to be pleased with the Ofcam ruling on Piers Morgan

[TeloMere]

Even though I can't stand the bloke?

@Nightlystroll Apologies, maybe I'm wrong. I have a very clear memory of I'm him saying 'I'm sorry I just don't believe it' and I remember thinking at the time how outrageous it was that he had said he disbelieved her. But maybe it was more to do with the Palace.

I really can't stand the man personally. He's an arrogant bully. His interviewing technique is just to shout over people and I've seen him reduce guests to tears over the most trivial things. They once ran a sensationalist story about some trivial parenting debate and he was utterly vile to some poor unsuspecting young mother who'd gone on. He's just horrible. Almost as bad as his followers who love to pipe in with 'he's only saying what everyone is thinking.' Well evidently not or he wouldn't be quite so disliked by so many people.

The only place where he does well is tackling bullshitting MPs. But otherwise his personality, opinions and presenting techniques are grim.

On a side note, there was a thread the other day slaughtering Eamon Holmes for being a dinosaur and offensive. Yet people are still rooting Piers? The mind boggles.

I'm glad the ruling was as such it was.

But I never felt he was cancelled etc.

He was getting more and more erected in his behaviour in general and was not coping well in general with presenting the programme.

He stormed off because he was challenged back. Others had also started challenging him over the preceding weeks and it was sending his behaviour further more erratic.

He absolutely had a right to disbelieve Meghan. But he went way beyond that. He closed down anyone who agreed with her. He closed down any one who had empathy for her. He would start up a dialogue slating her about anything loosely connected to anything to do with RF or even the USA.

It was best he left because it way beyond his right for freedom of speech to him needing to monologue aggressively and frequently about his opinions to the detriment of discussion and debate.

Erratic in his behaviour it actually said that when I typed and re read and so I have no idea why it changed as I posted

In short Piers only seems to agree with freedom of speech and opinions if the person talking is spouting his party line.

He is actually one of the worst journalist for allowing others freedom of speech and opinion.

In short Piers only seems to agree with freedom of speech and opinions if the person talking is spouting his party line

Same as those who hail cancel culture, actually

@itsgettingwierd you have summed it up much more eloquently than I ever could.

The issue with Piers and most of his followers is that they only want freedom of speech when said speech agrees with their views. If you don't agree with it then you must be thick or a snowflake. Where is the freedom for these differing views? They just want to shut them down.

I'm not sure anyone has the right to disbelieve anyone when they talk about their own mental health battles however. Or maybe I should say they have the right to believe what they want but it's certainly not within the realms of good taste, decency and professionalism to shout about them on live TV.

@itsgettingwierd

In short Piers only seems to agree with freedom of speech and opinions if the person talking is spouting his party line.

He is actually one of the worst journalist for allowing others freedom of speech and opinion.

Ironically the same can be said of Harry and Meghan.

@teaandcrumpets35. I think you're still believing that he said he didn't believe her when she was suicidal. So here is a clarifying quote of what he said after the show.

"When we talked about this yesterday I said as an all encompassing thing, 'I don’t believe what Meghan Markle is saying generally in this interview', and I still have serious concerns about the veracity of a lot of what she said," Morgan said.

He continued: “It's not for me to question if she felt suicidal, I am not in her mind and that is for her to say. My real concern was a disbelief frankly and I’m prepared to be proven wrong on this and if I'm wrong it is a scandal, that she went to a senior member of the Royal household and told them she was suicidal and was told she could not have any help because it would be a bad look for the family. If that is true a) that person should be fired and b) The Royal family have serious questions that need to be answered.”

“But I would also throw into the mix, that Prince Harry himself belongs to the top of several mental health charities. It does raise the question to me – he has sought help himself, he has talked about that openly –why could he not in that eventuality have gone and got Meghan the help she needed, maybe via the charities he represents?"

@Nightlystroll thank you for that, it does sound like a balanced response in comparison with a lot of the crap he comes out with. And the fact that he has entertained the possibility that he might be wrong makes a refreshing change too.

However I still think he's terrible based on the reasons listed in my other posts.

@ilovemydogandmrobama2

I seriously don't understand why Piers is so triggered by Meghan

He’s ‘triggered’ by bloody everything though, it’s his thing, vegan sausage rolls, Megan, body positivity the list goes on. Tedious rent a gob

@teaandcrumpets35
"The issue with Piers and most of his followers is that they only want freedom of speech when said speech agrees with their views. If you don't agree with it then you must be thick or a snowflake. Where is the freedom for these differing views? They just want to shut them down."

But isn't most of the world guilty of this? Its not just PM. I certainly see it on MN that people express ideas that are contrary to opinions that others feel they should hold. And they are sworn at, abused, called internal misogynists, insulted, and often those are the same people saying we must be tolerant of everyone: trans people, migrants, the disabled. All very correct. But those same people that preach that tolerance are the most intolerant of people that may disagree on child raising, breast feeding, politics, men's attitudes, etc. Sometimes it's like a race to the bottom as to who can be the most abusive.

@teaandcrumpets35
However I still think he's terrible based on the reasons listed in my other posts.

Haha. I've no quote to refute that. 😂😂😂😂

Piers Morgan is a self serving arsehole. And his idea of freedom of speech is extremely right wing.

Absolutely spot on @Earlydancing. MN is one of the worst places on the Internet for trying to shut people with a different opinion down.

@Earlydancing you are correct and the world would be a much better place if people were generally more tolerant and respectful of views different to their own. Far too many people feel the need to prove why their choices and beliefs are superior to others. I try to teach my kids that unless someone else's beliefs or behaviour are harmful in any way, you live and let live.

PM however has a massive platform from which he peddles his views and similar to the likes of Katie Hopkins et al, he stirs up a lot of hate.

@teaandcrumpets35
"@Earlydancing you are correct and the world would be a much better place if people were generally more tolerant and respectful of views different to their own. Far too many people feel the need to prove why their choices and beliefs are superior to others. I try to teach my kids that unless someone else's beliefs or behaviour are harmful in any way, you live and let live."

👍

[quote teaandcrumpets35]@Earlydancing you are correct and the world would be a much better place if people were generally more tolerant and respectful of views different to their own. Far too many people feel the need to prove why their choices and beliefs are superior to others. I try to teach my kids that unless someone else's beliefs or behaviour are harmful in any way, you live and let live.

PM however has a massive platform from which he peddles his views and similar to the likes of Katie Hopkins et al, he stirs up a lot of hate.

[/quote]
Agree.

It's not so much his views that are the issue. It's the way he promotes them through his journalism and shuts down those who don't agree.

There's no denying others from the other side do the same.

But he had a position as a journalist and shouldn't have used this as platform to shout loudest about what he believes. It's not good journalism. He should have listened to others, allowed them to speak and question and challenged them when he didn't agree.

Instead he'd shout they were snowflakes etc.

He actually had some really good insights and thought processes on many things. I'd often want to hear more but would end up switching off or over because I didn't like the way he delivered it by shouting others down.

And we know he can be great at getting to the heart of things. His life story's and interviews with serial killers were captivating and I hope he can still continue to do these well.

graziadaily.co.uk/celebrity/news/lizzie-cundy-meghan-markle-harry/

the world would be a much better place if people were generally more tolerant and respectful of views different to their own.

The problem with that is there's no consensus on which views are or are not harmful. That's especially true when there's a conflict of interest or rights between two or more groups of people.

There are some views that truly are unworthy of respect (the view of women by the likes of the Taliban being one example). I'll take issue with this sort of thing vociferously where I see it; same goes for racism.

It is possible to criticise a view, or a deed, without resorting to personal attacks. It's this kind of nuance Piers Morgan and others like him completely fail to grasp. Interesting how both he and Clarkson were kicked off their otherwise successful programmes for bringing the broadcasters into disrepute by behaving like spoiled petulant brats (and in Clarkson's case, a lout).

Those two are like peas in a pod (and interestingly enough don't like each other, on the apparent basis that one's 'left' (ha!) wing; the other, right. It's amusing that they truly don't see how nigh-on identical they are. How on earth they ever became so popular is a mystery to me.

I'm sorry but that is simply ignorant. You CAN. You can exchange vows and consider yourselves married to each other. You may not be married in the eyes of the government, but you have exchanged vows and are married. It's what Common Law Marriage is all about. Or DeFacto relationship. This black and white thinking of the UK is scary and quite worrying.

You don't understand Common Law marriage either.

You can't just "consider yourselves" married.

If she had said, "we exchanged private vows three days before and for us, those were the important vows", she wouldn't be criticized so much.

You should also be aware that when restaurants "marry the condiments", the ketchup bottles are not married either.

How on earth they (Clarkson and Morgan) ever became so popular is a mystery to me.

I loved Top Gear. It was so funny.

How on earth they (Clarkson and Morgan) ever became so popular is a mystery to me.

Men.

Er, I'm not a man.

@MarieIVanArkleStinks

the world would be a much better place if people were generally more tolerant and respectful of views different to their own.

The problem with that is there's no consensus on which views are or are not harmful. That's especially true when there's a conflict of interest or rights between two or more groups of people.

There are some views that truly are unworthy of respect (the view of women by the likes of the Taliban being one example). I'll take issue with this sort of thing vociferously where I see it; same goes for racism.

It is possible to criticise a view, or a deed, without resorting to personal attacks. It's this kind of nuance Piers Morgan and others like him completely fail to grasp. Interesting how both he and Clarkson were kicked off their otherwise successful programmes for bringing the broadcasters into disrepute by behaving like spoiled petulant brats (and in Clarkson's case, a lout).

Those two are like peas in a pod (and interestingly enough don't like each other, on the apparent basis that one's 'left' (ha!) wing; the other, right. It's amusing that they truly don't see how nigh-on identical they are. How on earth they ever became so popular is a mystery to me.

There are millions of people around the world who agree with the Taliban. They're on Twitter unlike Katie Hopkins and Donald Trump I didn't like Top Gear but loved 'Clarkson's Farm' I agreed with every bloody word he said.

How on earth they (Clarkson and Morgan) ever became so popular is a mystery to me

The problem nowadays is that due to cancel culture, it seems you have to be (or appear to be) a bit of a thug to be brave enough to speak your mind. More mellow people do not dare speak earnestly for fear of being deplatformed, shouted down, losing their jobs, etc. It's a shame, really