The Daily Scapegoat
Our daily newspapers have to sell, or otherwise they go out of print. The job of the Editors is to decide what sells and what is beyond the pale, i.e. likely to lead to expensive court cases, or a loss of readership.
Since the News of the World ceased publication it appears that the daily tabloids have taken over the mantle of destroying personalities in the public eye. The most noticeable element that seems to be constant is that the details relating to the crimes appear, like magic, from 30 years ago. The paedophile cases in the USA, dug up especially to ..........
occupy the media (newspapers and TV) in order to hide the body bags coming back from Iraq. The editors weren’t satisfied with that coverage so they pursued allegations relating to Michael Jackson, far more recent accusations and therefore, being a famous pop-
Here in the UK and in the Irish Republic 30-
For some strange reason we were expected to believe that Jimmy Saville was a Saint. When that proves not to be the case the magic 30 year history raises it’s ugly head again.
It’s unfortunate that Jimmy Saville can’t be here to defend himself which leaves the field open to any and all accusations. I wonder if the publication of his estate had anything to do with these belated statements to the press ?
The administrators of the Charity that Jimmy collected for have been quick to act in removing some details relating to the Charity. Perhaps the Charity Commission could take an interest in the running of that charity if they felt the need to disassociate themselves so rapidly !
Clearly all concerned have found it difficult to deal with the subject matter of paedophilia, hence the finger pointing when some of the clergy appear to have done nothing about accusations within the Church community.
Blue Movies; collecting dirty pictures -
I seem to remember a while ago when the offending images were girlie magazines. We’ve moved on somewhat since those days when the police raided the newsagents to remove the offending material from the top shelves.
I’ve never been able to understand how the collecting of dirty pictures can lead to a person, usually well known to the public, to be incarcerated. Who makes the decisions regarding the pursuance of this peculiar interest and consequent incarceration ? Is it decided by the Chief Constable of a particular area of the country or is it written in law that the citizen is not allowed to have weird photographs in their possession ?
Surely the culprits for any offending material should be those selling the images on the Internet ? Why is this not the priority of our police rather than finding out who downloaded such images. If the Internet Sites were non-
The problem appears to be that no one feels able to deal with the subject matter without appearing to support the suspect interests of a particular group.
We don’t find anyone criticizing the users of Blue Movies. The local constabulary don’t appear to be upset by such material, even though that material can be shown in homes in front of minors. It would seem that the degree of attention is related to the mothers of this world and any actions relating to children rather than adults for that reason.
Isobelle Barnet -
I remember a few years ago a very charming lady that appeared on What’s My Line -