Nothing about Diana makes sense – her death was a senseless loss of life.
I'm assuming the thread title above is acceptable language as I've seen it today on the front page of a 'newspaper' (cough, cough), font 90 capital letters and all.
I really don't get this country so may be someone can help me. How come you (British) guys seem to have so much adoration for Diana, the beloved generous princess tragically killed in a car accident, and yet come up with a front page like that ? That really defies my understanding, so grateful for anybody to try and makes sense of this for me
Nothing about Diana makes sense – her death was a senseless loss of life.
Let your mind go and your body will follow. – Steve Martin, LA Story
IMHO i am not too sure what i feel about Diana remembering all the media activity at the time i think it just went with the flow ie bad when the public thought she was bad and good when they thought she was good (sells newspapers) my opinion now is the fact that she has been dead for ten years and needs leaving in peace what will they do if tehy find the royal family guilty of murder which as we all know they wont no matter what the truth is (i have no opinions either way) put them in the tower???
just another waste of taxpayers money to produce something that very few people who are interested will believe
As for that newspaper i for one wouldnt buy it as i dont like to read that sort of stuff.
And here was I looking at the thread title and thinking that Cruella had found a profitable sideline during her dancing 'break'
Hmm, trying to make sense of the British media - now that's one to give you a headache!
Basically those words mean nothing - they are merely there to sell papers to those gullible enough to be interested in such things. I haven't been following the details of the Paris inquest, but can't help come across some of the headlines - whatever has been reported at the inquest that day, be it that Diana is sinner or saint, is splashed across the tabloids. The whore thing is just slightly more sensationalise.
Have just googled it for more details, and it seems to say more about her mother than Diana... apparently it was because she was dating Muslim men.
You seem to have missed the point, I saw those headlines this morning and read it yesterday on Ceefax; all news items were reporting Burrell's claim that Diana's mother called her a whore for sleeping around with f***ing Muslims (the report's words, not mine). None of them called her a whore but then, she was sleeping around a lot
it doesn't really matter the context or who said it or why - my point is how come the words Diana and whore can be associated on the front page of a newspaper that is bought everyday by millions, when I thought this country had some undying affection for their lost princess ? Doesn't this sort of headline just taints her name ?
(for the record I did see that this seems to be a reported saying from her mother as I had time to read smaller prints on the first page while I was queuing. I was just completely shocked to see such vulgarism on a front page, hence the thread).
Last edited by Caro; 15th-January-2008 at 03:31 PM.
Depends on your interpretation of what a lot is, some consider just once out of wedlock wrong, others may think more than one partner a month, year, week, day, too many! TBH it's nobody elses business how many partners, shags, liasons, anyone else has, famous or not.
well it has to do with you guys, as in the general British public, because if you didn't buy such papers then we wouldn't be talking about this. Isn't the Sun the most read paper in the country?
In other words, you get what you want to buy. And that sometimes puzzles me.
Blimey, I thought you were having a go at DianaS for a minute there
Me neither, at least you've got a good excuse.
I really really don't have any adoration for her. Didn't when she was alive, didn't on the day of her death, don't now. To me, both Mother Theresa and Jeffrey Bernard were much greater losses (they both died that same week).
I don't think any less of her now all these "revelations" are out - if anything I think better of her, she doesn't sound like such a complete freak as I thought.
You may be asking the wrong group of people. How many here read the Sun? Or any other tabloid? Or maybe people just don’t admit to it.
To be honest, it is one of the things that saddens me about this country – that the majority of the population read and take an interest in such rubbish. The same as the celeb gossip magazines.
Exactly what I was going to say. I guess that she was making up for lost time?
Why did you consider her a freak? What is a freak to you? Every human is different that's what makes us all so interesting. I don't like the word freak! (Can you tell) It reminds me of people being cruel because of someone having something unique about them. There is no such thing as 'normal'.
Ah, I read "guys" as "men".
You do have a good point, tabloids have increasingly become sensationalist over the years to the extent that there seem to be regular "headline wars" - pick the most eye catching headline to attract buyers. The non-tabloids do still concentrate on "news" but they require people to actually think and are less popular because of it. In general, tabloids are right up there with "Hello" and "ok" magazine in the literary stakes.
You would find that if you removed all the pictures from The Sun*, they would have barely 10% of their regular footprint the week after
You could market tabloids "news stories" in book form as "An idiots guides to dodgy foreigners taking our jobs" for the The Daily Mail and "An idiots guide to the royal families death squads" for The Sun*.
* or Mirror or Star ...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks