The paper that cannot be mentioned

[FatTony]

Today I posted the papers round up from the BBC site, including links from the above.

It caused offence to some people and for that I apologise. I do not buy the paper, I did not quote directly from their site and I have not added to their profits. A few posters voiced complaint and rightly so, and now it may be that Fredo has parted company, which is sad.

I accept the blame for this souly and I hope Fredo returns if he has not already.

I will make this point though, Murdoch owns the above, he bought it in the 60's I believe, as too its Sunday equivalent. He also owns Sky Media, The Times, Fox, the list goes on and on. Some people on this very forum call for Owen to be called back (probably one or two of the posters who've had a pop at myself and Fredo on the other thread). Well, he sold his story to the Sunday equivalent and made some good money doing so.

Most of you subscribe to Sky. Due to the above I do not, I made a point of cancelling it last year.

I made a mistake today, but some of you on that thread who kicked up a fuss are complete hypocrites. I agree it was wrong, but don't point the finger at us as you sit back reading The Times whilst tuned into Andy Gray and the other cocks on Sky.

[Morph]

I justed posted this in another thread but it'll do just as good in here but i expect the thread will be moved anyway:

Provide sources. If you post a rumour/article from elsewhere, please clearly provide the original source, and a link if possible.

Check the source. If it originates from the s*n rag, it should not be posted, and will be deleted. However, others should not flame those who inadvertently post such an article, but just inform a mod who will deal with it immediately.

Having just read a certain locked topic, I think we need some clarity on this S*n issue. Talk of red cards an such is silly, would it not just be more prudent to delete the name of the source and leave it at that if anyone has complaints. Personaly I don't mind seeing a quote from the rag if it's lifted from another website like it obviously was in this case. It doesn't fund or promote the paper in anyway and it's just as much 'news' as if it came from any other paper. We all know the reasons why we shouldn't be buying it etc, so i'll thank everyone for not jumping down my neck, but this is the second week in a row now. Let's see it sensibly sorted out please.
------------
Won't be around to dabate the point till tomorrow if there's anything that needs saying

[Helios Creed]

FatTony is innocent.

[hockin_monster]

Everyone makes mistakes. The crime is funding the paper (I don't believe in this Times/Sky stuff, but the sunday version is close enough to call), as discussed above. FatTony made an honest mistake. Move on.

[kendoddsdadsdogsdead]

Good on you for having the balls for coming on and apologising in what is the most volatile time on a subject that divides even the best of friends. Hopefully Fredo will reconsider his decision and maybe now have a wider awareness of the depth of feeling towards some parts of the media in Liverpool.

[Farside]

Good on you for having the balls for coming on and apologising in what is the most volatile time on a subject that divides even the best of friends. Hopefully Fredo will reconsider his decision and maybe now have a wider awareness of the depth of feeling towards some parts of the media in Liverpool.

That's a joke, right?

[kurtangle01]

What happened with fredo?

[Ataturk]

Today I posted the papers round up from the BBC site, including links from the above.

It caused offence to some people and for that I apologise. I do not buy the paper, I did not quote directly from their site and I have not added to their profits. A few posters voiced complaint and rightly so, and now it may be that Fredo has parted company, which is sad.

I accept the blame for this souly and I hope Fredo returns if he has not already.

I will make this point though, Murdoch owns the above, he bought it in the 60's I believe, as too its Sunday equivalent. He also owns Sky Media, The Times, Fox, the list goes on and on. Some people on this very forum call for Owen to be called back (probably one or two of the posters who've had a pop at myself and Fredo on the other thread). Well, he sold his story to the Sunday equivalent and made some good money doing so.

Most of you subscribe to Sky. Due to the above I do not, I made a point of cancelling it last year.

I made a mistake today, but some of you on that thread who kicked up a fuss are complete hypocrites. I agree it was wrong, but don't point the finger at us as you sit back reading The Times whilst tuned into Andy Gray and the other cocks on Sky.

its not like you filled your post with pics of you posed in a sun england hat dude..

i dont see anything wrong with copying and pasting from the bbc transfer gossip page even if it does quote the sun.

i read that page on the bbc website and it negates any need i have for buying any newspaper.

[Ataturk]

in reference to players selling their story to the notw...

didnt gerrard serialise his biog in said paper?

[EST_1892]

What happened with fredo?

Just read the "Saturday Papers" thread in the rumour section.

[kendoddsdadsdogsdead]

That's a joke, right?

In which respect? Did you not read my post and appreciate that Fredo being a resident of Mauritius might not have the benefit of a Scouse perspective on the matter?

[lfc_michael]

I will make this point though, Murdoch owns the above, he bought it in the 60's I believe, as too its Sunday equivalent. He also owns Sky Media, The Times, Fox, the list goes on and on. Some people on this very forum call for Owen to be called back (probably one or two of the posters who've had a pop at myself and Fredo on the other thread). Well, he sold his story to the Sunday equivalent and made some good money doing so.

Most of you subscribe to Sky. Due to the above I do not, I made a point of cancelling it last year.

I made a mistake today, but some of you on that thread who kicked up a fuss are complete hypocrites. I agree it was wrong, but don't point the finger at us as you sit back reading The Times whilst tuned into Andy Gray and the other cocks on Sky.

I don't know what went on and I have no axe to grind with someone making an honest mistake. However, I totally disagree with the above. The Hillsborough families call for a boycott of the one newspaper; they do not ask Liverpool fans to stop buying The Times or to stop watching Sky. Some people feel uncomfortable buying or reading The News of the World; again, that's their personal choice, but it is editorially independent of the other paper and has a history far pre-dating it.

[kendoddsdadsdogsdead]

I don't know what went on and I have no axe to grind with someone making an honest mistake. However, I totally disagree with the above. The Hillsborough families call for a boycott of the one newspaper; they do not ask Liverpool fans to stop buying The Times or to stop watching Sky. Some people feel uncomfortable buying or reading The News of the World; again, that's their personal choice, but it is editorially independent of the other paper and has a history far pre-dating it.

This is where the problem with boycotts and double standards enters the debate. With a sensible argument about the previous editor of the afore mentioned rag, others can expand it to the whole family of papers. I guess the lengths to which people will go to satisfy their conscience is independent of others. The history of Liverpool FC is inextricably linked with two disasters that both alienated and consolidated the fan base, and the arguments that ensue on this board and others will only ever stir up the old divides. Better that someone like Fredo makes the comment and gets educated than he carries on with the same belief regarding the paper for the rest of his days. How can we expect him to appreciate the tender nature of the matter just from conjecture on these pages and other forums?

[murder_inc]

Fat Tony, mistakes happen mate and im sure you never meant any harm. At the end of the day you are not an editor of the "number 1 fan site" ahem......
and im sure you will learn from this.

Personally i dont wanna know what goes on in that rag of a paper. I dont wanna know what goes on in its sister paper the No News of the World as well. I nearly divorced the missus last year for being naive and bringing it in, instead of the Sunday Mirror. As far as Sky goes, i subscribe to it and i dont really regret it. The times is too boring and I watch Fox News to laugh at the knob head air heads they call newsreaders. And Bill O'reilly makes me laugh with all his right wing bollocks same as Hannity. Its ****in funny and the arguments between presenter and guest are ****ing hillarious. Especcialy when the guest is nearly always spot on and the presenter is a bell end.

Anyway, takes a big man to recognise when he is in the wrong Fat Tony.

[Kilteragh]

I buy the Sunday Times every week. It's the only paper I buy. Never made the connection between it and the rag until it was mentioned in this thread. "Editorially" they are a million miles apart.

Wouldn't buy the rag. Will still buy the ST.