Telegraph Apologizes for Publishing Fake News about the First Lady
So I read the apology. Wow, they pretty much made up the entire story, lied about it, now apologized.
So where is the editor, where are the sources. Oh, wait there was none.
Telegraph Apologizes for Publishing Fake News about the First Lady
So I read the apology. Wow, they pretty much made up the entire story, lied about it, now apologized.
So where is the editor, where are the sources. Oh, wait there was none.
Originally posted by SquallX
This is so damn stupid. Why not critiques the family for the shits they have actually done that’s wrong? Why waste time and make shits up?Those idiots are giving Trump all the ammo he needs to blast them as fake news, yet they act surprise when they are criticized.
It's called Trump Derangement Syndrome, They can't help themselves, they have a problem. TDS permeates everything now, from this sort of craziness to how they police speech.
The UK is getting towards 1984. A guy retweeted a limerick about transgenders and a cop called him up.
Police investigate UK man for retweeting poem mocking men who say they’re ‘women’
Originally posted by Putinbot1
Ahh the far right press of the UK up to there old tricks. Never trust the right, they even turn on their own.
Originally posted by Raptor22
Come on guys, this is from the telegraph. U all should have seen this coming.
They're basically the UK version of The National Enquirer, right?
Originally posted by BrolyBlack
How do the libel laws work in the U.K.
If you're famous in the US, people can pretty much say what they want.
Doubly so, if someone damages their own reputation with public words.
Basically, the point of US libel laws is to protect one's reputation. Like if someone reports "I heard Subway has poo in it", or "The tailor down the road is cheating on his wife."
Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Regardless of what side it’s on, it’s not right.
Without it, there could be no tabloid journalism.
Nothing really right about it, but the alternative is famous people sue everyone, and the tabloids disappear, and a lot of people make less money from consumers.
Can't have that. The legal system is nothing, if it isn't to protect the ability of people to make money.
Originally posted by cdtm
If you're famous in the US, people can pretty much say what they want.Doubly so, if someone damages their own reputation with public words.
Basically, the point of US libel laws is to protect one's reputation. Like if someone reports "I heard Subway has poo in it", or "The tailor down the road is cheating on his wife."
Liberace sued a paper in the UK over saying he was gay and won lol. Then said he "cried all the way to the bank".
Originally posted by BrolyBlackno problem.
Can you explain what you actually mean by this, or did you just post this to post? It doesn't have any actual meaning.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.collinsdictionary.com/us/amp/english/telegraph
Telegraph- transitive verb- Definition 3- If someone telegraphs something that they are planning or intending to do, they make it obvious, either deliberately or accidentally, that they are going to do it.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pun
Pun Definition 1- the usually humorous use of a word in such a way as to suggest two or more of its meanings or the meaning of another word similar in sound
U see, the name of the paper is the Telegraph, which can mean both -
Telegraph definition 1-noun- "a system of sending messages over long distances, either by means of electricity or by radio signals. Telegraph was used more often before the invention of telephones"
Or the definition 3 which i posted above.
Since its a newspaper its most likely associating itself with the noun version of the word. But i made it seem like it was the transitive verb which would, associate them with making things obvious. Now if something is obvious then people should see it coming. Hence my pun about it being from the telegraph, therefore we should have seen it coming.