Leslie

Not so much an obsession as one of those unfortunate facts of life these days Trout.

As a matter of fact, what is you personal opinion of their "up their own backside" opinions on all the common sense reactions that this country was so well known for?

Les

GlesgaKiss

Thank f*ck there is such a thing as Google.

JTaylor

The first idiom's worth remembering.

jef

iTrader: (13)

thats the million dollar question, and practically i dont think there is a answer so to speak,

but in general the media groups themselves need to amend there ways, and conduct themselves in a better manner, with the benefit of spreading news and education to the masses,

but as there all run for profit, this can never happen.

even modest profits id encourage, to help give good pay to responsidble employees who have an interest in improving social and econmic/education situations (by this i mean speaking the truth, be it negative or positive). and allow for company growth ect. obviously report on events they feel newsworthy, but hyping evrything up 1 million % to sell as much as possible, has just led to the tosh weve got at present.

having small parts of papers with sections for the less serious issues, ie celeb rubbish is fine, if people like to read it, but it shouldnt be used the way it is now.

its a non starter for obvious reasons, but its ultimatley lead to the real mis-education for a huge section of society. newspapers have helped played parts in exposing scandals ect and some positive effects, but they chase these things to give themselves credability - its not for the good of the nation, its a tool to generate yet more income

im not claiming to have an answer just think its shameful the way things are at present, and has a negative effect in society as a whole.

Leslie

You disappoint me!

Les