I agree with Peter that the PCC should be disbanded full stop – they are self serving, chosen from their own ranks, unelected by the people, and thus unrepresentative. But unlike Peter, I really don’t care what they think about Jan Moir. The people have already spoken on youtube, on blogs, on twitter, on comments sections – the nation has told Mrs Moir where to go, because we aren’t as stupid and bigoted as she thought we were.
I support this silly woman’s right to utter unfounded offensive nonsense, and I take great joy in seeing her crashing down to earth, and exposed as a liar. Just like I enjoy seeing Nick Griffin exposed and shown to be a moron on Question Time.
What career moves are open to Mrs Moir now? That’s the question any journalist must ask, if they feel tempted to pander to prejudice and print unfounded nonsense that scapegoats a minority group in the community. (Answer: They end up in the journaists’ graveyard of the Daily Telegraph’s blog page, alongside ghouls such as Gerald Warner and other crackpots).
The PCC is a gravy train and a jolly – money for old rope. Exterminate it. Eliminate it. Eradicate it.
The PCC is an irrelevant nonsense. Ban it or deprive it of public money if it gets any.
Set up a statutory body with a very narrow but very clear and legally empowered brief:
1 To investigate complaints of incitement to violence or law-breaking.
2 To investigate allegations of inaccuracy published willfully or recklessly as fact.
3 To investigate complaints of invasion of privacy unwarranted by public interest (lives of partners or relatives of public figures, relationships or activities irrelevant to public roles and stances).
4 To enforce grovelling apologies on the front page or flagship news programmes and savage fines where complaints are upheld.
This is more than enough, and vastly more than the pathetic PCC is capable of doing. Opinion, no matter how gross, should not be its concern.
“What career moves are open to Mrs Moir now?”
A prosperous career writing for the BNP monthly newsletter?
A columnist in The Uganda Times?
Well said, Peter. If you, and Ben Summerskill, hadn’t reacted and spoken out about this appalling judgement immediately it would just have passed by – with a great big satisfied grin on Moir’s moosh.
I hope some of the media choose to do some analysis of the PCC and it’s value.
“If you, and Ben Summerskill, hadn’t reacted and spoken out about this trivial bit of rubbish to keep my fish and chips warm on the way home from the pub…”
None of us would have really given a flying toss about some has-been boyband member having a quick three-way…
Self regulation of the press is not working.
A free press does not mean self regulation.
Independent regulation seems to be needed.
I agree with Peter. It’s been on tons of morning chat shows/news etc with a few starights saying “this is not right” while clearly not bothered enough to do anything.
RobN – it’s not trivial rubbish
it was homophobia and the PCC failed again
I’d be very interested to research the number of homophobic complaints submitted to the PCC, and how many of those complaints as a percentage have been upheld or partially upheld by them. It seems it might be time to look into their track record of homophobic complaints, relative say, to racial complaints.
This might also provide evidence to back up claims when we feel the PCC doesn’t take homophobia seriously.
Chester: Well I’ve read it too, a few times, and it was tactless, insensitive and poorly written, but it was NOT homophobic. People read into this stuff what they want to read, but if you read it objectively you will see it is rather ambiguous, but nonetheless does not denigrate gay people, it merely says CP’s are just like any other marriage when it comes to splitting up.
You as usual go into one of your “poor-little-me” persecution rants every time someone takes an often well deserved swipe at the gay lifestyle.
Actually most of the article was ignorance not homophobia. I totally disagee with the PCC and believe it has paved the way for more abuse to come our way. However this came from some vile person who doesn’t know what she was talking about And didn’t bother to do research on the matter. As someone who wishes to speak on matters I feel at the very least she should have researched and it was her duty to give an accurate account rather than make it up as she went along.
I think we are in danger of supporters turning their backs on us if we start jumping up at every comment and labelling it homophobic when it is sheer ignorance. Surely it is our duty to make sure those who are ignorant are corrected with the fact.
I do think that if such articles appear then we should have the right to demand a correction and in the case of newspapers compensation. We are not second class citizen, we pay our taxes just like everyone else. Maybe they should be reminded of that fact.
RobN must have more than just one screw lost to not see that Moir’s article contained insidious elements of homophobia. 25,000 individuals saw that it was so. RobN can’t. Yet I see he posts all over this website. Who is he, exactly? Some Daily Mail reader or BNP member who pretends to be gay in order to come here and torment? If he IS queer then he definitely isn’t grateful to all those who have fought and campaigned for rights which he can now enjoy.
Careful Steven S, if you question RobN, he’ll tell you “I was here first”, like a schoolchild marking his favourite part of the playground.
Here are the contact details of the PCC:
Stephen Abell – Director
Kim Baxter – PA to the Chairman and Director
Jonathan Collett – Director of Communications
William Gore – Public Affairs Director
Scott Langham – Head of Complaints
Dear Mr Abell
In light of the decision by the PCC to reject the complaints made about the factually inaccurate; offensive; homophobic, intrusive column by Jan Moir about the death of Stephen Gately, I would like you to confirm how this decision was reached.
Was there a conflict of interest at work? Was there someone from the Mail Group of newspapers involved in the decision?
What is being done to make the PCC decision making process more transparent and independent?
While I support a free press I would remind you that this does not mean that journalists have a right to lie and to write articles whose sole purpose is to be needlessly homophobic and abusive.
I personally feel that through its failure to offer the gay community any redress for viciously homophobic ‘journalism’ (or incitement to give it a more accurate description) the PCC is not fit for purpose.
Self regulation by the British press clearly does not work and I an outside independent regulatory body is urgently required
Sqidgy: Oh go with that line of thinking. If it is fully justifiable, it’s worth complaining about, but this constant wittering about anyone criticising gay people is just going to alienate LGBT from everyone. “Oh no, she’s off again…”
StevenS: It is quite obvious from her article that there is no love lost between Jan Moir and gay men. However, there is equally no direct homophobic comment either. You said yourself, there were “insidious elements” – personally I think they were ambiguous and could be interpreted a number of ways, however, unlike you, I am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.
As for your comment regarding me being gay, yes I am, (NOT queer!) – but I see no reason why I should be grateful that I have to suffer the most part a bunch of selfish, vain, mean and narrow minded individuals that claim to be a “community” but in reality don’t give a flying toss about anyone or anything, (except when they want to shag something) So pray tell me what exactly it is I am supposed to “enjoy”.
George: You may equate it to the schoolyard, but I believe it is a very old fact that “Possession is nine tenths of the law”.
So it’s mine. Now f_ck off.
RobN – you don’t even know me plus it was homophobic, for example she attacked all couples plus she didn’t wait for the coroner before jumping to the totally wrong conclusions why and how he died
Bloody hell, he’s gone and done it again. Somebody responds honestly and holds up the mirror to him and he’s gone and insulted us again in the vilest manner he possibly can!
What a sad sad loser.
RobN has described us as “a bunch of selfish, vain, mean and narrow minded individuals that claim to be a ‘community’ but in reality don’t give a flying toss about anyone or anything, (except when they want to shag something)”
Over and over and over again this fool reads here in these pages of gay men and women having done good and fine things, but no, RobN’s suffering from a neurotic delusion: he can only keep repeating his message of self-hatred, like a needle that’s got stuck on an old-fashioned record-player.
Poor miserable old bug*er.
No Eddy. If anyone’s got a needle stuck, it’s you and your persistent rants about my apparent self-hatred. I’d love to know where you get these bizarre concepts. It’s YOU I hate, luvvie! I keep telling you that! I’m a gay man! How could I possibly not put myself on a pedestal and stare at the mirror all day?
Suddenly RobN claims to own the pinknews domain…well this interesting. As you said RobN, possession is 9/10s of the law.
George: You are a twat of the highest order. I thought our conversation was regarding immigrants, when I said “I was here first”. Try and keep up will you?
RobN: Consensus seems to hold that you are the one who is the twat of the highest order, given that you are clearly too blind to see it, but don’t worry, everyone else does.
P.S RobN: I’m sure if we delve back into history, there would be some picts, vikings, Celts and others who may disagree with you.
Mr Tatchell concluded: “This ruling brings the PCC into disrepute. It’s another nail in the coffin of this discredited, feeble institution. The PCC is past its sell-by date. It should be replaced by an independent statutory body with real power and principles.”
Here in Australia we have a similarly weak willed and toothless press council.
It is regularly highlighted on this on ABC TV’s Media Watch program. This seems to have far more effect than the Press Council. I do not know if the BBC has such a program. If not maybe it is time it had.
When a debate gets to the point where people are calling each other “twats” then it’s over. What a shame.
When a debate gets to the point where people are calling each other “twats” then people have started speaking honestly and forthrightly and calling a shovel a shovel. I do approve.
Sorry but once you start calling people names because they happen to have a different opinion means they are incapable of debate and cannot contribute any else worth know. Basically they’ve lose it.
Squidgy: “Basically they’ve lose it.”
I think you are incapable of debate even before then with grammar like that. ;)
RobN: your right I apologise to you for my dyslexia!
Frankly, I am tired of lazy people who can’t be bothered to focus their little brains and sit down and study and respect the English language. Instead, they issue utter nonsense, grammatical travesties of every sort, and when picked up on the meaninglessness of their verbiage, they turn and squawk “Oh, but I have a disability. You see I suffer from DYSLEXIA!”
Well, some people DO suffer from dyslexia, dyslexia being a mental condition. But I happen to know without any doubt whatsoever that a lot of very lazy people who simply can’t be bothered to mind their ps and qs are using dyslexia as an excuse, pure and simple!
No one can claim to be dyslexic unless they have undergone rigorous long-term testing conducted by a highly-qualified psychologist. And that means that the opinion of some sympathetic namby-pamby primary school teacher is no qualification whatsoever! It’s too easy to claim half your inner-city class suffers from dyslexic when you’re a lazy teacher who can’t be bothered to put in the work to teach your children the English language. Most of the teachers I come in contact with these days should be allowed nowhere near a classroom. Most of them can hardly express themselves, never mind teach children how to speak and write.
Oh, dear, I see I used the word “dyslexic” in the above paragraph when in fact I meant to say “dylexia”. Mea culpa. Silly me! Note well that I will NOT seek to excuse myself by claiming even the smallest degree of dyslexia.
God, your boring me Elizabeth, I’ll come back and look at that later when I need some sleep.
I am disabled, (I am in a wheelchair and suffer several illnesses that forced me to retire as a nurse, something else that seems to be ridiculed) dyslexia is a side issue (yes diagnosed properly) but by all means thank you for being judgmental and thinking you know best. I do have problems writing I always have but usually people understand and say they know what I am talking about.
I’m sure most disabled people will join me in hoping you yourself don’t find yourself amongst us, although I am weakening on the idea for you. Would be interesting to see you how you cope position.
Despite your badgering I still have a degree on literature and am an author so may I suggest you in future sort your own sad little life out, rather than using other people as a shield for it.
I guess we’ve spoken before and again I will not debate with someone clearly who needs learn to take other peoples side of a debate before ranting off and picking on others. You may not agree with it but hey thats life.
RobN – it was homophobic as it attacked everyone
what gay lifestyle?
Suidgy, sorry matey, but can’t help noticing that since Elizabeth gave it to you hard you’ve tidied up your act – there’s hardly an a grammatical error in your last post.
What the like of Elizabeth does John is called bullying. For a paper for gay people that should be aware of the amount of bullying it’s readers get, it should be more aware and more able to stop it from happening. It would seem some gay people scream from the rafters intolerance yet are themselves the most intolerence people to walk the planet.
For all your sniping, you cannot expect people to treat you in the manner you wish if you yourself are screaming them down. You get what you deserve.
I have written to this paper before about the bullying within its threads and feel the paper should be ashamed of itself for allowing it, so widely to continue without intervention.
I may very well be disabled but apologising for a mistake that someone has honestly brought forward and explaining the reason why is not a reason to sudden give the green light to be bullied by others. I am entitled to share my views as much as the next person. I should feel free also to do so without the fear of being bullied.
Some people scream “Bullying! Bullying!” and they are right.
Some losers squeal “Bullying! Bullying!” just because their views are rejected or contested by others.
Pete T – it’s never that simple TBH
But, Chester, I think I would agree with Pete T that there are definitely those who cry “Bully!” as soon as they feel their over-inflated self-opinion has been called into question. As for the rest, yes, there are infinite shades of grey, of course.