Full Version: Ken Livingstone
Does anyone else detect a whiff of mental instability about him recently. He always seems to be on the verge of breaking into tears when answering the most mundane of questions,and he now seems unable to oppologize for causing offence.
I could see this one coming.
A) no I don't detect that.
B ) He shouldn't appologise. his remarks were taken way out of context. His record of fighting racism is second to none amongst politicians
C) this is muckraking by the Standard and the GLA Tories.
A) no I don't detect that.
B ) He shouldn't appologise. his remarks were taken way out of context. His record of fighting racism is second to none amongst politicians
C) this is muckraking by the Standard and the GLA Tories.
do you not think he's made it a whole lot worse by not just saying, "ok bad example using nazi guards, what I was trying to say was your just a 'Yes Man'" and leaving it at that?
Going on to make a fool of yourself seemingly comparing his suffering to those of the holocaust is crazy and smacks a bit of megalomania to me.
Going on to make a fool of yourself seemingly comparing his suffering to those of the holocaust is crazy and smacks a bit of megalomania to me.
Just so everyone can make there own minds up on the subject.
I will quote the 'offensive remark' make by Livingstone,and his response to being asked for an apology by various groups (including the Jewish Council).
Livingstone says to Jewish journalist Oliver Finegold: '' You're like a German war criminal.
Finegold protests.
Livingstone: ''You are just like a concentration camp guard''
Livingstone yesterday when asked to apologise: ''I could apologise but why should i say words i do not believe in my heart''.
I will quote the 'offensive remark' make by Livingstone,and his response to being asked for an apology by various groups (including the Jewish Council).
Livingstone says to Jewish journalist Oliver Finegold: '' You're like a German war criminal.
Finegold protests.
Livingstone: ''You are just like a concentration camp guard''
Livingstone yesterday when asked to apologise: ''I could apologise but why should i say words i do not believe in my heart''.
I'm just wondering how one takes 'you're like a Nazi concentration camp guard' out of context? In what context is that Ok? Was, perhaps, the journalist stripping him naked, shooting at him, gassing him, and then making a lamp out of his skin? Was he, perhaps, lining him up with his staff so that one bullet could penetrate all of their skulls?
If not, he needs to apologise.
Before he gets fired.
He's behaving like a madman. I wonder what the Olympic committee in town to see if London should host the 2012 Olympics is making of all of this?
God, it's embarrassing.
If not, he needs to apologise.
Before he gets fired.
He's behaving like a madman. I wonder what the Olympic committee in town to see if London should host the 2012 Olympics is making of all of this?
God, it's embarrassing.
In the exchange, Ken complained that he was being harassed by journalists from the Standard as they keep following him to private parties etc. Fiengold said he was just doing his job. Ken said, thats just what the Nazi concentration camp guards said.... and there you have it... out of context
Unlike anybody here, Ken has led anti-racist organisations for over twenty years. let's have a little persepective about this.
Unlike anybody here, Ken has led anti-racist organisations for over twenty years. let's have a little persepective about this.
It's unfortunate that the person he said it to was Jewish.
We're all a little sensitive about that stuff.
So he needs to apologise, and, frankly, give me a break. When Jesse Jackson, whose work for civil rights make Ken Livingstone look like a layabout, made an ill-advised reference to 'Hymietown' that was offensive to Jews, he had to apologise. I don't care who you are or what you've done, if you tell a Jew they're like a Nazi concentration camp guard, and they've got a tape recorder running, you apologise or you get FIRED.
He better get on with it.
And it was a nasty thing to say to anybody. He's a big whiney baby, my tube fare keeps going up, and I wish to hell I could vote.
We're all a little sensitive about that stuff.
So he needs to apologise, and, frankly, give me a break. When Jesse Jackson, whose work for civil rights make Ken Livingstone look like a layabout, made an ill-advised reference to 'Hymietown' that was offensive to Jews, he had to apologise. I don't care who you are or what you've done, if you tell a Jew they're like a Nazi concentration camp guard, and they've got a tape recorder running, you apologise or you get FIRED.
He better get on with it.
And it was a nasty thing to say to anybody. He's a big whiney baby, my tube fare keeps going up, and I wish to hell I could vote.
Ken Livingstone is a selective 'anti-racist' and always has been.
Would he have refused to apologise, if he had been asked to retract offensive comments directed towards the Islamic community ? Its the same with Labours non-apology for the recent anti-semetic 'Fagan/Pig' posters. Its all selective.
Where are all those who were lining up to have a pop at Kilroy about offensive remarks last year?Why arn't they demarnding a public apology from Livingstone?Why isn't Ian(care)Blair of the Yard launching a hate crime investigation? Its all double standards and hypocracy.
Red Ken's was keen to invite an Islamic extremist to London as his honoured guest recently (funded by taxpayers money),but he is unwilling to apologise to the Jewish community ,so close to the 60th anniversay of the liberation of Aushwitz.
Would he have refused to apologise, if he had been asked to retract offensive comments directed towards the Islamic community ? Its the same with Labours non-apology for the recent anti-semetic 'Fagan/Pig' posters. Its all selective.
Where are all those who were lining up to have a pop at Kilroy about offensive remarks last year?Why arn't they demarnding a public apology from Livingstone?Why isn't Ian(care)Blair of the Yard launching a hate crime investigation? Its all double standards and hypocracy.
Red Ken's was keen to invite an Islamic extremist to London as his honoured guest recently (funded by taxpayers money),but he is unwilling to apologise to the Jewish community ,so close to the 60th anniversay of the liberation of Aushwitz.
Yes, he's building up quite an anti-semitic reputation within London's Jewish community. I think his views on Israel are beginning to eat his brain.
QUOTE(Mata @ Feb 15 2005, 06:14 PM)
It's unfortunate that the person he said it to was Jewish.
We're all a little sensitive about that stuff.
So he needs to apologise, and, frankly, give me a break. When Jesse Jackson, whose work for civil rights make Ken Livingstone look like a layabout, made an ill-advised reference to 'Hymietown' that was offensive to Jews, he had to apologise. I don't care who you are or what you've done, if you tell a Jew they're like a Nazi concentration camp guard, and they've got a tape recorder running, you apologise or you get FIRED.
He better get on with it.
And it was a nasty thing to say to anybody. He's a big whiney baby, my tube fare keeps going up, and I wish to hell I could vote.
We're all a little sensitive about that stuff.
So he needs to apologise, and, frankly, give me a break. When Jesse Jackson, whose work for civil rights make Ken Livingstone look like a layabout, made an ill-advised reference to 'Hymietown' that was offensive to Jews, he had to apologise. I don't care who you are or what you've done, if you tell a Jew they're like a Nazi concentration camp guard, and they've got a tape recorder running, you apologise or you get FIRED.
He better get on with it.
And it was a nasty thing to say to anybody. He's a big whiney baby, my tube fare keeps going up, and I wish to hell I could vote.
Ken said:
QUOTE
"I don't suggest for one minute that has anything to do with the Holocaust which was uniquely the most evil chapter in history.
"But when reporters say to me I'm only doing this because it's my job... that's the same abdication of moral responsibility at the thin end of the wedge that in its most extreme and horrific version ends up with others being prepared to stand as a concentration camp guard.
"We are responsible for our own choices in this life, I always have been and so have reporters."
"But when reporters say to me I'm only doing this because it's my job... that's the same abdication of moral responsibility at the thin end of the wedge that in its most extreme and horrific version ends up with others being prepared to stand as a concentration camp guard.
"We are responsible for our own choices in this life, I always have been and so have reporters."
That's pretty conclusive as far as I'm concerned. It's nothing like what Jackson said.
If Finegold wants to use the Neuremberg defence for what he said that's up to him, but he's going to get called on it. Let's not forget, his sister paper said that Jews should be sent back to Germany in the '30s and it supported Mussolini.
I think people who line up behind the Tories on this one are just wrong.
How you don't vote is up to you Mata.
The point is, that it wasn't just some off the cuff remark. Livingstone has 'history' with this jounalist.He knew full well that Finegold was a Jew.It was an intentionally spiteful remark, born out of anger and designed to inflame.
He was an arse for playing the Hitler card (there are many better ways he could have said what he wanted to say), and while I hate the Daily Mail I don't think Livingstone won many debating points bringing up what the paper said sixty years ago (without any evidence that the current editor/proprieter hold the same views as Rothermere the facts aren't particularly relevant in this context).
He's still far better at the job than any of his rivals would be, though, despite being far too hospitable to Yusuf al-Qaradawi a few months ago.
He's still far better at the job than any of his rivals would be, though, despite being far too hospitable to Yusuf al-Qaradawi a few months ago.
I agree with Joe, although I think that's an indictment of his rivals, rather than any endorsement of Livingstone.
I can't believe nobody more qualified than Shagger Norris will run against him. It's infuriating.
He is an embarrassment.
I can't believe nobody more qualified than Shagger Norris will run against him. It's infuriating.
He is an embarrassment.
Its also worth noting that Livingstone wasn't adverse to working for Finegolds paper 'The Standard' in the past,as a resturant critic.
''We are responsible for our own choices in this life, I always have been and so have reporters''.....You said it ken.
''We are responsible for our own choices in this life, I always have been and so have reporters''.....You said it ken.
for fucks sake, they have been trying to knobble ken since i was a thin young thing!
nothing new under the sun... or the standard or the mail!
nothing new under the sun... or the standard or the mail!
QUOTE(Mata @ Feb 15 2005, 06:04 PM)
I agree with Joe, although I think that's an indictment of his rivals, rather than any endorsement of Livingstone.
I can't believe nobody more qualified than Shagger Norris will run against him. It's infuriating.
He is an embarrassment.
I can't believe nobody more qualified than Shagger Norris will run against him. It's infuriating.
He is an embarrassment.
There is. The lovely Simon Hughes who as an MP for Bermondsey did a hell of a lot and I admire his bravery over some of the stuff he did - mentioned elsewhere on here I think.
I voted for him and he got a decent vote but...
Simon Hughes the closet gay MP who came to parliament in the Bermondsey by-election on a wave of homophobia against the openly gay Labour candidate Peter Tatchell!
Lets have a half in the closet/half out of the closet candidate next time,and keep everyone happy.
Just one more thing, Graham, you said that Livingstone was understandably upset because the reporters keep following him to 'private parties'. And I understand that the contretemps occurred when Livingstone was, indeed, walking out of a party. Is it true, though, that the party was actually being held in City Hall? And wasn't it a party for a public official recently getting quite a bit of the limelight? So.... perhaps the party was a PPP (public-private party)?
He says he's been hounded at lots of different parties by that particular jounalist and that was the final straw. Now Tony Blair has said he should appologise I don't think he has much political choice, but I think that says more about the sad state of British politics than it does about Ken Livingstone.
Unfortunately, that particular journalist had a tape recorder which recorded him saying nothing except, 'Did you enjoy the party, sir?' before Ken lost his mind.
Honestly, I'm sympathetic if he's actually being harassed, but if he cannot be smarter than that, they'll get him in the end.
Honestly, I'm sympathetic if he's actually being harassed, but if he cannot be smarter than that, they'll get him in the end.
The clash with the jounalist may have something to do with the fact that Livingstone has a well known reputation for turning vindictive and aggresive after a few drinks. Just ask some of his ex-girlfriends.
i would, if i knew any of them.
although this quote will do for me, with regard to the allegations made by the Evening standard . Ken allegedly assaulting a man after he found his pregnant girlfriend smoking at a party...
you read the standard you get one story, you read the observer you get another one.
KLF, perhaps you could ring one of his ex girlfriends and get a quote direct from her. then i might believe it.
although this quote will do for me, with regard to the allegations made by the Evening standard . Ken allegedly assaulting a man after he found his pregnant girlfriend smoking at a party...
QUOTE
The Observer has obtained a letter to the Standard from Emma and Kate Beal and fellow partygoer Mike Furniss, all of whom were quoted in the paper on Thursday. It reads: 'The Evening Standard 's story today has attributed a number of statements to us, none of which are true.'
you read the standard you get one story, you read the observer you get another one.
KLF, perhaps you could ring one of his ex girlfriends and get a quote direct from her. then i might believe it.
QUOTE(the klf @ Feb 16 2005, 01:44 PM)
Livingstone has a well known reputation for turning vindictive and aggresive after a few drinks.
not half as vindictive and aggressive as i get after reading a few posts by sun reading standard bearing knivelling little fuckers.
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=435&id=804252003
I presume you're refuring to this incident ,Nevski.
I presume you're refuring to this incident ,Nevski.
QUOTE(the klf @ Feb 15 2005, 05:24 PM)
Ken Livingstone is a selective 'anti-racist' and always has been.
Would he have refused to apologise, if he had been asked to retract offensive comments directed towards the Islamic community ? Its the same with Labours non-apology for the recent anti-semetic 'Fagan/Pig' posters. Its all selective.
Where are all those who were lining up to have a pop at Kilroy about offensive remarks last year?Why arn't they demarnding a public apology from Livingstone?Why isn't Ian(care)Blair of the Yard launching a hate crime investigation? Its all double standards and hypocracy.
Red Ken's was keen to invite an Islamic extremist to London as his honoured guest recently (funded by taxpayers money),but he is unwilling to apologise to the Jewish community ,so close to the 60th anniversay of the liberation of Aushwitz.
Would he have refused to apologise, if he had been asked to retract offensive comments directed towards the Islamic community ? Its the same with Labours non-apology for the recent anti-semetic 'Fagan/Pig' posters. Its all selective.
Where are all those who were lining up to have a pop at Kilroy about offensive remarks last year?Why arn't they demarnding a public apology from Livingstone?Why isn't Ian(care)Blair of the Yard launching a hate crime investigation? Its all double standards and hypocracy.
Red Ken's was keen to invite an Islamic extremist to London as his honoured guest recently (funded by taxpayers money),but he is unwilling to apologise to the Jewish community ,so close to the 60th anniversay of the liberation of Aushwitz.
Perfectly summed up. He needs a kicj in the arse and put in a real mayor who does not harbour any less than favourable views on ANY minority!
Big_willy
As Jeremy Hardy pointed out the other night (see how I very subtly slipped that in?) The statement was not anti-Semitic. He likened the journalist to a concentration camp guard, the implication being that concentration camp guards were carrying out despicable deeds on the orders of their superiors. How is this anti-semitic? Flippant, perhaps, but anti-semitic?
The fact that the journalist was Jewish doesn't, for me, change the connotation. He was saying that concentration camp guards were not very nice. He was also saying that the journalist was not very nice. I don't really see why the journalist's own religion comes into it.
The fact that the journalist was Jewish doesn't, for me, change the connotation. He was saying that concentration camp guards were not very nice. He was also saying that the journalist was not very nice. I don't really see why the journalist's own religion comes into it.
Exactly Joanie, exactly.
I drives me up the wall that any comment that can be seen as negative in any way about Jews or talking to someone who is Jewish and referring to Nazis, makes you Anti-semetic.
Woody Allen must be the most anti-semetic person on the planet!
And Graham (because I forgot to reply before) - I didn't realise Simon Hughes was a "closet" homosexual. It has always been known to be that he's gay - either my Gaydar is really good (natch!) or my parents used to get inside info from Lib Dem headquaters!
I drives me up the wall that any comment that can be seen as negative in any way about Jews or talking to someone who is Jewish and referring to Nazis, makes you Anti-semetic.
Woody Allen must be the most anti-semetic person on the planet!
And Graham (because I forgot to reply before) - I didn't realise Simon Hughes was a "closet" homosexual. It has always been known to be that he's gay - either my Gaydar is really good (natch!) or my parents used to get inside info from Lib Dem headquaters!
I'm so glad that you two have the same opinion as me on this.
The remark was not about religion, but mindless compliance. The journalist is obviously a touch spineless to be using this as a religious weapon. Next thing you know the old penalties for blasphemy will be reintroduced, and then the burning of the witches and then the crucifix as an acceptable form of punishment...
I think he is doing the right thing morally by refusing to apologise, but in terms of his career - banjaxed. It seems that we all have to watch our maners around other peoples religions (unless you're pagan, then that's fair game, apparently, for jibes about goat-f**king and human sacrifice (not to mention satanism - stupid bastards, that's part of the Christian faith system!
))
Next thing, Darwinism will be declared illegal, because it offends the fundamentalist christian creationist right-wing.
The remark was not about religion, but mindless compliance. The journalist is obviously a touch spineless to be using this as a religious weapon. Next thing you know the old penalties for blasphemy will be reintroduced, and then the burning of the witches and then the crucifix as an acceptable form of punishment...
I think he is doing the right thing morally by refusing to apologise, but in terms of his career - banjaxed. It seems that we all have to watch our maners around other peoples religions (unless you're pagan, then that's fair game, apparently, for jibes about goat-f**king and human sacrifice (not to mention satanism - stupid bastards, that's part of the Christian faith system!
))Next thing, Darwinism will be declared illegal, because it offends the fundamentalist christian creationist right-wing.
QUOTE(dissident @ Feb 22 2005, 02:06 PM)
Next thing, Darwinism will be declared illegal, because it offends the fundamentalist christian creationist right-wing.
In some parts of America that's pretty much the case nowadays...eek.
I don't think the comment was anti-semitic -- but I think it was stupid and insulting, so he deserves the kicking he's getting at the moment in the media. I also think he handled it badly (more media kicking, richly deserved).
I strongly believe he needs to apologise to the members of the Jewish community whom he inadvertently insulted, admit it was a stupid thing to say, and then defend himself like a grown-up against charges of anti-semitism. All this metaphorical teen-age-like kicking of dirt clods, sticking out of his lower lip and 'No! I won't apologise and you can't make me!' is increasingly nauseating.
I strongly believe he needs to apologise to the members of the Jewish community whom he inadvertently insulted, admit it was a stupid thing to say, and then defend himself like a grown-up against charges of anti-semitism. All this metaphorical teen-age-like kicking of dirt clods, sticking out of his lower lip and 'No! I won't apologise and you can't make me!' is increasingly nauseating.
Sarah. He wasn't out at the time of the Bermondsey by election
Mata. Today Ken said:
"I have been deeply affected by the concern of Jewish people in the city, in particular that my comments may have been seen to downplay the horror and magnitude of the Holocaust.
"I wish to say to Londoners my words were not intended to cause such offence and that my view remains that the Holocaust against the Jews is the greatest racial crime of the 20th century."
Mata. Today Ken said:
"I have been deeply affected by the concern of Jewish people in the city, in particular that my comments may have been seen to downplay the horror and magnitude of the Holocaust.
"I wish to say to Londoners my words were not intended to cause such offence and that my view remains that the Holocaust against the Jews is the greatest racial crime of the 20th century."
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Now watch. I predict it's a dead issue by Thursday.
Now watch. I predict it's a dead issue by Thursday.
Livingstone is a man full of hate.Two of his biggest hates are the the Daily mail group of newspapers and the Isreali's.So of course he is not going to apologise.
He is a pig headed, arrogant weasel.How hard would it have been to apologise for causing offense(even if it the offence caused was unitentional).It would have shown more courage to swallow his pride and back down.Thats why no one was surprised when he didn't.Instead of trying to reconsile with the jewish community he criticized one of their newspapers for inconsistancy and lauched a tyrade of pure hatred against The Standard and the Daily mail group.I say it again.The man has 'issues'. Just ranting on about the daily mail in the 1930's was no comfort to those seeking a withdrwal of his words.He said he was provoked and still insists on likening the journalist in question, to a mass murdering concentation camp guard.(just clear you minds and re-read that last sentence)
.Don't forget this journalists 'crime' was to ask Livingstone and i quote ''Have you had a nice evening'' after he left a function at City Hall.
The fact that Cuddly Ken met his current girlfriend whilst they were BOTH working for The Standard,doesn't seem to register any sort of hypocricy in his mind.Is he saying he didn't know about the Daily Mail groups support for certain Nazi groups in the 1030's when he was working there,but does now?
I and many other are much more offended by Ken's attitude,arrogance and lack of aplogogy AFTER the event, than i was by his original remarks to the jounalist.
He is a pig headed, arrogant weasel.How hard would it have been to apologise for causing offense(even if it the offence caused was unitentional).It would have shown more courage to swallow his pride and back down.Thats why no one was surprised when he didn't.Instead of trying to reconsile with the jewish community he criticized one of their newspapers for inconsistancy and lauched a tyrade of pure hatred against The Standard and the Daily mail group.I say it again.The man has 'issues'. Just ranting on about the daily mail in the 1930's was no comfort to those seeking a withdrwal of his words.He said he was provoked and still insists on likening the journalist in question, to a mass murdering concentation camp guard.(just clear you minds and re-read that last sentence)
.Don't forget this journalists 'crime' was to ask Livingstone and i quote ''Have you had a nice evening'' after he left a function at City Hall. The fact that Cuddly Ken met his current girlfriend whilst they were BOTH working for The Standard,doesn't seem to register any sort of hypocricy in his mind.Is he saying he didn't know about the Daily Mail groups support for certain Nazi groups in the 1030's when he was working there,but does now?
I and many other are much more offended by Ken's attitude,arrogance and lack of aplogogy AFTER the event, than i was by his original remarks to the jounalist.
QUOTE(the klf @ Feb 22 2005, 06:39 PM)
I and many other are much more offended by Ken's attitude,arrogance and lack of aplogogy AFTER the event, than i was by his original remarks to the jounalist.
Any chance the guy's politics factored in to getting your underpants in a bunch?
Any chance that the guys politics is affecting your judgement,as to the sort of man he is.
He's a Lefty so he must be allright.....Yeah Right !
He's a Lefty so he must be allright.....Yeah Right !
I haven't really followed this story but having read yesterdays London Evening Standard one word (or is it two) sprang to mind, witch-hunt. The usual suspects lining up to take a pop at Ken. No surprises.
QUOTE(the klf @ Feb 22 2005, 06:39 PM)
.He said he was provoked and still insists on likening the journalist in question, to a mass murdering concentation camp guard.(just clear you minds and re-read that last sentence)
Oh please, KLF. This is disingenuous in the extreme. We've all made throwaway remarks incorporating hyperbole. That doesn't meant that we really, LITERALLY meant the things we've said. The man who runs our village boules team is unaffectionately known as "Nazi Pat". We refer to him thus because he is dictatorial and demands absolute control. No one who uses this nickname, nor anyone who hears it, could think we mean to suggest that Pat has perpetrated some of the worst hate crimes in human history, and is actually a war criminal in hiding. They understand that we mean he is a bit of a tosser.
The journalist in question has completely blown out of proportion a similarly throwaway remark, and it is currently being used, as Dickie says, as a brickbat by those who have always had it in for Ken. I'm disappointed about how those who have been genuinely upset by this have been so manipulated by the gutter press.
Coupled with the fact that the journalist in question is now refusiing to answer questions from the rest of media community - and no-one from the papers in question is prepared to accept the same 'doorstepping' treatment they hand out to their latest target, whom ever that maybe.
The reference to concentration camp guard came about because the journalist stuck tothe tired old line of 'only doing my job', 'only following orders' the same guttless socially irresponsible answer that concentration camp guards gave. No integerity with themselves and society.
Personnally I couldn't give a shit as to whether Mr Livingstone had 'had a nice evening' - it's the type of low brow celebrity gossip that keeps our newspapers and TV stations full of "bingo, trivia and tits" (to quote Tom Robinson). To be repeatedly asked the same question, and one as vacuous as that deserves a strong rebuke.
If the journalist in question is such a champion of the oppressed, why isn't he out there reporting on the deaths of almost 48,000 people a day through starvation caused by the monetary policies of the WTO and IMF?
The reference to concentration camp guard came about because the journalist stuck tothe tired old line of 'only doing my job', 'only following orders' the same guttless socially irresponsible answer that concentration camp guards gave. No integerity with themselves and society.
Personnally I couldn't give a shit as to whether Mr Livingstone had 'had a nice evening' - it's the type of low brow celebrity gossip that keeps our newspapers and TV stations full of "bingo, trivia and tits" (to quote Tom Robinson). To be repeatedly asked the same question, and one as vacuous as that deserves a strong rebuke.
If the journalist in question is such a champion of the oppressed, why isn't he out there reporting on the deaths of almost 48,000 people a day through starvation caused by the monetary policies of the WTO and IMF?
Journalists, like everybody else, do what they're hired to do, dissident. You don't get to go report about what you want to report unless your daddy owns a newspaper.
As you clearly did, I too heard the Today program piece this morning on doorstopping the newspaper group in question, and I thought it was brilliant. Very, very clever. And it's nice to see the media policing itself.
However:
Erm, what? How many times do you reckon Tony Blair's been asked 'Do you regret invading Iraq sir? Sir? SIR?? Do you regret invading Iraq? Sir SIR?? Do you regret invading Iraq? Sir? SIR??? Do you regret....?'
You want that to stop? I have seen the piece on Jeremy Paxman asking the same question 14 times a dozen times, but never has anybody ever told me they didn't think he should have done it. I suspect you think this particularly journalist shouldn't have asked the same question over and over again largely because it annoyed Ken Livingstone, but that is a slippery slope, and I don't think you can or should step on it lightly lest you land on your ass.
Asking the same question until it is answered is a journalist's job. Now, when told to ask a question with which they disagree, it's up to the journalist's conscience what they do. I, personally, would have quit before I'd have been the inane reporter shouting at Prince Charles last week with false jollity, 'Sir, are you looking forward to the big day? Sir? SIR?? Are you looking forward to the big day, sir??'
Actually, I'd have killed myself before I'd do that. He never answered the question.
As a young reporter, I was very nearly fired from my first newspaper job for refusing to phone the mother of a little girl who had been run over by a hit-and-run driver to ask her how she felt.
My editor ultimately made the call herself, so the woman was not saved from the stupidity, but I was able to look myself in the mirror the next day and like myself.
But it's up to individual reporters to behave like something more than animals. It's not up to us as a society to hem them in by laws, since we cannot write a law that says 'You are allowed to ask annoying questions only when it makes me, personally, very happy.'
As you clearly did, I too heard the Today program piece this morning on doorstopping the newspaper group in question, and I thought it was brilliant. Very, very clever. And it's nice to see the media policing itself.
However:
QUOTE
To be repeatedly asked the same question, and one as vacuous as that deserves a strong rebuke.
Erm, what? How many times do you reckon Tony Blair's been asked 'Do you regret invading Iraq sir? Sir? SIR?? Do you regret invading Iraq? Sir SIR?? Do you regret invading Iraq? Sir? SIR??? Do you regret....?'
You want that to stop? I have seen the piece on Jeremy Paxman asking the same question 14 times a dozen times, but never has anybody ever told me they didn't think he should have done it. I suspect you think this particularly journalist shouldn't have asked the same question over and over again largely because it annoyed Ken Livingstone, but that is a slippery slope, and I don't think you can or should step on it lightly lest you land on your ass.
Asking the same question until it is answered is a journalist's job. Now, when told to ask a question with which they disagree, it's up to the journalist's conscience what they do. I, personally, would have quit before I'd have been the inane reporter shouting at Prince Charles last week with false jollity, 'Sir, are you looking forward to the big day? Sir? SIR?? Are you looking forward to the big day, sir??'
Actually, I'd have killed myself before I'd do that. He never answered the question.
As a young reporter, I was very nearly fired from my first newspaper job for refusing to phone the mother of a little girl who had been run over by a hit-and-run driver to ask her how she felt.
My editor ultimately made the call herself, so the woman was not saved from the stupidity, but I was able to look myself in the mirror the next day and like myself.
But it's up to individual reporters to behave like something more than animals. It's not up to us as a society to hem them in by laws, since we cannot write a law that says 'You are allowed to ask annoying questions only when it makes me, personally, very happy.'
QUOTE(Mata @ Feb 23 2005, 09:50 PM)
But it's up to individual reporters to behave like something more than animals. It's not up to us as a society to hem them in by laws, since we cannot write a law that says 'You are allowed to ask annoying questions only when it makes me, personally, very happy.'
No, it's up to the Press as a whole to have a code of conduct with rules on ethical behaviour and to know where the line is between getting a question answered and outright harrassment.
QUOTE(Mata @ Feb 23 2005, 11:50 AM)
Journalists, like everybody else, do what they're hired to do, dissident. You don't get to go report about what you want to report unless your daddy owns a newspaper.
My Daddy didn't own the magazine I worked on and I regularly refused the assignments on the basis that they were not newsworthy or of any real interest to the people - eventually I got fired, by the owner, for an article (which was published) on the Rights of Arrest (or lack of them) in a European neighbour, and the Editor resigned in protest, so journos can say "No", as you very commendably did!
QUOTE(Mata @ Feb 23 2005, 11:50 AM)
However:
Erm, what? How many times do you reckon Tony Blair's been asked 'Do you regret invading Iraq sir? Sir? SIR?? Do you regret invading Iraq? Sir SIR?? Do you regret invading Iraq? Sir? SIR??? Do you regret....?'
Erm, what? How many times do you reckon Tony Blair's been asked 'Do you regret invading Iraq sir? Sir? SIR?? Do you regret invading Iraq? Sir SIR?? Do you regret invading Iraq? Sir? SIR??? Do you regret....?'
Hardly a vacuous question, and one we are all still waiting for him to answer.
I want the badgering to continue when the issue deserves an answer. I wish the press would stop chasing actors and asking them about their love lives and filling the press with pointless pages and hours of 'facts' about this person or that, who are paid millions for, well, pretending to do things.
I'm sick of hearing about celebrities when there are major issues that need to be brought to the fore, above and beyond the lives of people who, quite often, haven't actually done anything worth celebrating (or am I missing the point of the word celebrity?)
There are far more important questions to bug the boy Livingstone with - issues of transport, crime, drugs, congestion charging, health service, public expenditure, public amenities, homelessness, the kidnapped being forced in to the sex-trade on the Capitals streets, the Russian Mafia's growing hold on the Capital... As some examples. But to ask a person who need s to speak on these issues such a pointless question as was asked, is pathetic.
QUOTE(Mata @ Feb 23 2005, 11:50 AM)
Asking the same question until it is answered is a journalist's job. Now, when told to ask a question with which they disagree, it's up to the journalist's conscience what they do. I, personally, would have quit before I'd have been the inane reporter shouting at Prince Charles last week with false jollity, 'Sir, are you looking forward to the big day? Sir? SIR?? Are you looking forward to the big day, sir??'
Actually, I'd have killed myself before I'd do that. He never answered the question.
Actually, I'd have killed myself before I'd do that. He never answered the question.
I cringe everytime I hear someone shout something like that. I too, would have topped myself rather than degrade myself in public like that...
QUOTE(Mata @ Feb 23 2005, 11:50 AM)
But it's up to individual reporters to behave like something more than animals. It's not up to us as a society to hem them in by laws, since we cannot write a law that says 'You are allowed to ask annoying questions only when it makes me, personally, very happy.'
Very true Mata, I only hope I have made it clear that that in my opinion, the question was inane and the media are guilty for reductionism - bring everything down to the lowest possible level. There are big question Ken Livingstone needs to answer, and there are better questions to ask him.
QUOTE(the klf @ Feb 16 2005, 04:41 PM)
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=435&id=804252003
I presume you're refuring to this incident ,Nevski.
I presume you're refuring to this incident ,Nevski.
yes thats incident i am referring to.
the incident which his partner backed up ken's verions of events.
but then, 'she would wouldn't she'?
QUOTE
I have seen the piece on Jeremy Paxman asking the same question 14 times a dozen times, but never has anybody ever told me they didn't think he should have done it.
There is of course a difference - Paxman usually interviews people who have been put up to (not) answer questions in a studio environemnt. He doesn't stand outside functions in the dead of night looking for or trying to create a soundbite.
an interesting twist in the story that i have only just become aware of... i should read the papers and watch the telly more.
letter from ken livingstone to the editor of the ES regarding a nazi uniform incident...
fight,fightfight,fight,fight ad infinitum.
letter from ken livingstone to the editor of the ES regarding a nazi uniform incident...
fight,fightfight,fight,fight ad infinitum.
QUOTE
22 February 2005
Dear Ms Wadley
Your paper has repeated today a demand that I make an apology for remarks made to an Evening Standard newspaper reporter. My chief of staff wrote to you yesterday regarding accusations that appeared in newspapers that morning that members of management of Associated Newspapers had appeared at the retirement party of the former editor of the Daily Mail, in the Associated Newspaper building, in Nazi uniforms. These reports were officially acknowledged as true yesterday by Associated Newspapers, which stated that five members of its staff had attended this party in Nazi military uniform.
I note that seven pages of your newspaper today are devoted to matters that are concerned with my remarks to one of your reporters.
I therefore ask you the following questions.
Do you not consider that the appearance of members of Associated Press in Nazi military uniforms at a party with senior management is a far more serious issue than any statements that you have printed by myself?
Far from trivializing the holocaust I have repeatedly stated that I consider the holocaust the greatest racist crime of the 20th century. Which may be taken as infinitely more offensive – my remarks or the appearance of five members of Associated Press staff in Nazi uniforms? If you consider I should apologise for my remarks why have you therefore not demanded that Associated Newspapers apologise for this event?
In the press statement by Associated Newspapers it states that the former editor of the Daily Mail, Sir David English, considered this incident as in ‘bad taste’. Why were those involved not asked to leave? Why were they not asked to apologise? Why was no disciplinary action taken against them? I assure you that if any member of my staff were to appear in Nazi uniforms they would be instantly dismissed. It is also still not clear if any of those present at the party, including those who wore Nazi uniform, are still on the staff of Associated Newspapers
How can anyone, knowing that Associated Newspapers has not apologized for a hundred times worse event that anything I am even accused of, take seriously your demand that I should apologise? Your demand is that I should apologise for something that is far less offensive or serious than what has been revealed about Associated Newspapers while they are not required to apologise. Compliance with this would be for me to accept that anything I am even accused of is more serious than what has been revealed about Associated Newspapers. The reverse is true.
I await your reply. In this please inform me of any apology from Associated Newspapers for this event or action taken against those involved in it.
Yours sincerely
Ken Livingstone
Mayor of London
Dear Ms Wadley
Your paper has repeated today a demand that I make an apology for remarks made to an Evening Standard newspaper reporter. My chief of staff wrote to you yesterday regarding accusations that appeared in newspapers that morning that members of management of Associated Newspapers had appeared at the retirement party of the former editor of the Daily Mail, in the Associated Newspaper building, in Nazi uniforms. These reports were officially acknowledged as true yesterday by Associated Newspapers, which stated that five members of its staff had attended this party in Nazi military uniform.
I note that seven pages of your newspaper today are devoted to matters that are concerned with my remarks to one of your reporters.
I therefore ask you the following questions.
Do you not consider that the appearance of members of Associated Press in Nazi military uniforms at a party with senior management is a far more serious issue than any statements that you have printed by myself?
Far from trivializing the holocaust I have repeatedly stated that I consider the holocaust the greatest racist crime of the 20th century. Which may be taken as infinitely more offensive – my remarks or the appearance of five members of Associated Press staff in Nazi uniforms? If you consider I should apologise for my remarks why have you therefore not demanded that Associated Newspapers apologise for this event?
In the press statement by Associated Newspapers it states that the former editor of the Daily Mail, Sir David English, considered this incident as in ‘bad taste’. Why were those involved not asked to leave? Why were they not asked to apologise? Why was no disciplinary action taken against them? I assure you that if any member of my staff were to appear in Nazi uniforms they would be instantly dismissed. It is also still not clear if any of those present at the party, including those who wore Nazi uniform, are still on the staff of Associated Newspapers
How can anyone, knowing that Associated Newspapers has not apologized for a hundred times worse event that anything I am even accused of, take seriously your demand that I should apologise? Your demand is that I should apologise for something that is far less offensive or serious than what has been revealed about Associated Newspapers while they are not required to apologise. Compliance with this would be for me to accept that anything I am even accused of is more serious than what has been revealed about Associated Newspapers. The reverse is true.
I await your reply. In this please inform me of any apology from Associated Newspapers for this event or action taken against those involved in it.
Yours sincerely
Ken Livingstone
Mayor of London
!But they do support the Royals, maybe Harry took advice on his party attire from the pages of The Nazi on Sunday...
As i've said before. i didn't find Livingstones original outburst towards the journalist that offensive, maybe that's because i'm not a Jew or because i can see what point he may have been trying to make.No,we've all said things we shouldn't of,but most of us are big enough to apologise for upsetting people (if they say they are upset with our comments,even if we think they are over reacting), it's the polite and curtious thing to do.
Its ken's comments AFTER the incident that have angered me.His refusal to apologise for causing offence and the way he has childishly blamed everyone and everything else for the situtation and his refusal to look at himself and accept any failing's he may have, that has harmed his standing amongst Londoners a lot more than his original outburst.
Its ken's comments AFTER the incident that have angered me.His refusal to apologise for causing offence and the way he has childishly blamed everyone and everything else for the situtation and his refusal to look at himself and accept any failing's he may have, that has harmed his standing amongst Londoners a lot more than his original outburst.
QUOTE(the klf @ Feb 23 2005, 02:54 PM)
harmed his standing amount Londoners a lot more than his original outburst.
what does this mean?
Should have read 'amongst' not 'amount'
good to know you have you finger on the pulse of all londoners, KLF.
is there any evidence that Ken Livingstones popularity has plummeted due to his behaviour since making the remark?
i can't find any. not even anecdotal. i ask around my colleagues at college, and they don't give a flying foxtrot. about anything
is there any evidence that Ken Livingstones popularity has plummeted due to his behaviour since making the remark?
i can't find any. not even anecdotal. i ask around my colleagues at college, and they don't give a flying foxtrot. about anything
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.