Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 12:36:10 pm

Login with username, password and session length

Links


FSA logo

Author Topic: Lorraine Cox Murder.  (Read 6306 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #30 on April 01, 2021, 08:43:42 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
Yeah but for how long?

They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?



(want to hide these ads? Join the VSC today!)

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #31 on April 01, 2021, 08:48:28 pm by Getridorit »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

belton rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 2883
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #32 on April 01, 2021, 08:49:36 pm by belton rover »
I don’t expect it to stay in the news at all, Glyn. I thought I’d made that clear.

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #33 on April 01, 2021, 08:52:04 pm by Getridorit »
Yeah but for how long?

They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?

How long was the Everard story in the headlines?
Wasnt exactly swept under carpet.

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #34 on April 01, 2021, 08:54:36 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.

drfchound

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 29196
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #35 on April 01, 2021, 08:55:00 pm by drfchound »
Web site front pages aren’t quite the same as traditional front page news though, are they?
Yes it is on the first page, but after the Neo Nazi copper, George Floyd’s girlfriend and a Corona virus update.





I wasn’t sure what to think about this Belton so I googled all three of the news articles quoted on the thread.
The story doesn’t appear to be the main article on any of them.
As you say, it is on the first page but each online article has a link to open if you want to read more.
More than likely there  wouldn’t have been room for it on the front page of a traditional actual newspaper.

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #36 on April 01, 2021, 08:57:18 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
Yeah but for how long?

They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?

How long was the Everard story in the headlines?
Wasnt exactly swept under carpet.

Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?

Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report. I had heard about the case but the name didn't register.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2021, 09:00:09 pm by Glyn_Wigley »

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #37 on April 01, 2021, 09:00:39 pm by Getridorit »
Yeah but for how long?

They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?

How long was the Everard story in the headlines?
Wasnt exactly swept under carpet.

Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?

Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.
Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.
You know.

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #38 on April 01, 2021, 09:02:20 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
Yeah but for how long?

They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?

How long was the Everard story in the headlines?
Wasnt exactly swept under carpet.

Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?

Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.
Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.
You know.

To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #39 on April 01, 2021, 09:02:59 pm by Getridorit »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #40 on April 01, 2021, 09:06:11 pm by Getridorit »
Yeah but for how long?

They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?

How long was the Everard story in the headlines?
Wasnt exactly swept under carpet.

Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?

Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.
Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.
You know.

To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.
Well, in this "illegal immigrant kills someone" case.
The press coverage, and public outcry has been a fraction of the "copper kills someone" case.

Why?

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #41 on April 01, 2021, 09:07:45 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.

It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.

It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #42 on April 01, 2021, 09:08:20 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
Yeah but for how long?

They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?

How long was the Everard story in the headlines?
Wasnt exactly swept under carpet.

Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?

Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.
Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.
You know.

To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.
Well, in this "illegal immigrant kills someone" case.
The press coverage, and public outcry has been a fraction of the "copper kills someone" case.

Why?


I keep telling you, it's a six months old story apart from the verdict!!

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #43 on April 01, 2021, 09:09:52 pm by Getridorit »
Yeah but for how long?

They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?

How long was the Everard story in the headlines?
Wasnt exactly swept under carpet.

Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?

Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.
Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.
You know.

To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.
Well, in this "illegal immigrant kills someone" case.
The press coverage, and public outcry has been a fraction of the "copper kills someone" case.

Why?


I keep telling you, it's a six months old story apart from the verdict!!
It wasn't 6 months old, 6 months ago.
Where were the stories then?

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #44 on April 01, 2021, 09:11:01 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
Yeah but for how long?

They've found the body, they've convicted the perpetrator, how long do you expect it to be in the headlines when there's nothing new to say?

How long was the Everard story in the headlines?
Wasnt exactly swept under carpet.

Dunno, because I don't know the story you're talking about. Shows how big that's been in the media, doesn't it?

Just looked it up. I would imagine that was in the headlines for a long time because there kept on being new stuff to report.
Sarah everhard the woman murdered in London.
You know.

To me, it was the 'Copper kills someone' case. Like I said, the name didn't register.
Well, in this "illegal immigrant kills someone" case.
The press coverage, and public outcry has been a fraction of the "copper kills someone" case.

Why?


I keep telling you, it's a six months old story apart from the verdict!!
It wasn't 6 months old, 6 months ago.
Where were the stories then?

In the papers perhaps? How about you go and look and then tell us all about how ridiculously small they were, eh?

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #45 on April 01, 2021, 09:12:59 pm by Getridorit »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.

It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.

It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.


BillyStubbsTears

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 36596
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #46 on April 01, 2021, 09:14:15 pm by BillyStubbsTears »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website.

I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.

You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.

Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.

I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #47 on April 01, 2021, 09:15:46 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.

It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.

It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.



Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #48 on April 01, 2021, 09:18:54 pm by Getridorit »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website.

I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.

You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.

Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.

I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?
I said it wasn't the lead story on either website, or the BBC, and it wasn't.

My point is the huge difference in coverage, and more so, the outcry between the Cox and everhard murders.

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #49 on April 01, 2021, 09:20:16 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website.

I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.

You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.

Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.

I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?
I said it wasn't the lead story on either website, or the BBC, and it wasn't.

My point is the huge difference in coverage, and more so, the outcry between the Cox and everhard murders.

Ahem.

Quote
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Make your fecking mind up.

It's because it's a six-months old story that it wouldn't get much coverage today, as I've explained.

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #50 on April 01, 2021, 09:21:06 pm by Getridorit »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.

It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.

It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.



Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.

Yes, it had coverage. But a fraction of the everhard murder.

Also why no public outcry on the scale of the everhard murder?

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #51 on April 01, 2021, 09:22:21 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.

It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.

It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.



Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.

Yes, it had coverage. But a fraction of the everhard murder.

Also why no public outcry on the scale of the everhard murder?

Ask the fecking public.

Still waiting to hear what you'd fill the front page with btw.

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #52 on April 01, 2021, 09:22:58 pm by Getridorit »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website.

I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.

You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.

Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.

I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?
I said it wasn't the lead story on either website, or the BBC, and it wasn't.

My point is the huge difference in coverage, and more so, the outcry between the Cox and everhard murders.

Ahem.

Quote
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Make your fecking mind up.

It's because it's a six-months old story that it wouldn't get much coverage today, as I've explained.
Yes, I've literally repeated myself.
So?

belton rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 2883
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #53 on April 01, 2021, 09:23:21 pm by belton rover »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.

It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.

It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.



Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.
I’ve just done that with ‘Glyn Wigley’.
You are a ‘Countdown’ dark horse, aren’t you, Glyn?

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #54 on April 01, 2021, 09:23:47 pm by Getridorit »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.

It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.

It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.



Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.

Yes, it had coverage. But a fraction of the everhard murder.

Also why no public outcry on the scale of the everhard murder?

Ask the fecking public.

Still waiting to hear what you'd fill the front page with btw.

I'm asking you

River Don

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 8190
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #55 on April 01, 2021, 09:24:08 pm by River Don »
Of course, all murderers should be treated with equal contempt, and their victims should be given the same amount of sympathy and support, but they're not.

Had the Murderer in this case been a White man, and the victim a Black girl, social media would have been flooded with outrage far more than it is, and that includes this forum.

It is as though some people are frightened to comment on this particular act of evil in fear of being called a racist.

Not true.

This case recieved very little attention, it only really came to the public eye in contrast to the Everard case which had attracted such a high level of attention.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/03/26/criminal-death-black-sisters-didnt-cause-public-outcry-sarah/

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #56 on April 01, 2021, 09:24:29 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website.

I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.

You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.

Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.

I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?
I said it wasn't the lead story on either website, or the BBC, and it wasn't.

My point is the huge difference in coverage, and more so, the outcry between the Cox and everhard murders.

Ahem.

Quote
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Make your fecking mind up.

It's because it's a six-months old story that it wouldn't get much coverage today, as I've explained.
Yes, I've literally repeated myself.
So?

No, you've contradicted yourself.

Glyn_Wigley

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11963
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #57 on April 01, 2021, 09:25:08 pm by Glyn_Wigley »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.

It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.

It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.



Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.

Yes, it had coverage. But a fraction of the everhard murder.

Also why no public outcry on the scale of the everhard murder?

Ask the fecking public.

Still waiting to hear what you'd fill the front page with btw.

I'm asking you

As I haven't outcried anything, I'm the wrong person to ask!

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #58 on April 01, 2021, 09:26:35 pm by Getridorit »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

I said it was the lead UK story in the Guardian. The very attachment I posted shows it as the lead story in the UK News section of The Guardian website.

I said it was the lead story on the Independent webpage. It was but it had slipped down a few hours later when I took that screen grab.

You said it wasn't on the front page of either the Independent or Guardian site. This two screen grabs in that attachment are of the front pages of the Guardian and Independent websites.

Wilts said it was carried on the BBC News page. You contradicted him. But it was and still is on the main BBC News webpage.

I'll ask again. What precisely are you trying to achieve here?
I said it wasn't the lead story on either website, or the BBC, and it wasn't.

My point is the huge difference in coverage, and more so, the outcry between the Cox and everhard murders.

Ahem.

Quote
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Make your fecking mind up.

It's because it's a six-months old story that it wouldn't get much coverage today, as I've explained.
Yes, I've literally repeated myself.
So?

No, you've contradicted yourself.
Go back and re read it old lad, I've not contradicted myself in the slightest.

Getridorit

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 310
Re: Lorraine Cox Murder.
« Reply #59 on April 01, 2021, 09:27:12 pm by Getridorit »
I'm not sure what sort of personal standards you need to have to, without any evidence, accuse someone of deliberately lying on an issue as horrific and heartbreaking as this, but there you go.

See the attached.
Nope, checked again. it's never been the leading story of either newspaper you claim?


The point yet again the double standards of the press.

It sounds like you think that no other news story should have been deemed more important than the report of the conviction of someone who committed a murder that happened six months ago.
Sounds like your saying it doesn't matter, and not worth reporting because the murderer didn't fit the right profile.

It should have been reported. And it was. Quite rightly.

It's you that's got a pencil up their arse about the size of the coverage not being big enough for your liking, despite there being only one new piece of information to tell. Go on, then, tell us how you would have filled a front page with just a guilty verdict about an old story.
It's more the press coverage and lack of outcry 6 months ago that I'm referring.

Just don't understand the difference between the cases, that warranted the marked difference in outcry and press coverage.



Lack of press coverage? I've just put 'lorraine cox newspaper reports' into Google. You do the same and then tell us all how little coverage it's had.

Yes, it had coverage. But a fraction of the everhard murder.

Also why no public outcry on the scale of the everhard murder?

Ask the fecking public.

Still waiting to hear what you'd fill the front page with btw.

I'm asking you

As I haven't outcried anything, I'm the wrong person to ask!
Exactly.

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2012