"A fantasy world awash with sex and porn"

You know I just had to laugh at this. I been calling our local paper "The local Fishwrap" for years.

No a second day in the newspaper today, Daily Express carries a follow up story on the guys new SL woman in the USA.
(not on the 'papers web site so can't give you a link)

just a sidenote...

the guy who wrote the "awash with sex and porn" pseudoarticle has a website...

easy to find by simply putting his full name in google...

the website says just this:

"NAME WITHELD FOR FORUM RULES) - Journalist
contact me on: (PHONE NUMBER)"


yep, you got that right, the guy puts his phone# on his website and asks people to call him.

They must be short of Princess Diana stories.

I haven't looked up his full name and done that, but I suspect it's a mobile phone issued by the newspaper, and it's fairly common among UK tabloids to urge readers to call them. It's cheap newsgathering. There's usually a splash on several of the paper's pages, along the lines of: "Got a scandalous story? Call us now on ###". And on stories already published you'll frequently find: "Do you know [name of person in this story]? Call us now on ###".

<sidenote>

It's amusing to note the variants on tabloids in the UK. The Daily Star is often regarded as the lowest of the low when it comes to news. You might find some, but you'll have to look past pages and pages of tits and arse and adult phoneline ads to find it (and even then it'll be along the lines of: "BB [Big Brother] bad boy's sex op. Ex page 3 girlfriend tells all [and bares her boobs in our exclusive 6-page spread]!".

Just above the Star are the Mirror and the Sun. Both are the 'official' Big Brother paper, both feature "[important person] writes for our paper" articles whenever they can get them, and both write about "[Sun/Mirror] readers" as representative of the common man. Which, given how many of those papers are left lying around our staff canteen at work, I guess they are.

Then you get to the more upmarket tabloids. These are the ones that aren't 'red-tops' (referring to the paper's masthead). These are the Daily Mail and the Daily Express. Both tend toward moral crusades, frequently call for curbs on immigration, and tend to feature at least one Princess Diana story per week.

Above those you enter broadsheet territory, although except for their weekend editions most of the broadsheets are now published in tabloid-sized format (for which breakfast tables and cramped commuters up and down the land are grateful). There's little to choose from (apart from political leanings) between the Guardian, Times, Telegraph, and Independent. It is, at least, possible to find news in those four, and any one of them will suffice if I just want to catch up on what's happening in the world.

Then we have the Financial Times, clutched by businessmen. Don't ask me. Stocks and shares and world business markets ain't my thing

Long post, I know, but I have coffee and I'm mildly bored, so that's what you get.

</sidenote>

Skell I'm most disappointed that you didn't mention The Sport! Is that considered too big a joke to even be at the bottom of the pile?

Even the guys in the work canteen have better taste than that. Never seen it there, and I actually thought it was just a Sunday rag!

On the inside front page there is a box containing that days Nipple Count.

Atleast the Sport doesn't pretend to be a newspaper like the Sun, the Star and the News of the World. It freely admits to being silly trash, while the others try to disguise themselves as newspapers.

The News of the World sums it up; on the morning after the huge earthquake that happened in Pakistan a couple of years ago in which thousands were killed, their front page had a headline about a reality TV show.

You know I never seen that paper.
Is it a sporting paper all about football and cricket, or dare I say it is it all 'tits and bums'?

That just about sums it up. And with another round of "I'm a has-been TV 'personality'/ex-boyband member (you know, the ugly one nobody liked)/obscure and thrusting young glamour model Get Me Out of Here" about to start up tomorrow, we can only expect more of the same.

Try image-googling "Daily Sport" with Google Safe Search turned off. That'll tell you all you need to know. (I suggest NOT doing that either at work or in a place where children can see your computer screen...)

The worst it contains is breasts.

Yeah, but the Google image search is a little less tame.

The first page of the search doesn't even have an exposed nipple on it.

Oh wait, sorry, it does have an exposed nipple on it. Gosh!

You got safe search turned *off* right? I see at least two stills from the Britney sex video on there, and they're slightly more than an exposed nipple

T&A yes, the title is misleading. There was a time where it was funny and had stories about Elvis being alive and living on the moon in a world war II bomber, or man turned into table by witchcraft but they figured pictures of boobs would sell more.

That's on the second page.

They still have that stuff too. Also, about half the paper actually is sports news.

I see it 'sport girls'.
Ok I give the link I got off Google, but only click if over 18, and you realy must.
http://www.dailysport.co.uk/Home/Story.php?ID=717
Looks like it something like parts of SL.

First page returns 21 results for me. The Britney pics are #8 and #14. Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. It's a moot point; I was just warning June of the possibility of seeing what I was seeing, and not doing it in front of her boss or kids

And this was the girl who complained that she was humiliated when Russell Brand shared details about their sex life in the media.

Well, I am pretty sure if someone shared details of your sex life in the media you would be humiliated (maybe for different reasons). It's too easy to slam people who are "revealed" in this way; it can destroy a person, upset their families, break-up marriages, confuse and horrify their children, ruin careers. I been there to some extent. It can takes years and years to get over what amounts to public ridicule.

As a private person, yes. As a celebrity, it depends. You do lose a certain amount of privacy as your fame grows, and so many "celebrities" see fit to wave their "Private Parts" for all to see when it suits them. In the "Old Days" celebrities' failings and follies were generally well protected by studios and handlers, but now in our "Entertainment Tonight" culture it seems anything goes. What is particularly sickening to me is this "fame" is now being accorded to some of the world's most vilest people: Murderers, Child Abusers and Politicians.

If, like her, I were a professional porn star I would consider it to be an occupational hazard. I doubt that it would ruin her career, all things considered.

Now got a link for you.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/71294/Our-love-is-real-says-other-woman-in-virtual-romance