-RESERVED-

high end english, i can't comprehend any

Anyways not sure how it works, but wouldn't LYN get into legal trouble if we somehow name whoever that is without proven facts?

Ignorance is bliss.

As we get older, we begin to accept that everyone has skeleton's in their closet. We're matured enough to deal with the fact that icons or role models aren't perfect, while kids aren't. You don't tell your kids that Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy aren't real until their old enough to accept it do ya? Media censorship is across the board, doesn't matter if it's sports or politics. You don't see the local dailies pick up on the extra-curricular activities of government officials, unless they're from the opposition camp do ya? Don't we as a people of this nation have a right to know? Honestly, I could give a rats ass if a politician has a fetish for shagging sheep just so long as he gets his job done.

Now I don't like the fact that just because they're superstars, they can act as though they're above the law because they know they can get away with it but at the very least I reckon these cases get settled out of court, and the families of the victims get compensated. It's really hard to find a squeeky clean role model and I'm not sure one exists. With that in mind, we do what we have to do to ensure that young impressionable minds are not corrupted. Sometimes doing the 'right thing' means doing something wrong for the greater good. This isn't my opinion as an adult, for I do think that being famous comes with a price and you have a civic and social responsibility to an upstanding individual. We often forget however that the players we worship on the pitch and sometimes off it, are kids who have been deprived of a normal life and sometimes, do act out. My opinion is based on the fact I think we need to protect young kids from realising that their role models are really, just regular folk who happen to be good at something.

Good post. I concur wit this. In the end, they are just human with needs and wants. It is up to us to shield our kids from the negativity of the world. I can say the same of people blaming teachers these days for not educating their children properly whenever their kids got bad results. For me, it is simple, everything starts at home and with the parents. If the parents shows those negative acts to their kids, of course those kids will follow suit.

IMO, this thread is quite stupid. It's down to your own logical thinking. Must we tell you everything on what to do? Again, I would like to know what are the mods currently doing about this fella here? He has done nothing but creating stupid threads from time to time and personally attacked MU fans in the Lounge.

donate one post dapat pahala tao

All he has to do is post "We won it nineteen times, we won it nineteen times" to be banned

All that notwithstanding, there is a bigger issue at hand here: should there actually be a law that allows you to censor everything?

It's not just about role models etc. etc. It's the legal implications of rich people actually being able to legally hide everything they do. Whether we care or whether it's appropriate for us to know is one thing, but the fact that money buys you the power to censor is in itself dangerous.

That goes whatever team the guy is from. Or whether he/she is a football player or not.

It is certainly not for the law to decide how kids view role models.

I'm with the opinion that the media shouldn't be involved with private lives of celebrities. Actors, footballers and other entertainers are not public figures and shouldn't be scrutinized. They are just regular citizens who so happen to be good and famous at their work. If random reporters starts snooping around in the lives of regular people there will be shouts on privacy issues etc.

Oh, and I fully support celebrities who bashes up paparazzi who keeps on harassing them.

my time had come for the TS of this thread, and i shall close it

oops, i am not the TS of this thread....er...nvm

RESERVED

thats exactly what i feel about the mods as well, with relation to gooners thread

sad right bro

so i come to conclusion that CBP is just like beandy/yukie liao only with higher english level and he's against man utd while beandy/yukie liao's english is so-so and he's against arsenal.

and the difference is, beandy/yukie never as active-to-create-new-topic-to-attract-ppl like CBP do and CBP good at that.
well, as canadian(opppppsss) lecturer, he must do better than beandy/yukie of coz.

This post has been edited by choy89: May 22 2011, 06:26 PM

u bergurau ah bro?

well, CBP and co. mostly does it in their own thread mostly at City thread or the thread they create
which is normal i guess, most people take a piss as other clubs through their own thread. take your own thread for example lots of it.
of course same goes for my thread as well, no black black

yukie and beandy straight forward in out thread and in our face, try picturing CBP doing all this directly in your MUST thread
and this below is from that thread itself created not long ago (what club u support)

either way, i guess they both CBP&Co. and YukieCasa are our very own clubs black kryptonite, pain in the ass

plz stick to the topic...

oh btw pic of Imogen Thomas...

You're right, having a law that permits the wealthy to get away with murder is a little extreme. That being said, we live in a society where media censorship is wide spread. Seriously, I don't even bother reading the local dailies anymore. Instead, I rely on the internet where information is less controlled. It's like I said earlier, from my POV as an adult, I don't like being told only what people want me to know. I want to know the truth.

i dont agree about the censorship law.... if he does it, he should own up like a man... although if he does, it does not take it away that he cheated...

This post has been edited by aressandro10: May 23 2011, 11:01 AM

I see where you're coming from, but the fact is, for many of these individual, they choose to monetise their fame. Their reputation is their source of income. It cannot be fair that they get to benefit from it but are not allowed to lose from it either. It is their responsibility to maintain their brand and if by their actions they do not than only themselves are to blame.

Ordinary workers in offices lose out when they perform their jobs badly, so they are not exempt.

Secondly, there is sometimes public interest involved. The superinjuction issue began to be more widely known when an MP (using his Parliamentary immunity) revealed one of the superinjunction covering Fred Goodwin, who was the CEO responsible for the Royal Bank of Scotland's dramatic crash. Turns out he was having an intense affair before the crash. Considering that taxpayers now own the bank (because the government bailed them out), it becomes completely public interest the conduct of the CEO who brought about this problem.

Indeed, from a Malaysian point of view, it certainly seems like a small matter. Superinjunctions, however, does not tell you what the media wants you to know, but it tells you what you don't want to and cannot know.

P.S. Ryan Giggs has already been revealed in Parliament, so it's all officially out there. Another flaw in the law: it's practically unenforceable, e.g. once it gets on Twitter.

This post has been edited by minority: May 24 2011, 12:48 AM

Yes Now its in UK media



http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/ma...-injunction-row





http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/8523323...-colleague.html





http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13453626


Rather than flogging this DEADHORSE. I'm closing this thread and opening a poll!