MacKenzie moves to the Mail.

[Liverpool lad]

Another paper that is to be avoided regardless of who is writing for it, I don't need MacKenzie there to stop me picking it up

[Redder Lurtz]

Well I'm opening myself up for a bit of a negging here so fire away if you wish.

 

I'm not a daily mail buyer (I have in the fairly distant past but not these days) although I have read it as a lot of other members of this site have, and usually have a bit of a chuckle. It's the Daily Mail, not Mein Kampf so I think it can be taken light heartedly. I have no plans to buy the Daily Mail and MacKenzie writing for them hasn't affected that position. The sun, on the other hand, is a rag I won't have near me. I don't click on any links to the rag's articles and I don't pick one up and browse it if it's been left on the train. It's a disgusting article. MacKenzie writing for the Mail won't mean I wouldn't pick one up and browse through it though, no more than I'd boycott the BBC because he appears on the occasional show. I will just choose not to read his contributions, much as I would avoid any BBC show he's in. I just think all this "ban the daily mail" business is all a bit over-reactionary.

[Antynwa]

Another paper that is to be avoided regardless of who is writing for it, I don't need MacKenzie there to stop me picking it up

 

I agree.

 

Although if people are boycotting the mail because of that scumbag, they should be boycotting sky, bbc.

 

Boycotting anything else but the Sun just devalues what the campaign stands for, and the success it's achieved.

[razor]

I disagree.

 

Does Mackenzie have an employment contract with the BBC?

 

The rag printed the lies, but it was Mackenzie who was the driving force behind the publication. He is guilty. As I understand it, many staff writers actually tried to disuade him from publishing, but he went ahead anyway. Furthermore, he has actually stuck to his guns, whilst the rag has tried to apologise several times.

 

To me it actually makes more sense to boycott the Mail than the rag (though I think boycotting both maintains the issue in public discourse so I'm all for maintaining the rag ban). There has to be a considered rationale behind the boycott, and to me it makes sense to target Mackenzie. So that means the Mail.

 

We should spread the word. Sorry if this is inconvenient to some. Like it was inconvenient to the many Merseyside based Sun readers in 1989.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

I disagree.

 

Does Mackenzie have an employment contract with the BBC?

 

The rag printed the lies, but it was Mackenzie who was the driving force behind the publication. He is guilty. As I understand it, many staff writers actually tried to disuade him from publishing, but he went ahead anyway. Furthermore, he has actually stuck to his guns, whilst the rag has tried to apologise several times.

 

To me it actually makes more sense to boycott the Mail than the rag (though I think boycotting both maintains the issue in public discourse so I'm all for maintaining the rag ban). There has to be a considered rationale behind the boycott, and to me it makes sense to target Mackenzie. So that means the Mail.

 

We should spread the word. Sorry if this is inconvenient to some. Like it was inconvenient to the many Merseyside based Sun readers in 1989.

 

Spot on.

 

Anyone got an e-mail address where messages can be passed through to Kenny pointing out that his position writing for a paper* that employs that cunt is untenable and that he should just stop now, regardless of what his contract might say?

 

 

(*It is the same paper, really, any day of the week.)

[Antynwa]

I disagree.

 

Does Mackenzie have an employment contract with the BBC?

 

The rag printed the lies, but it was Mackenzie who was the driving force behind the publication. He is guilty. As I understand it, many staff writers actually tried to disuade him from publishing, but he went ahead anyway. Furthermore, he has actually stuck to his guns, whilst the rag has tried to apologise several times.

 

To me it actually makes more sense to boycott the Mail than the rag (though I think boycotting both maintains the issue in public discourse so I'm all for maintaining the rag ban). There has to be a considered rationale behind the boycott, and to me it makes sense to target Mackenzie. So that means the Mail.

 

We should spread the word. Sorry if this is inconvenient to some. Like it was inconvenient to the many Merseyside based Sun readers in 1989.

 

Its not about convenience, because quite frankly I don't buy The Mail anyway, and not many people do.

 

It doesn't matter about employment contracts, the reason they get that cunt on the BBC and on Sky, radio shows etc is because it gets them viewers for some horrible reason.

 

They need to make more money than what they pay him per appearance, or article. I didn't need another reason not to read or buy the mail because I don't do that anyway, I can't boycott something I don't read.

 

The official stance, has always been and always will be 'Don't buy The Sun' anything else you do is down to both personal taste and personal opinion. Although I don't see why you'd read the daily fucking mail anyway, cunt or no cunt.

[norwichlfc]

With every suggesting Kenny gives up his column in The Mail, shouldn't Gerro and Carra be told in no uncertain terms to drop their contracts with The Sc*m Paper ??

[AngryOfTuebrook]

With every suggesting Kenny gives up his column in The Mail, shouldn't Gerro and Carra be told in no uncertain terms to drop their contracts with The Sc*m Paper ??

WHAT??????

[Kevin D]

With every suggesting Kenny gives up his column in The Mail, shouldn't Gerro and Carra be told in no uncertain terms to drop their contracts with The Sc*m Paper ??

 

Negged.

[norwichlfc]

Obviously nobody knows that they have columns in that paper

[TalkSilly]

Its not about convenience, because quite frankly I don't buy The Mail anyway, and not many people do.

 

It doesn't matter about employment contracts, the reason they get that cunt on the BBC and on Sky, radio shows etc is because it gets them viewers for some horrible reason.

 

They need to make more money than what they pay him per appearance, or article. I didn't need another reason not to read or buy the mail because I don't do that anyway, I can't boycott something I don't read.

 

The official stance, has always been and always will be 'Don't buy The Sun' anything else you do is down to both personal taste and personal opinion. Although I don't see why you'd read the daily fucking mail anyway, cunt or no cunt.

 

It's the second most popular paper in the Country by the way.

 

National ABCs: Mail on Sunday only paper up in May - Press Gazette

[Phoenix]

Cant imagine many liverpool fans readd the Dailay Mail anyway.

 

Trying to ban everything removes the symbolism of the ban of the rag

[Skidfingers McGonical]

With every suggesting Kenny gives up his column in The Mail, shouldn't Gerro and Carra be told in no uncertain terms to drop their contracts with The Sc*m Paper ??

 

News of the world is were they have had articles on the past.

[RobbieOR]

It's the second most popular paper in the Country by the way.

 

National ABCs: Mail on Sunday only paper up in May - Press Gazette

 

I reckon Ants point was the people who dont buy the Sun, they dont buy the Mail either.

[BobbyFischer]

I don't like MacKenzie and I like the Daily Mail even less - but I don't think Mackenzie is the devil incarnate.

 

There are thousands, if not millions, of other people treading the earth who are far more dangerous than the former editor of the Sun. He's a nuisance, an irritant and an attention seeker. If he gets any idea that some form of 'internet campaign' is being waged against him it won't worry him. In fact it'll give him an extra spring in his step.

 

There's often no logic as to who writes for certain newspapers.

 

Mackenzie had an article in the Guardian the other day.

Simon Jenkins is a regular contributor to the same 'paper.

Suzanne Moore has written loads of columns for the Daily Mail, as has Alison Pearson.

Alastair Campbell has written articles for The Spectator.

 

 

In fact, it's rather like football isn't it?

 

I wouldn't worry about it too much.

[VladimirIlyich]

I don't like MacKenzie and I like the Daily Mail even less - but I don't think Mackenzie is the devil incarnate.

 

There are thousands, if not millions, of other people treading the earth who are far more dangerous than the former editor of the Sun. He's a nuisance, an irritant and an attention seeker. If he gets any idea that some form of 'internet campaign' is being waged against him it won't worry him. In fact it'll give him an extra spring in his step.

 

There's often no logic as to who writes for certain newspapers.

 

Mackenzie had an article in the Guardian the other day.

Simon Jenkins is a regular contributor to the same 'paper.

Suzanne Moore has written loads of columns for the Daily Mail, as has Alison Pearson.

Alastair Campbell has written articles for The Spectator.

 

 

In fact, it's rather like football isn't it?

 

I wouldn't worry about it too much.

 

So we just ignore all bans and do nothing? Great idea,that will work.

 

I dont buy any and never will.

[goatboy59]

If Kenny wasn't arsed about Littlejohn ("the only good thing about Manchester is that it's not Liverpool") Heffer (one degree of separation from Bigley to Hillsborough) or Wooldridge (Clough is ace!) then I'm not sure he'll take a stand over McKenzie's one column a week.

 

The sooner we accept that our Glasgow born, Liverpool domesticated boss is pretty right wing the better we'll feel.

 

Even gods aren't infallible.

[Newport]

Even The Guardian publishes his repulsive views these days...

 

Thank God for Rupert Murdoch | Kelvin MacKenzie | Comment is free | The Guardian

 

Brilliant comment to it:

MawalTrees

30 June 2011 9:00PM

 

 

Kelvin MacKenzie

 

In my view this article represents perfectly most of your views of this world. I remember seeing you on Question Time and feeling embarrased for you.

 

It's hard to completely nail you down since you do occasionally talk some sense but truth be told that's probably more down to the the sheer volume of opinions you offer. Some have to be right.

 

Your head is buried so far up Murdoch's backside it's unbelievable. You're a poodle, a stooge and your basis for worshipping all things Murdoch is he offered someone of limited abilities like yourself a nice earner. You may well have been part of the most successful news empire in this country, but if you totaled all your output together it would add up to precisely nothing. Your responsible for the dumbing down, tribalism, ideology above common sense, scapegoating, lying, misrepresentation of facts, sensationalism of trivial things, in fact the list of charges against is to long to fully put down here.

 

You offers views that are so black and white it's hard to even begin to dissect them. This article being the perfect example. This country needs more James Dysons, Berner's Lee's, etc, not more Murdochs.

 

For folks like you the little England mentality = the entire universe.

 

Typical of you, you offer selective memory. In other news the $500million Murdoch spunked on Myspace then didn't have a clue what to do with, has just been shifted on to Justin Timberlake of all people for $22millions. Business genius indeed. All of New's Corps businesses are rubbish mate. Crap, basic, and businesses built on spouting lies and spreading ignorance like a virus.

[Pony Princess]

The Daily "Immigrants may cause cancer" Mail, eh?

[Bubble]

The Daily "Immigrants may cause cancer" Mail, eh?

 

What do you mean "may" cause cancer??

 

Seriously, if anyone can't get by without their daily dose of right wing reactionary bullshit, you can use this site to view the Mail's site without giving them any hits. The comments function doesn't work, unfortunately, so it's useless for trolling.

[Block109'er]

Christ, this guy is just a fucking disease, wish he would just disappear.

[norwichlfc]

News of the world is were they have had articles on the past.

 

 

And the NoTW is owned by and is the sister paper of which daily paper ??

[god knows]

Just had an email back from the Mail regarding my disgust at the cunt working for them. I need some help from you more computer savvy people in order to post it on here.

[Duff Man]

Really disappointed to see Mackenzie getting space on the GU website. It's like finding out your bird's been cheating on you.

[Red Nick]

Speculation is that Murdock will give up ownership of all his british press interests to get the BskyB deal through the Monopolies commission.

 

So what do people think, a hollow victory?