Page 1 of 2

How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 10 Jan 2016, 14:35
by dookus
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/boxing/ty ... ug-7149892

Dig up a load of stuff about Peter Fury that's been on the public record for many years. Add in some quotes from Peter Fury from an interview with Terry Dooley from Boxing Scene nearly three years ago, unattributed to make it look as if he's been interviewed by the Mirror. Stick it under the label of "a Sunday People investigation" as if you didn't just nick a load of stuff off Google. Job done!

British press, best in the world, holding a light to power etc etc etc

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 10 Jan 2016, 16:46
by handsofstone
Finger on the pulse as per,if their gonna recycle old stories then surely they shouldve done it after Tyson beat Wlad,strike when the irons hot 'n all that

Peter might have done a lot wrong in the past but he seems like a gent and more importantly he seems like he's trying to change

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 10 Jan 2016, 17:14
by bripez
Fame is a double edged sword - if you go down that road then you have to take the rough with the smooth.

Fury courts the media, is very vocal and controversial in many of his view points - he therefore has created media interest and as such the media are interested.

Some may also see a contradiction in what he says going on about religion etc. and his actual actions - whether that be his own situation knobbing birds and making them sandwiches or the actions of his dad and uncle.

Either way this pinky adds to the "interest" that he himself has been instrumental in creating.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 10 Jan 2016, 17:19
by mickey1975
Why hasn't Tyson been on the chat show circuit? I think it's disgusting the way he's been treated since he pulled off one of the greatest ever wins by a Brit. I hope they come down just as hard on AJ and Sims just as hard if he ever reaches that level.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 10 Jan 2016, 18:12
by bripez
mickey1975 wrote:Why hasn't Tyson been on the chat show circuit? I think it's disgusting the way he's been treated since he pulled off one of the greatest ever wins by a Brit. I hope they come down just as hard on AJ and Sims just as hard if he ever reaches that level.
Had he been asked and refused?

If not, why do you think that is ?

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 07:44
by magwitch
...thought this might be a Bunce piece, I was going to ask whether I needed a notepad and a bic.

Anyway - question - Is Mr Fury any more controversialin this century with his views on gays and Jess Ennis and kitchens and cups of tea (plus associations with certain people), than the now lauded, revered and beloved Mr Ali was in the last century, with his probable rumoured affairs, objection to the Vietnam War, alleged racism and his association to certain people, Malcolm X(?) Nation of Islam etc etc?

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 07:51
by SNG
mickey1975 wrote:Why hasn't Tyson been on the chat show circuit? I think it's disgusting the way he's been treated since he pulled off one of the greatest ever wins by a Brit. I hope they come down just as hard on AJ and Sims just as hard if he ever reaches that level.
Who's going to have him on after the things he said in the press? Don't be naive.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 07:55
by Boxerbeetle
magwitch wrote:...thought this might be a Bunce piece, I was going to ask whether I needed a notepad and a bic.

Anyway - question - Is Mr Fury any more controversialin this century with his views on gays and Jess Ennis and kitchens and cups of tea (plus associations with certain people), than the now lauded, revered and beloved Mr Ali was in the last century, with his probable rumoured affairs, objection to the Vietnam War, alleged racism and his association to certain people, Malcolm X(?) Nation of Islam etc etc?
No, nowhere near.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 08:11
by mickey1975
SNG wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:Why hasn't Tyson been on the chat show circuit? I think it's disgusting the way he's been treated since he pulled off one of the greatest ever wins by a Brit. I hope they come down just as hard on AJ and Sims just as hard if he ever reaches that level.
Who's going to have him on after the things he said in the press? Don't be naive.
People with far more controversial views appear on TV every day.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 08:13
by SNG
mickey1975 wrote:
SNG wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:Why hasn't Tyson been on the chat show circuit? I think it's disgusting the way he's been treated since he pulled off one of the greatest ever wins by a Brit. I hope they come down just as hard on AJ and Sims just as hard if he ever reaches that level.
Who's going to have him on after the things he said in the press? Don't be naive.
People with far more controversial views appear on TV every day.
On the celebratory-wank-a-thon chat show circuit? I don't think so, nice try.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 08:23
by mickey1975
What have I tried to do?!

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 08:24
by SNG
Okay, who appears regularly on the chat show circuit with more controversial views than Tyson Fury?

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 10:08
by CaptainSpacerod
Specifically with regard to Peter; he comes across as a nice fella in interviews but the man was a drug dealing scumbag. He can talk all he wants about changing his life around blah blah blah - doesn't change the fact that as a grown man he decided to go down the wrong path. He didn't have an epiphany and choose to be a better man, he got caught. A leopard doesn't change it's spots.

With regard to John he's just an odious dirtball as the other thread attests to in some detail.

Full credit to Tyson for becoming such a likeable, decent young man having been brought up by these two goons (long prison sentences aside)

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 11:34
by keithmoonhangover
mickey1975 wrote:Why hasn't Tyson been on the chat show circuit? I think it's disgusting the way he's been treated since he pulled off one of the greatest ever wins by a Brit. I hope they come down just as hard on AJ and Sims just as hard if he ever reaches that level.
While there's no proof that they are not showing any kind of biased, Jonathan Ross is a big boxing fan, so I wonder why he hasn't been on there?

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 11:47
by SNG
keithmoonhangover wrote:
mickey1975 wrote:Why hasn't Tyson been on the chat show circuit? I think it's disgusting the way he's been treated since he pulled off one of the greatest ever wins by a Brit. I hope they come down just as hard on AJ and Sims just as hard if he ever reaches that level.
While there's no proof that they are not showing any kind of biased, Jonathan Ross is a big boxing fan, so I wonder why he hasn't been on there?
Seriously? You wonder why Jonathen Ross and ITV haven't had Tyson Fury on their chat show?

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 11:48
by moogie101
SNG wrote:Okay, who appears regularly on the chat show circuit with more controversial views than Tyson Fury?
Katie Holmes. You look into her quotes, clearly as bad as anything Tyson has said.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 11:50
by SNG
moogie101 wrote:
SNG wrote:Okay, who appears regularly on the chat show circuit with more controversial views than Tyson Fury?
Katie Holmes. You look into her quotes, clearly as bad as anything Tyson has said.
Would you say she regularly appears on the British chat show circuit? What has she said anyway, I'm completely unaware.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 11:51
by moogie101
magwitch wrote:...thought this might be a Bunce piece, I was going to ask whether I needed a notepad and a bic.

Anyway - question - Is Mr Fury any more controversialin this century with his views on gays and Jess Ennis and kitchens and cups of tea (plus associations with certain people), than the now lauded, revered and beloved Mr Ali was in the last century, with his probable rumoured affairs, objection to the Vietnam War, alleged racism and his association to certain people, Malcolm X(?) Nation of Islam etc etc?

Really? Different worlds, I get people like Tyson but please stop trying to defend the utter shite that comes out of his mouth.

Not sure if he loves the media attention & doing it on purpose to get attention or just an idiot who seriously needs a PR agent whose first moves should be shutting down his social media accounts & banning him from all interviews.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 11:54
by moogie101
SNG wrote:
moogie101 wrote:
SNG wrote:Okay, who appears regularly on the chat show circuit with more controversial views than Tyson Fury?
Katie Holmes. You look into her quotes, clearly as bad as anything Tyson has said.
Would you say she regularly appears on the British chat show circuit? What has she said anyway, I'm completely unaware.
Sorry, I meant Katie Hopkins. An idiot who is clearly being paid to say shite, & yeah she's all over TV.

For an idea of what she says ....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvan ... uotes.html

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 11:57
by SNG
Katie Holmes haha.

Right I'm with you, yeah Hopkins is a pudendum. To be fair though she's paid to say things like that, and to get the reaction she gets. Whether she believes the shite she comes out with I don't know, perhaps there's a show Tyson could go on.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 12:49
by mickey1975
CaptainSpacerod wrote:Specifically with regard to Peter; he comes across as a nice fella in interviews but the man was a drug dealing scumbag. He can talk all he wants about changing his life around blah blah blah - doesn't change the fact that as a grown man he decided to go down the wrong path. He didn't have an epiphany and choose to be a better man, he got caught. A leopard doesn't change it's spots.

With regard to John he's just an odious dirtball as the other thread attests to in some detail.

Full credit to Tyson for becoming such a likeable, decent young man having been brought up by these two goons (long prison sentences aside)
Would you ban Tibbs, Sims, AJ and Pat Barrett, too?

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 13:10
by CaptainSpacerod
I'd say a sizeable percentage of the population disagree to some extent with the concept of homosexuality. Being amongst them shouldn't preclude Tyson from appearing on chat shows - they don't have to discuss homosexuality with him.

The political correctness of a tiny minority of over vocal liberals dictate to the masses what should and should not be approved of.

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 13:13
by CaptainSpacerod
mickey1975 wrote:
CaptainSpacerod wrote:Specifically with regard to Peter; he comes across as a nice fella in interviews but the man was a drug dealing scumbag. He can talk all he wants about changing his life around blah blah blah - doesn't change the fact that as a grown man he decided to go down the wrong path. He didn't have an epiphany and choose to be a better man, he got caught. A leopard doesn't change it's spots.

With regard to John he's just an odious dirtball as the other thread attests to in some detail.

Full credit to Tyson for becoming such a likeable, decent young man having been brought up by these two goons (long prison sentences aside)
Would you ban Tibbs, Sims, AJ and Pat Barrett, too?
Didn't say I'd ban him, I just don't buy his reformed character act.

Tibbs was a family feud - that's different. AJ was relatively minor. Pat Barrett - more serious. Sims I'm not aware of what he did - Tony ?

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 13:17
by bripez
mickey1975 wrote:
CaptainSpacerod wrote:Specifically with regard to Peter; he comes across as a nice fella in interviews but the man was a drug dealing scumbag. He can talk all he wants about changing his life around blah blah blah - doesn't change the fact that as a grown man he decided to go down the wrong path. He didn't have an epiphany and choose to be a better man, he got caught. A leopard doesn't change it's spots.

With regard to John he's just an odious dirtball as the other thread attests to in some detail.

Full credit to Tyson for becoming such a likeable, decent young man having been brought up by these two goons (long prison sentences aside)
Would you ban Tibbs, Sims, AJ and Pat Barrett, too?
Who has been "banned" ?

You will have to try harder Mickey - ask Homicide Henry for some tips if you want to go down that road !

Re: How journalism works, pt. 94

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 13:17
by mickey1975
Because Tibbs says so? The prosecution didn't. Not sure about Sims myself but know he's been away and couldn't get into America (can now).