Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

The Queen Is Nude!

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [On Another Note...] >> News and Hot Topics >> The Queen Is Nude! Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 10:24:18 AM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4236
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot
So says the headline of Italian magazine Chi, which conjurs up some rather unpleasant thoughts.

Quite a shit-storm about this, although some would argue it's a shitstorm in a tea-cup. Personally I'm on Will and Kate's side, despite not necessarily being a royalist, and there's a part of me that hopes they prevail as the excuses I've heard from the editors of Chi and Closer are such cynical drivel. Sure, she's leading a life of privilige but I do feel sorry for Kate and William's outraged husband response is entirely understandable. No doubt some will claim she's "asking for it".

Be interesting to see what happens in the French courts today. What do you think?

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."
Post #: 1
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 10:31:04 AM   
sanchia


Posts: 18247
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
I too am not a royalist but the manner in which the pictures were taken is akin to a peeping Tom in that they were in a private residence out of public view and I think I read somewhere the only way these pictures could have been taken were wither by someone shinning up a tree with a telephoto lens or getting on a cherry picker. I can't really see the difference between these pictures and if someone is lurking at a window taking pictures of the people inside through a gap in the curtains.

Sadly whilst people buy the tat magazines which purchase these pictures people will keep doing this.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 2
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 10:37:02 AM   
donethinking


Posts: 431
Joined: 24/4/2012
From: Haggisland
Shitstorm in a B-cup


(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 3
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 10:55:30 AM   
jon5000


Posts: 1089
Joined: 29/3/2007
From: LA
I find the UK tabloid press's reaction hilariously hypocritical. They're attempting to claim some kind of moral high-ground to score well with their (likely) fiercely royalist readership... yet they do it week in, week out with other 'celebrities'.

What a bunch of wormy hacks.

(in reply to donethinking)
Post #: 4
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:01:11 AM   
Chief


Posts: 7778
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Banshee
I don't really care, I just want to see the pics.

(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 5
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:02:37 AM   
Fluke Skywalker


Posts: 9540
Joined: 23/4/2006
From: the dark side of the sun


But seriously - anyone got a lik to the pics

(in reply to Chief)
Post #: 6
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:03:41 AM   
superdan


Posts: 8280
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chief

I don't really care, I just want to see the pics.


They're really not that good. You'd think the paps would have learnt how to take a decent photo by now. She looks like the lead singer from Everything But The Girl in some of them.

(in reply to Chief)
Post #: 7
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:06:53 AM   
OPEN YOUR EYES

 

Posts: 4384
Joined: 5/2/2012

quote:

ORIGINAL: jon5000

I find the UK tabloid press's reaction hilariously hypocritical. They're attempting to claim some kind of moral high-ground to score well with their (likely) fiercely royalist readership... yet they do it week in, week out with other 'celebrities'.

What a bunch of wormy hacks.


Yep

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker



But seriously - anyone got a lik to the pics


hot.

(in reply to jon5000)
Post #: 8
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:10:19 AM   
steffols


Posts: 7689
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Jungleland
It doesn't take a computer expert to find the pics on google.

Some of the opinions about this that I've heard are really worrying. People saying stuff like 'well, we pay for her lifestyle, so shes fair game.' Just because she fell in love and married someone who happened to be a member of the royal family does not make her 'fair game'. She is entitled to privacy just like everybody else on the planet. She has not give permission for nude photos of her to be published, how on earth do magazines think they will get away with this?

It's also something to think about that they know the money they make from printing pictures like this will be far more than any legal battle will cost which sort of sounds to me like they have free reign to do as they please and no one can stop them - not even the courts.

< Message edited by steffols -- 17/9/2012 11:14:16 AM >


_____________________________

It's midnight in Manhattan, this is no time to get cute, it's a mad dog's promenade,
So walk tall, or baby don't walk at all.

(in reply to superdan)
Post #: 9
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:12:31 AM   
steffols


Posts: 7689
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Jungleland

quote:

ORIGINAL: jon5000

I find the UK tabloid press's reaction hilariously hypocritical. They're attempting to claim some kind of moral high-ground to score well with their (likely) fiercely royalist readership... yet they do it week in, week out with other 'celebrities'.

What a bunch of wormy hacks.


I thought that about the Sun writing a piece about the the distance the photographer was from the house. How they think they can stand on their moral high ground when just a month ago they published pictures taken with a long lens of Cheryl Cole in a car accident with blood pouring down her face.

_____________________________

It's midnight in Manhattan, this is no time to get cute, it's a mad dog's promenade,
So walk tall, or baby don't walk at all.

(in reply to jon5000)
Post #: 10
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:29:20 AM   
superdan


Posts: 8280
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: steffols
Some of the opinions about this that I've heard are really worrying. People saying stuff like 'well, we pay for her lifestyle, so shes fair game.' Just because she fell in love and married someone who happened to be a member of the royal family does not make her 'fair game'. She is entitled to privacy just like everybody else on the planet. She has not give permission for nude photos of her to be published, how on earth do magazines think they will get away with this?



Just to play Devil's advocate for a moment (in the interests of discussion), if you were one of the most famous and photographed women on the planet, would you assume you were ever free to bare your breasts outdoors without the risk of some pap scumbag taking a photo, no matter where you are? What happened was a blatant invasion of privacy, and they are entirely right to sue, but it showed a level of naivety that I found slightly surprising for the Royals to be honest. She has the right to privacy as does anyone, but unfortunately this is the real world and while there is a market for pictures like this (and while the law pretty much allows it since punishments are relatively toothless) the risk will always be there, surely?

(in reply to steffols)
Post #: 11
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:31:47 AM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7934
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire
I'm neither anti or pro royal, but I think the whole affair is really rather tawdry. There was no need to take those pictures.

The only reason to take those pictures I can think of is to appeal to guys who want to a see a beautiful girl topless and therefore shift more copies of whatever asinine magazine published the pictures. Which strikes me as being somewhat misogynist.

_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to steffols)
Post #: 12
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:36:25 AM   
sanchia


Posts: 18247
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chief

I don't really care, I just want to see the pics.


They're really not that good. You'd think the paps would have learnt how to take a decent photo by now. She looks like the lead singer from Everything But The Girl in some of them.


I get the impression they were taken from over a mile away and then fiercely cropped.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to superdan)
Post #: 13
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:38:41 AM   
Shifty Bench

 

Posts: 15398
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Land of the Scots
Ach, they're not even that impressive anyway.......

What?

(on a serious note, it's a disgusting invasion of privacy, regardless of who the victim is. I really despise the paps at times)

_____________________________

Extended Edition Podcast- Episode 46:Threads Of Destiny (Star Wars Fan Film)

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 14
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:41:03 AM   
Fluke Skywalker


Posts: 9540
Joined: 23/4/2006
From: the dark side of the sun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Ach, they're not even that impressive anyway.......

What?

(on a serious note, it's a disgusting invasion of privacy, regardless of who the victim is. I really despise the paps at times)


Their despicable most of the time, as jon5000 pointed out it's open season against everyone else but if it's the beloved Royal Family it's time to start spitting blood.

(in reply to Shifty Bench)
Post #: 15
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:53:25 AM   
sanchia


Posts: 18247
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
I think it should be the start of a movement against such paparazzi tat. If a picture is taken of them whilst on public land then fine but in their own homes or property via significant telephoto lens then no that is not fine,

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)
Post #: 16
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 11:59:03 AM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Ach, they're not even that impressive anyway.......

What?

(on a serious note, it's a disgusting invasion of privacy, regardless of who the victim is. I really despise the paps at times)


Their despicable most of the time, as jon5000 pointed out it's open season against everyone else but if it's the beloved Royal Family it's time to start spitting blood.


It has to be a female member of the Royal Family. When it's a male member, he's the one who's called a disgrace.

(in reply to Fluke Skywalker)
Post #: 17
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 12:13:00 PM   
Brooksy84


Posts: 461
Joined: 25/1/2010
I can't help but think that the Royals are about to undo a lot of the good PR they have built for themselves over the last couple of years. Though there will always be those who are anti-establishment, the Royal family has probably never been more popular than it is now, due in the majority to the efforts of William, Kate and Harry. Suddenly Royalty is modern, current and cool. But the reaction to the pictures from their camp strikes me as a fall back to the old days a little, taking legal action and such. Everyone has a right to privacy, agreed, but when you have the secure lifestyle and privilege that marrying into royalty brings, surely not being able to sunbathe topless to avoid situations such as this is a sacrafice worth making? Such a strong reaction, in my opinion, presents an air of being untouchable and above others, the main critiscism frequently thrown at the Royals in general. While at the moment they have a lot of support, I wonder how long it will last if their camp continue to go on about it and present themselves as such victims. For me, it would have been much better to present a simple statement saying that they find the pictures deplorable and request privacy in such matters in the future, then move on. I say this as someone neither particularly pro nor anti establishment, but if push came to shove I'd rather have them than not.

quote:

The only reason to take those pictures I can think of is to appeal to guys who want to a see a beautiful girl topless and therefore shift more copies of whatever asinine magazine published the pictures. Which strikes me as being somewhat misogynist.


Not sure I agree with this. Most blokes (myself included, I won't lie) will just do a bit of google searching to find the pictures, whereas surely those buying the magazine will be women or possibly gay men? I can't imagine straight men are Closer or Chi magazine's key demographic.

_____________________________

http://averagefootballfan.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to sanchia)
Post #: 18
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 12:14:27 PM   
steffols


Posts: 7689
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Jungleland

quote:

ORIGINAL: superdan


quote:

ORIGINAL: steffols
Some of the opinions about this that I've heard are really worrying. People saying stuff like 'well, we pay for her lifestyle, so shes fair game.' Just because she fell in love and married someone who happened to be a member of the royal family does not make her 'fair game'. She is entitled to privacy just like everybody else on the planet. She has not give permission for nude photos of her to be published, how on earth do magazines think they will get away with this?



Just to play Devil's advocate for a moment (in the interests of discussion), if you were one of the most famous and photographed women on the planet, would you assume you were ever free to bare your breasts outdoors without the risk of some pap scumbag taking a photo, no matter where you are? What happened was a blatant invasion of privacy, and they are entirely right to sue, but it showed a level of naivety that I found slightly surprising for the Royals to be honest. She has the right to privacy as does anyone, but unfortunately this is the real world and while there is a market for pictures like this (and while the law pretty much allows it since punishments are relatively toothless) the risk will always be there, surely?


It's a good point and I do agree with you. She should have been aware that this is a possibility when you are a pretty woman in the royal family. Yes, it's unfair that she can't take her top off when she thinks she has the privacy of a private property and in the company of only her husband but I feel this may be a lesson that she has to learn along the road.

It's shocking that people in the public eye need to think like this though. Again, the media and certain eejits have this opinion that because they are in the public eye then they are opening themselves to complete intrusion and nothing can be done. It's disgusting.


_____________________________

It's midnight in Manhattan, this is no time to get cute, it's a mad dog's promenade,
So walk tall, or baby don't walk at all.

(in reply to superdan)
Post #: 19
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 12:17:01 PM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4236
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fluke Skywalker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shifty Bench

Ach, they're not even that impressive anyway.......

What?

(on a serious note, it's a disgusting invasion of privacy, regardless of who the victim is. I really despise the paps at times)


Their despicable most of the time, as jon5000 pointed out it's open season against everyone else but if it's the beloved Royal Family it's time to start spitting blood.


It has to be a female member of the Royal Family. When it's a male member, he's the one who's called a disgrace.


Thing is I've read plenty of opinion out there that states she was in the wrong and that she was behaving "disgracefully" and in a manner that is not "becoming" of the future queen by daring to sunbathe topless.

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to AxlReznor)
Post #: 20
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 12:25:37 PM   
AxlReznor

 

Posts: 1623
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain
I hadn't heard that. Well as far as I'm concerned, Harry was acting like a single man in his 20's on a trip to Vegas. And Kate was acting like a young woman on holiday. Expecting them to be somehow above this is ridiculous. And if people think they're badly behaved, thank God the tabloids didn't exist in the days of the Tudors.

(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 21
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 12:38:21 PM   
superdan


Posts: 8280
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brooksy84

I can't help but think that the Royals are about to undo a lot of the good PR they have built for themselves over the last couple of years. Though there will always be those who are anti-establishment, the Royal family has probably never been more popular than it is now, due in the majority to the efforts of William, Kate and Harry. Suddenly Royalty is modern, current and cool. But the reaction to the pictures from their camp strikes me as a fall back to the old days a little, taking legal action and such. Everyone has a right to privacy, agreed, but when you have the secure lifestyle and privilege that marrying into royalty brings, surely not being able to sunbathe topless to avoid situations such as this is a sacrafice worth making? Such a strong reaction, in my opinion, presents an air of being untouchable and above others, the main critiscism frequently thrown at the Royals in general. While at the moment they have a lot of support, I wonder how long it will last if their camp continue to go on about it and present themselves as such victims. For me, it would have been much better to present a simple statement saying that they find the pictures deplorable and request privacy in such matters in the future, then move on. I say this as someone neither particularly pro nor anti establishment, but if push came to shove I'd rather have them than not.


I'm not sure I agree. This isn't like when Harry got pissed up in Vegas and flashed his tallywhacker around in full view of the public, they were in a remote and secluded chateau owned by one of the Royals. They had every right to assume full privacy (even if, once again, that was proven to be rather hopeful) and I think it is right for them to sue because a) The law was probably broken, and b) doing nothing only encourages these pap scumbags to feel untouchable, rather than the Royals.

The bottom line is, the press have got away for far too long with showing nude or compromising pictures of famous people that have absolutely no merit beyond boosting sales by satisfying a prurient public. Kate wasn't shooting up heroin or torturing puppies, she was sunbathing. The more the book is thrown at the gutter press, perhaps they'll be less inclined to sink to such depredations in the future. I'm not holding my breath though.

(in reply to Brooksy84)
Post #: 22
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 12:41:43 PM   
vad3r


Posts: 4403
Joined: 3/9/2010
From: Close to Mod HQ
She can take my (single) virginity any day.

_____________________________

Single Virgin Mod Candidate 2013


quote:

ORIGINAL: horribleives
To paraphrase the great man himself:

Vad3r won't go anywhere near this.

(in reply to superdan)
Post #: 23
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 1:04:29 PM   
Brooksy84


Posts: 461
Joined: 25/1/2010
Truth is though, the public loves gossip and candid photography enough to feed the demand. Labelling those that would publish photo's and stories like this as scum is like classing drug dealers as scum; without the demand they wouldn't survive (I accept there is a degree of variation in my example there). I guarantee you 90% or more of those who have said how disgraceful an invasion of privacy this was have all had a look at the photos themselves, or at least searched for them.

_____________________________

http://averagefootballfan.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to vad3r)
Post #: 24
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 1:23:15 PM   
Pigeon Army


Posts: 14612
Joined: 29/1/2006
From: Pixar HQ, George Lucas' Office.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brooksy84

Truth is though, the public loves gossip and candid photography enough to feed the demand. Labelling those that would publish photo's and stories like this as scum is like classing drug dealers as scum; without the demand they wouldn't survive (I accept there is a degree of variation in my example there). I guarantee you 90% or more of those who have said how disgraceful an invasion of privacy this was have all had a look at the photos themselves, or at least searched for them.


This is by no means a justification or an excuse for taking the photos, though. There isn't some sort of burgeoning market for "Kate Middleton hot naked pix" that this is feeding - these pictures, and that market, wouldn't exist without the pictures. The fact that we have a society so slavishly attached to living the celebrity dream vicariously through tabloid mags is awful and unpleasant and leads to some reprehensible breaches of privacy (like this one), but that doesn't mean that the people who feed can turn around, shrug, say "just doin' my job" and go back to it. They don't have to do it. The market isn't forcing them to at gunpoint.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brooksy84

I can't help but think that the Royals are about to undo a lot of the good PR they have built for themselves over the last couple of years. Though there will always be those who are anti-establishment, the Royal family has probably never been more popular than it is now, due in the majority to the efforts of William, Kate and Harry. Suddenly Royalty is modern, current and cool. But the reaction to the pictures from their camp strikes me as a fall back to the old days a little, taking legal action and such. Everyone has a right to privacy, agreed, but when you have the secure lifestyle and privilege that marrying into royalty brings, surely not being able to sunbathe topless to avoid situations such as this is a sacrafice worth making? Such a strong reaction, in my opinion, presents an air of being untouchable and above others, the main critiscism frequently thrown at the Royals in general. While at the moment they have a lot of support, I wonder how long it will last if their camp continue to go on about it and present themselves as such victims. For me, it would have been much better to present a simple statement saying that they find the pictures deplorable and request privacy in such matters in the future, then move on. I say this as someone neither particularly pro nor anti establishment, but if push came to shove I'd rather have them than not.


I can think of a number of situations where people, famous and otherwise, have taken legal action against people who have taken covert semi/nudes of them that they didn't authorise or know about. There was a NZ Broadcasting Standards Authority case where a breach of privacy was found in a television crew rustling around some girl's room, including her underwear drawer, as part of a prank show and aiming to screen that across the country. Just because someone is a Royal doesn't mean that they're not entitled to the same legal protections that other people - whether their sunbathing topless is a smart thing to do is another question entirely. The fact that them seeking the same kind of legal recourse we allow any citizen presents an air of 'untouchability' to you says more about your perception of them than it does about them.

quote:

Not sure I agree with this. Most blokes (myself included, I won't lie) will just do a bit of google searching to find the pictures, whereas surely those buying the magazine will be women or possibly gay men? I can't imagine straight men are Closer or Chi magazine's key demographic.


Their demographic is whoever will buy the magazine. I doubt they're picky if it means a lot of money.

Also, a friend of mine on Twitter posted this, highlighting just how far the photographer had to go to get this picture (it's from the MailOnline as part of their hypocritical-as-all-hell crusade to make sure that they don't attract more negative publicity alongside the Leveson Inquiry, so take it with a grain of salt, but I'm prone to believing it) -



I mean that's pretty fucking ludicrous

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rinc
She's supposed to be 13! I'd want her to be very attractive though


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat
quote:

ORIGINAL: Pigeon Army
Stop being mean to Deviation

No.

(in reply to Brooksy84)
Post #: 25
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 1:45:09 PM   
Brooksy84


Posts: 461
Joined: 25/1/2010
Oh absolutely, it's an extreme without doubt. My point is simply this: Kate Middleton is an intelligent woman. During her engagement to Will, she must have laid awake at night from time to time asking herself, am I ready for all that's about to come my way? This lack of privacy, the limited social life, the pressure to act a certain way, present a certain image. At some point she must have realised that every time she put on a bikini the paps were gona be like flies around shit. With this in mind, if there was even a chance that by going topless you were risking the possibility of an opportunistic papparazzo lying in wait for the money shot, then surely you'd just go without. Is this fair? Perhaps not. Is it the reality? Unfortunately for her, yes, and when she made the commitment to marry him she accepted that a lot of crap was gona come her way. I don't say this as one of the "she's famous so she deserves it" mob, I'm just pointing out the way things are.

_____________________________

http://averagefootballfan.blogspot.co.uk/

(in reply to Pigeon Army)
Post #: 26
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 1:55:37 PM   
Chief


Posts: 7778
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Banshee
Surely there is a legal line somewhere that says you aren't allowed to take pictures of strangers breasts without their knowledge, regardless of status?

(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 27
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 2:06:18 PM   
sanchia


Posts: 18247
Joined: 3/1/2006
From: Norwich
In the UK it apparently could be defined as breeching the Voyeurism statute which apparently can lead to up to one year in jail. Apparently in France the privacy laws are very strict and there is the possibility of a couple of years in jail for the photographer although the editor of the magazine may just get a fine which will more than likely be a lot less than the increased revenue publishing the pictures has made,.

Interestingly the company which owned the French magazine which first published the pictures is owned by Silvio Berlusconi and nothing associated with him surprises me.

_____________________________

Nothing to see here.



(in reply to Chief)
Post #: 28
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 2:07:07 PM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4236
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brooksy84
At some point she must have realised that every time she put on a bikini the paps were gona be like flies around shit. With this in mind, if there was even a chance that by going topless you were risking the possibility of an opportunistic papparazzo lying in wait for the money shot, then surely you'd just go without.


I see what you're saying but she was in a supposedly secluded environment, no matter what the editor of Closer thinks. She can't be blamed for assuming that she was safe from prying eyes - prying eyes with a huge fucking telescopic lens that is. I don't think she was being in any way reckless, and my personal reaction has in no way been influenced by our fickle press.

Of course I have googled the photos, so I'm well aware of my own culpability here.

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to Brooksy84)
Post #: 29
RE: The Queen Is Nude! - 17/9/2012 3:05:33 PM   
superdan


Posts: 8280
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brooksy84

Truth is though, the public loves gossip and candid photography enough to feed the demand. Labelling those that would publish photo's and stories like this as scum is like classing drug dealers as scum; without the demand they wouldn't survive (I accept there is a degree of variation in my example there). I guarantee you 90% or more of those who have said how disgraceful an invasion of privacy this was have all had a look at the photos themselves, or at least searched for them.


PA has already responded to this, but with tabloids it's often more a case of supply creating demand rather than feeding it. They'll publish these pictures and when people look at them they go, "See! People wanted to see them, it was in the public interest. We are justified", while at the same time there's the contradiction in almost every poll I've seen in this country which overwhelmingly seems to demonstrate that people believe the pictures shouldn't have been published. People will look at photos because, well, that's what we do. However, give people the choice as to whether they should be published in the first place, and it would seem that outside a few curtain-twitchers and wank-happy simpletons the consensus would be that the public interest hasn't been served.

(in reply to Brooksy84)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [On Another Note...] >> News and Hot Topics >> The Queen Is Nude! Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125