the harassment and abuse of these people is comparable to how people slow down to look at a car wreck. The answer isn't more car wrecks to satisfy the demand.
    I never said that demand justifies the means, and I fail to see how you came to that conclusion based on what I posted. But I do think it's shortsighted to simply pin the blame on the media, when there is obviously such a massive demand for this kind of reporting.
    What I would take issue with is not blaming the media. I do blame them as they are the ones doing the harassing. They are the ones making the choice. That there is a market for the results of that harassment is irrelevant. There's a market for many things that we disallow.

    "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by moahunter View Post
    I like what Harry did here, and how it was worded. I dread Charles being our king though, hoping eventually we become a republic and the right to vote for our head of state like the US does, or just have appointed by the PM like now, but formally cut the link to the UK family. Harry seems the only good one, but then, that's not surprising given the stories that he doesn't really have royal parents (Dianna and Hewitt).
    Then you've gotta be happy you're in Canada, where we had the guts to abandon the Union Jack on our flag back in 1965. This is in sharp contrast to New Zealand, which recently voted to continue clinging to England's leg
    I think of art, at its most significant, as a Distant Early Warning system that can always be relied on to tell the old culture what is beginning to happen to it. —Marshall McLuhan

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •