Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

An ignominious end to a 168 year old tradition, so a certain amount of sadness is understandable in that respect, despite the fact that much of it's reputation was built on sleaze.

In the end it went into self-destruct and was appropriately destroyed by it's own particular brand of sleaze.

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

Just a Slight exaggeration, 2.3 million a week and an average of 3,218,867 last month.

http://tinyurl.com/64ckmop

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

They'll likely be collectors items in a few years time.

Wonder if they find space for this one.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-question.html

Ppl. in glasshouses comes to mind.

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

I do house cleaning for some folk as most round here know, But every new computer screen has a camera built in to it and has adaptive text recognition built in to it, Your lack of phone signal is kettle we forgot to switch off, When I switch on my oh's Tampax warmer your credit card will stop working.

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

Next time I need 3 year old statistics I'll give you a shout, OK?

Oh and its probably better to read the articles you post... "Market-leader The News of the World also lost sales, dropping 2.7% - but it still sold an average of 3,218,867 last month."........... That'll be "last month" three years ago....


But don't worry, someone will report me and it will all be OK... OK?

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

My point exactly sales are even more now at 2.4 million a week depending which news group you read from

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

Let's not hope they are selling your house. I like statistics that, You know get to the point quickly.

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

Your point exactly? What, that your point was wrong? Its best in a discussion to try and actually make sense!

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

I was only trying to point out your exaggeration as I knew you would want confirmation, it wasn't even 8 million three years ago, I doubt it ever was. Maybe you can show us the link to 8 million sales a week?

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

Ah you see the difference between you and I is that I could not give a crap... its not that important to my life.

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

I read today that the NOW has/had the highest circulation in the world:confused:

I know I will get slammed for this but is all this hacking stuff such a big deal for the ordinary person? We have had emotive stuff coming out every few hours, Milly Dowlers phone hacked, the mccanns, 7/7 victims (all wrong I know) but it is what newspapers do and why people buy them. Take the Dowler family, their lawyer is criticising the hacking but what about the Father who lied for a long time about his whereabouts that day thus wasting police time, was he any better:blink:

If newspapers didn't hack and pay for information we would have never known what a crooked bunch the MP's were, or that members of the royal family were willing to sell themselves. Would it be in the publics interest for newspapers to be censored and not pry?

Also what about the phone companies who earn billions, why aren't their lines made safer to hacking. If some sleazy PD can do it there must be hundreds more out there who can hack and sell the information.

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

1950 was the starting point

http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/secto...028236.article

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

Until some one else talks what you consider to be crap?

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

Nope, until someone shows me 3 year old statistics that pretty much prove only one thing... that they don't read their own links.

Re: Phone hacking hypocrisy
 

60 years ago ? I see:rofl: