Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Piers Morgan cancelled.

Options
123468

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    GMB have huge ethical problems imo, letting him talk about Meghan at all, considering his personal enmity towards her, due to her rejecting him. The fact GMB allowed him to harass her like this is a huge problem. Does the British media have any kind of standard of ethics? How could they allow a jilted man to harass a woman for years on air?

    The whole cancel culture stuff is just nonsense to distract from the fact that a man was allowed to use the media to harass a woman who rejected him. The more I think about what happened, the worse it is.

    There is something really rotten with British media.


  • Options
    #153
    MrStuffins
    Registered Users Posts: 19,198 ✭✭✭✭MrStuffins


    wes wrote: »
    GMB have huge ethical problems imo, letting him talk about Meghan at all, considering his personal enmity towards her, due to her rejecting him. The fact GMB allowed him to harass her like this is a huge problem. Does the British media have any kind of standard of ethics? How could they allow a jilted man to harass a woman for years on air?

    The whole cancel culture stuff is just nonsense to distract from the fact that a man was allowed to use the media to harass a woman who rejected him. The more I think about what happened, the worse it is.

    There is something really rotten with British media.

    This is a guy who orchestrated, contributed to and bragged about illegal phone hacking while he was the editor or two of the biggest tabloids in the country.

    A phone hacking practice that included hacking into the voicemail of a recently murdered schoolgirl so that they could get the scoop on some of the gory details of her murder ahead of other papers.

    But I guess me thinking that's wrong makes me "woke" somehow?

    The man is absolute scum!


  • Options
    #154
    strandroad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,676 ✭✭✭strandroad


    wes wrote: »
    GMB have huge ethical problems imo, letting him talk about Meghan at all, considering his personal enmity towards her, due to her rejecting him. The fact GMB allowed him to harass her like this is a huge problem. Does the British media have any kind of standard of ethics? How could they allow a jilted man to harass a woman for years on air?

    The whole cancel culture stuff is just nonsense to distract from the fact that a man was allowed to use the media to harass a woman who rejected him. The more I think about what happened, the worse it is.

    There is something really rotten with British media.

    Imagine if Eamon Dunphy met Amy Hubermann socially just before she met Brian O'Driscoll, and if she didn't stay in touch because she didn't feel like it. Then if Dunphy went on to drag her in every gig he had on rugby, and in fact generated hundreds of columns and tweets solely about her and her perceived character, with other media following his lead and inviting him to spout off at every opportunity. Years and years of that.

    It's pure stalker harassment, and it's crazy how Morgan is still getting away with it, with millions of fans loving what he does. That's UK media for you.


  • Options
    #155
    wes
    Registered Users Posts: 11,747 ✭✭✭✭wes


    MrStuffins wrote: »
    This is a guy who orchestrated, contributed to and bragged about illegal phone hacking while he was the editor or two of the biggest tabloids in the country.

    A phone hacking practice that included hacking into the voicemail of a recently murdered schoolgirl so that they could get the scoop on some of the gory details of her murder ahead of other papers.

    But I guess me thinking that's wrong makes me "woke" somehow?

    The man is absolute scum!

    It is bizarre that so much wrong doing is being defended on the basis of a hatred of "woke", which is a term I doubt those using it as a pejorative could provide any kind of definition, beyond something they don't like.

    Far too many people are willing to support any kind of horror, on the basis that those who are right wing should never suffer any consequences for the nasty **** they do, be it racism, criminality, or terrorism etc.


  • Options
    #156
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    MrStuffins wrote: »
    This is a guy who orchestrated, contributed to and bragged about illegal phone hacking while he was the editor or two of the biggest tabloids in the country.

    A phone hacking practice that included hacking into the voicemail of a recently murdered schoolgirl so that they could get the scoop on some of the gory details of her murder ahead of other papers.

    But I guess me thinking that's wrong makes me "woke" somehow?

    The man is absolute scum!

    Wrong paper. For all his faults, he wasn't involved in that one.

    https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-did-piers-morgan-boast-about-phone-hacking


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    MrStuffins
    Registered Users Posts: 19,198 ✭✭✭✭MrStuffins


    wes wrote: »
    It is bizarre that so much wrong doing is being defended on the basis of a hatred of "woke", which is a term I doubt those using it as a pejorative could provide any kind of definition, beyond something they don't like.

    Far too many people are willing to support any kind of horror, on the basis that those who are right wing should never suffer any consequences for the nasty **** they do, be it racism, criminality, or terrorism etc.

    To these people "woke" just means anything they disagree with.

    It's a catch-all term that they can use and be applauded by like-minded individuals who have no idea what they're saying either.

    Like the poster before claiming that to be against a vendetta of constant harassment by an individual on National TV, in the press and on social media based on the fact that a lady didn't want to have a relationship with the guy is considered "woke"

    It's alarming!


  • Options
    #158
    anewme
    Registered Users Posts: 11,951 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    wes wrote: »
    GMB have huge ethical problems imo, letting him talk about Meghan at all, considering his personal enmity towards her, due to her rejecting him. The fact GMB allowed him to harass her like this is a huge problem. Does the British media have any kind of standard of ethics? How could they allow a jilted man to harass a woman for years on

    There is something really rotten with British media.

    Well, in news out, shes taken on ITV in allowing his comments on her mental health.


  • Options
    #159
    Gregor Samsa
    Registered Users Posts: 9,032 ✭✭✭Gregor Samsa


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Wrong paper. For all his faults, he wasn't involved in that one.

    https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-did-piers-morgan-boast-about-phone-hacking

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_International_phone_hacking_scandal#Daily_Mirror_allegations
    On 22 July, former Daily Mirror financial journalist James Hipwell spoke to The Independent, claiming that the practice had been "endemic" at the Mirror during his time there under the editorship of Piers Morgan.

    "They would call a celebrity with one phone and when it was answered they would then hang up. . . . After they'd hacked into someone's mobile, they'd delete the message so another paper couldn't get the story. There was great hilarity about it."


  • Options
    #160
    Sandor Clegane
    Registered Users Posts: 1,119 ✭✭✭Sandor Clegane


    The irony of Morgan complaining about peoples right to free speech and people not wanting others to say anything back is astounding, the man just ran off and quit his job because someone exercised there right to free speech and told him some things he didn't want to hear.

    The man is literally the definition of what he himself criticizes :pac:


  • Options
    #161
    SHOVELLER
    Registered Users Posts: 1,639 ✭✭✭SHOVELLER


    He is their equivalent of dunphy. An overpaid mouth. Empty vessels make the most noise.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    fryup
    Registered Users Posts: 18,067 ✭✭✭✭fryup


    but that's his job to air his views, he's a social commentator...personally speaking i've no problem with the man, there's far more annoying people on TV


  • Options
    #163
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Leroy42 wrote: »

    Most peopled would be fired that did the same in work

    He wasn't Most because he are Best.


  • Options
    #164
    NeuralNetwork
    Closed Accounts Posts: 727 ✭✭✭NeuralNetwork


    NeuralNetwork wrote: »
    I bet this is just a PR stunt for his rumoured, impending launch on the British counterpart to Fox News that’s due to launch soon “GB News” - their first delve into tabloid television.

    And there we go:

    “Andrew Neil would be ‘delighted’ to talk to Piers Morgan about GB News role”

    https://www.breakingnews.ie/entertainment/andrew-neil-would-be-delighted-to-talk-to-piers-morgan-about-gb-news-role-1094147.html


  • Options
    #165
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    I cannot understand how the women either side of him ever stayed as long as they have, he cuts them off and they stand there blushing and awkward like giggling 1980's top of the pops groupies.

    He cut his teeth in a salacious industry that demands, encourages and rewards tactics that would make J Edgar hoover seem boring. He evolved and elevated his own status and standing in celebrity and society, getting into hot tubs with the most vile of people it would seem...and yet people think putting him on panel shows, soap boxes and morning TV was going to bring out the best in the recalcitrant ****!!!


  • Options
    #166
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Only 44K
    citizens of Britain was not happy about his work ?
    From silly 67 millions ????
    And that was the point to let him go ?
    Seriously ?
    He did his job perfectly if only 44K was not happy about it !


  • Options
    #167
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Only 44K
    citizens of Britain was not happy about his work ?
    From silly 67 millions ????
    And that was the point to let him go ?
    Seriously ?
    He did his job perfectly if only 44K was not happy about it !

    Are you ali g ? or just as bad with grammer as Morgan was/is with ethics...:D yo me as got 44 kay sayz peeeers is well rotten init...


  • Options
    #168
    MrStuffins
    Registered Users Posts: 19,198 ✭✭✭✭MrStuffins


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Only 44K
    citizens of Britain was not happy about his work ?
    From silly 67 millions ????
    And that was the point to let him go ?
    Seriously ?
    He did his job perfectly if only 44K was not happy about it !

    He resigned


  • Options
    #169
    stefanovich
    Registered Users Posts: 5,490 ✭✭✭stefanovich


    MrStuffins wrote: »
    He left.

    Hardly cancelled!

    Edit: good to see him get a slap! C*nt of the highest order!

    He left after a conversation with management. He was cancelled they just let him quit instead of firing him.

    He said he valued freedom of speech more than his job.

    What’s wrong with people having a different opinion? I thought himself and Reid balanced each other out quite well.


  • Options
    #170
    stefanovich
    Registered Users Posts: 5,490 ✭✭✭stefanovich


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Only 44K
    citizens of Britain was not happy about his work ?
    From silly 67 millions ????
    And that was the point to let him go ?
    Seriously ?
    He did his job perfectly if only 44K was not happy about it !

    I’d say it was 10 angry communists with a script.


  • Options
    #171
    Dempo1
    Registered Users Posts: 26,986 ✭✭✭✭Dempo1


    Ghastly, hidious individual but he's not wrong when it comes to the Duchess

    Is maith an scáthán súil charad.




  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    gmisk
    Registered Users Posts: 33,081 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    stefanovich wrote: »
    He left after a conversation with management. He was cancelled they just let him quit instead of firing him.

    He said he valued freedom of speech more than his job.

    What’s wrong with people having a different opinion? I thought himself and Reid balanced each other out quite well.
    "Himself and Reid balanced each other out quite well"
    He never shut up she barely spoke...perfect balance....lol

    Good riddance to him.... no doubt he will pop up on that new right wing news channel.


  • Options
    #173
    Junkyard Tom
    Registered Users Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Junkyard Tom


    It's getting increasingly difficult to tell the difference between consequences-for-being-a-bastard with being 'cancelled'.


  • Options
    #174
    Strumms
    Registered Users Posts: 25,492 ✭✭✭✭Strumms


    Zaph wrote: »
    That guy did what every right thinking person wished they could do - he put Piers Morgan in his place, and did so in a calm, rational manner. I'm not sure what you were watching, but the rest of us saw a bully being called out on his bullsh*t and not being able to take it.


    I’m sure what I’m watching It’s... a debate, on a tv show. One person trying to shoutout or shut down and disable another’s persons ability to air a view, opinion etc in that context and setting isn’t in the public interest... isn’t very democratic...isn’t very pro free speech... you can think what you like about Morgan, I’m no fan but it doesn’t make the individual being referenced blameless in that moment.... let Morgan have his say and enable people to have their opinion of him.

    It’s all very well calling out Morgan as whatever but that doesn’t grant a hall pass to the mouthpiece... he is there to carry out a function on tv... to enable the interest and enjoyment of the public...that show... had I been watching I’d be turning off.


  • Options
    #175
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    It's getting increasingly difficult to tell the difference between consequences-for-being-a-bastard with being 'cancelled'.

    Well that just proves that anyone you think is a bastard is being cancelled


  • Options
    #176
    MrStuffins
    Registered Users Posts: 19,198 ✭✭✭✭MrStuffins


    stefanovich wrote: »
    He was cancelled they just let him quit instead of firing him.

    Walking off in a huff because someone rightfully called you out on your creepy behaviour, straight out of the Harvey Weinstein handbook, is not being "cancelled".
    He said he valued freedom of speech more than his job.

    He was free to speak. He chose to storm off, have a cry, and then resign in embarrassment.


  • Options
    #177
    MrStuffins
    Registered Users Posts: 19,198 ✭✭✭✭MrStuffins


    Junkyard Tom wrote: »
    It's getting increasingly difficult to tell the difference between consequences-for-being-a-bastard with being 'cancelled'.

    Not at all.

    This is quite clearly not being "cancelled" or anything to do with being "woke".

    The dude launched a vendetta because he wanted a relationship with Markle and she had no interest.

    It's not called being cancelled, it's called being a creep


  • Options
    #178
    Harry Palmr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 40,061 ✭✭✭✭Harry Palmr


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Only 44K
    citizens of Britain was not happy about his work ?
    From silly 67 millions ????
    And that was the point to let him go ?
    Seriously ?
    He did his job perfectly if only 44K was not happy about it !

    Most tv shows get dozens of complaints at most. 44 thousand means the suits take notice.


  • Options
    #179
    anewme
    Registered Users Posts: 11,951 ✭✭✭✭anewme


    He has also received negative press for his comments about one of the presenters wearing a mini skirt yesterday.


  • Options
    #180
    Baggly
    Registered Users Posts: 35,024 ✭✭✭✭Baggly


    Mod

    Thread moved to Current Affairs / IMHO.

    Please read and observe the local charter.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    Snickers Man
    Registered Users Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    Thelonious Monk wrote: »
    He never really bothered me that much but I haven't seen much of him really. I find it odd that someone with Irish parents and I think even an Irish passport is so invested in the royal family, I knew loads of 2nd gen Irish people when I lived over there and none of them gave a sh*t about the firm and usually had more republican leanings than your average born and bred son of Eireann!

    Yeah. His original name is O'Meara.

    The shame! The shame!


Advertisement