Are Sky News and The Sun besmirching Virgin name with hysterical reporting?

[SydneyHopper]

Their shared coverage of the unfortunate train crash seems unbalanced


Or am I being overly sensitive in this climate of corporate skullduggery?

[punky]

I kindly ask our members to consider carefully posting allegations against companies in view of possible libel repercussions.

[Virgin Mary]

Originally Posted by SydneyHopper

Their shared coverage of the unfortunate train crash seems unbalanced


Or am I being overly sensitive in this climate of corporate skullduggery?

How? Where is the evidence?

I read the Sky News web site nothing wrong there. I read the Sun, very balanced for a change

[SydneyHopper]

Originally Posted by Virgin Mary

How? Where is the evidence?

I read the Sky News web site nothing wrong there. I read the Sun, very balanced for a change

I guess it depends on how ruthless one believes business
to be, and of course, opportunist. Now, if I was cut from
the funny old cloth that creates business ideology. The
war-craft of modern day business. I would send my News
channel out to the crash site, have its cameras span the
destruction, allow it to settle on a Virgin emblem and then have
my papers draw up inflammatory titles and use foreboding colours.

Are you saying that news is bias free, without agenda?

Of course, it lacks evidentiary completeness.

[BushPigUK]

If Virgin use their heads and drop their price as they no longer have to pay Sky then it makes it more attractive to stay.
Lets face it, if we are sensible all you need do is download the programs you watch on Sky1/2 they are easy enough to find on any torrent site. In the end you'll be watching episodes before Sky show them so you can pee off Sky people by spoiling it for them :-)

[SydneyHopper]

Originally Posted by Gavin

I kindly ask our members to consider carefully posting allegations against companies in view of possible libel repercussions.

I'll call that a shot across the bow



Do I need to prefix every claim with an 'allegedly' or does
that afford no special protection? And if not, what areas
do I need to steer clear of? And how can I sustain
an imaginative hypothesis, and express my
right for publishing paranoid fantasy
and keep the sleeping dragon
within its docility?

And is the legal onus on me, or the forum?

Thanks for your patience

Originally Posted by SydneyHopper

I'll call that a shot across the bow



Do I need to prefix every claim with an 'allegedly' or does
that afford no special protection? And if not, what areas
do I need to steer clear of? And how can I sustain
an imaginative hypothesis, and express my
right for publishing paranoid fantasy
and keep the sleeping dragon
within its docility?

And is the legal onus on me, or the forum?

Thanks for your patience

No i think it means dont knock $ky there never in the wrong.

[NTLVictim]

"In my opinion" normally takes care of it.

[punky]

Originally Posted by SydneyHopper

I'll call that a shot across the bow



Do I need to prefix every claim with an 'allegedly' or does
that afford no special protection? And if not, what areas
do I need to steer clear of? And how can I sustain
an imaginative hypothesis, and express my
right for publishing paranoid fantasy
and keep the sleeping dragon
within its docility?

And is the legal onus on me, or the forum?

Thanks for your patience

Legally its a grey area. I think the ultimate responsibility belongs to the poster, however the forum is complicit as the medium responsible for transmitting the libellous comments. The forum will remove anything libellous, or what can be reasonably, as its stipulated in our terms and conditions. However, we kindly ask posters to avoid getting us to that point.

Originally Posted by Bill C

No i think it means dont knock $ky there never in the wrong.

Ahh, yes, the old i'm-Murdoch's-puppet argument again

Noticing I am not quashing this thread. Merely asking posters to avoid posting libellous remarks. It doesn't matter who or what its regarding. Posting libellous comments is against our T&Cs.

[NTLVictim]

This is from the Sun's website, their words not mine..
"The line speed for the area is 95mph but the tilting Pendolino train — which was carrying 180 passengers — is capable of reaching 125mph."

Now is it just my individual perception, or is the writer possibly trying to infer something with that sentence?

[rogerdraig]

Originally Posted by NTLVictim

This is from the Sun's website, their words not mine..
"The line speed for the area is 95mph but the tilting Pendolino train � which was carrying 180 passengers � is capable of reaching 125mph."

Now is it just my individual perception, or is the writer possibly trying to infer something with that sentence?

no he just has the same opinion as me that all cars capable of doing over 70 should be banned from the motorways thus leaving a safe road full of robin relients

[Carl J]

Originally Posted by NTLVictim

This is from the Sun's website, their words not mine..
"The line speed for the area is 95mph but the tilting Pendolino train � which was carrying 180 passengers � is capable of reaching 125mph."

Now is it just my individual perception, or is the writer possibly trying to infer something with that sentence?

He's inferring that the train is capable of doing 125mph but was only doing 95mph due to the track being too poor to support the full speed of the train perhaps?

Just my perception.

[garyeuph]

Originally Posted by NTLVictim

This is from the Sun's website, their words not mine..
"The line speed for the area is 95mph but the tilting Pendolino train � which was carrying 180 passengers � is capable of reaching 125mph."

Now is it just my individual perception, or is the writer possibly trying to infer something with that sentence?

He was probably 'implying' something

It depends how you see things really.
I mean the story line could be about a car crash killing people and injuring many.
The story may be " The speed limit for the motorway is 70 mph, the car is capable of reaching speeds of 150 mph "
As I read that I feel that a question mark is being placed against the speed the driver was doing, but that is only me, maybe the reporter had other reasons for the quote?

[SydneyHopper]

What was more inflammatory was the title: "TRAIN OF DEATH"

In actuality, a poor old lady falling on her knitting needles
should not lend itself to such a 'bride of frankenstein' headline