TV
Aware as I am of my reputation here as the Mail's defender, I don't ever lick butt and will readily say so if I think the paper has screwed up. As they have on this occasion - it's a non-story!
For goodness sake, she's only sat on a desk. What did you expect to see? That said, I suppose we should be grateful for career women still wearing skirts in 2007...
Alexia posted:
Prudes!! Too much leg indeed!! Focus on what's coming out of her mouth!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=476878&in_page_id=1773&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=picbox&ct=5
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=476878&in_page_id=1773&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=picbox&ct=5
Aware as I am of my reputation here as the Mail's defender, I don't ever lick butt and will readily say so if I think the paper has screwed up. As they have on this occasion - it's a non-story!
For goodness sake, she's only sat on a desk. What did you expect to see? That said, I suppose we should be grateful for career women still wearing skirts in 2007...
JC
Aware as I am of my reputation here as the Mail's defender, I don't ever lick butt and will readily say so if I think the paper has screwed up. As they have on this occasion - it's a non-story!
For goodness sake, she's only sat on a desk. What did you expect to see?
Her sat behind the desk? Like any normal non-dumbed down news service.
tvarksouthwest posted:
Alexia posted:
Prudes!! Too much leg indeed!! Focus on what's coming out of her mouth!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=476878&in_page_id=1773&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=picbox&ct=5
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=476878&in_page_id=1773&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=picbox&ct=5
Aware as I am of my reputation here as the Mail's defender, I don't ever lick butt and will readily say so if I think the paper has screwed up. As they have on this occasion - it's a non-story!
For goodness sake, she's only sat on a desk. What did you expect to see?
Her sat behind the desk? Like any normal non-dumbed down news service.
TG
I really fail to see why sat on desk must = dumbed down.
FFS, it's a trail for a bulletin - a bulletin during which we know that she will be sat behind a desk - and basically, she's nipped into the studio early to do a quick ad for it a full hour in advance.
Do people really expect the poor woman to sit behind the desk ALL THE TIME just so she doesn't risk looking "simple", or that somehow perching on the desk will mean that she's therefore going to use simpler words, or the day's news will be subject to a simpler, lower-quality analysis?
Rubbish.
FFS, it's a trail for a bulletin - a bulletin during which we know that she will be sat behind a desk - and basically, she's nipped into the studio early to do a quick ad for it a full hour in advance.
Do people really expect the poor woman to sit behind the desk ALL THE TIME just so she doesn't risk looking "simple", or that somehow perching on the desk will mean that she's therefore going to use simpler words, or the day's news will be subject to a simpler, lower-quality analysis?
Rubbish.
BB
Just two days after Daily Mail posted that article about Emily on there website, here they go again, but this time, with new prey.
"Now Fiona shows too much leg on Crimewatch"
"The night Crimewatch turned into Thighwatch"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=477116&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=picbox&ct=5
"Now Fiona shows too much leg on Crimewatch"
"The night Crimewatch turned into Thighwatch"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=477116&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=picbox&ct=5
CW
Charlie Wells
Moderator
Well l guess all female news readers / presenters could wear jeans so that the Daily Mail can't moan about too much leg being shown and instead moan about the dumbing down of the BBC by jean wearing.
Also how much leg is too much leg? (you don't have to answer that question)
Also how much leg is too much leg? (you don't have to answer that question)
SP
Whilst I don't necessarily follow the dumbing down argument, are you really trying to suggest that perching on the desk is anything other than a contrived exercise in posed casualness?
You really think presenters wander into a studio and decide for themselves where they're going to stand / sit / perch?
TG posted:
I really fail to see why sat on desk must = dumbed down.
FFS, it's a trail for a bulletin - a bulletin during which we know that she will be sat behind a desk - and basically, she's nipped into the studio early to do a quick ad for it a full hour in advance.
Do people really expect the poor woman to sit behind the desk ALL THE TIME just so she doesn't risk looking "simple", or that somehow perching on the desk will mean that she's therefore going to use simpler words, or the day's news will be subject to a simpler, lower-quality analysis?
Rubbish.
FFS, it's a trail for a bulletin - a bulletin during which we know that she will be sat behind a desk - and basically, she's nipped into the studio early to do a quick ad for it a full hour in advance.
Do people really expect the poor woman to sit behind the desk ALL THE TIME just so she doesn't risk looking "simple", or that somehow perching on the desk will mean that she's therefore going to use simpler words, or the day's news will be subject to a simpler, lower-quality analysis?
Rubbish.
Whilst I don't necessarily follow the dumbing down argument, are you really trying to suggest that perching on the desk is anything other than a contrived exercise in posed casualness?
You really think presenters wander into a studio and decide for themselves where they're going to stand / sit / perch?
JR
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=477174&in_page_id=1879
Look at the Google ad bar on the left. See what eBay's selling this time.
Look at the Google ad bar on the left. See what eBay's selling this time.
TV
Why the Mail is continuing to make such a fuss about this is unbelievable yet a valid story I'd have thought the Mail would have seized on - namely Pete Doherty's cats being seized by the RSPCA after they ingested cocaine - goes unmentioned.
Must be a bad news week.
Must be a bad news week.
DC
Nah, the official Pete Doherty newspaper(The Mirror) would probably have that story.
I dunno why I keep buying that paper, it just gets on my nerves when yet another front page is taken up by some no talent loser
Quote:
namely Pete Doherty's cats being seized by the RSPCA after they ingested cocaine
Nah, the official Pete Doherty newspaper(The Mirror) would probably have that story.
I dunno why I keep buying that paper, it just gets on my nerves when yet another front page is taken up by some no talent loser
GS
I feel another "Simon Special" coming on -
"Let's kick the drugs out of showbusiness - including their wayward moggies".
Gavin Scott
Founding member
tvarksouthwest posted:
Pete Doherty's cats being seized by the RSPCA after they ingested cocaine.
I feel another "Simon Special" coming on -
"Let's kick the drugs out of showbusiness - including their wayward moggies".
TV
Very droll. As if the poor cats are to blame - it's instinct for them to try and eat something on the floor they are attracted to - so this was an accident waiting to happen. The man can't even look after himself, so what hope have those cats got?