I guess what I need to know is why DC felt a tabloid hack was an appropriate pr fella for a supposedly respectable political party.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
good question there bern.i was wondering why dc went to the gutter press.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
PaulB - Comparisons are indeed valid between Coulson and Brown but there is a big difference.
Coulson is not accused of doing anything wrong while working for DC so DC has no reason to sack him.
Nothing new has been revealed, despite the hot air, that was not known about when DC employed him 2 1/2 years ago, so again no reason for DC to sack him.
Finally Coulson as editor was in the Brown position relative to McBride as the senior person responsible. Coulson, though claiming he knew nothing and was personally innocent, something no-one has been able to demonstrate is not true, decided that as the man in charge and as a point of principal he should resign. Brown, in a similar position as Coulson (but much closer to Mcbride personally than Coulson was to his journalist) used weasel words and did not resign, unlike Coulson, Brown not being a man of principal.
As for DC employing a tabloid editor, why not? Thats where many broadsheet editors and journalists learn their trade in the first place, after local press, anyway. Coulson has been very effective indeed and therefore was clearly a good choice and there has been no mud thrown at him over his role working for Cameron, let alone sticking.
It is only because of the effectiveness of the Coulson operation that Labour's spin machine, and in client newspaper, are trying to get him. Not very successfully seeing as it is a flawed case.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
thats a rather struggaling post there barry.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Just trying to spell it out so anyone can understand, Howard. It seems that no matter how simply you put things there are those who choose not to understand. I know from hard experience, for instance, if I did not mention the local press in the context I did, some bright spark would focus in on that to the exclusion of the specific point made.
But, admit it, it is a bit like employing the editor of the Beano, but less fun.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
barry
what post of mine was you referring to in post no.25?
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Sorry howard, I mentioned your name, should have been Brian's
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
barryw,no need to spell it out.employ gutter press people expect the dirty end of a stick.if this gezzer thinks hes inocent and insists hes inocent he must think we are all thick or somthing.as chief editer he must have known it was happening because he had to sign of the cheks on a regular bases.on reflection he got out before he got his fingers burnt by the scndel.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
I suspect Brian that what you said is actionable. You have made a clear assertion of guilt for something that has not been proven and no charges made. See you in court.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
why will you be standing next to me.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
barryw,if there is nothing in it why has the gardian reporting it and why are papers looking at the story with intrest.and why is there going to be a commons inquirey.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
brian
the point that barry is making, is that the case is under investigation, no charges have been brought.
i suspect that the "news of the screws" have a stronger legal team than one you might employ.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
i rest my case.
