Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pierre
I think your being a bit harsh
Sorry, no logic to it at all, Fearon is a **** sucking toerag with a conviction list as long as your arm and we (yes, we -it's our money) are paying him £4,500 grand. Thats approx 450 licence payers' money going out of their bank account into his. It's disgusting and dispicable.
And it's not just this single point that is the argument against the Licence fee, this is just one of many.
|
I'm no apologist for Fearon but he was paid because he was the only other person present when a 16 year old boy was shot in the back (not a typical self defence strategy hene Tony Martin's conviction). Without his input rounded coverage of the event would not be possible because Fearon's voice had not previously been heard. Martin's version of events, on the other hand, have been widely publicised and one newspaper paid him a six figure sum for his story.
The answers aren't easy and as I said I'm not sure it was wise to pay Fearon, precisely because of the media furore that has transpired. Not to have paid him though, would have meant the rug would have been pulled from under the reasoning behind the programme in the first place, so it would have had to have been pulled.