Reasons To Hate The Sun Pt. 960

[8ball]

If you read the Sun repeatedly and it's not part of your job* then I don't think it bodes well for your intelligence.


* - a friend of mine used to work for a charity and part of her job was monitoring the right-wing cock-munching scum press for attacks on a certain vulnerable group

 

[8ball]

. . . though I hear the football coverage is good.

The Daily Mail has very good horseracing coverage, incidentally. I used to do the gee-gees. . .

 

[Rob Ray]

8ball, The Sun specialises in being fun and not too much like hard work, while also (supposedly) telling you if something interesting/important is going on in the world. The sort of people who read it, or the Daily Star, may also read Nuts, Zoo, FHM or whatever else, none of which proves stupidity.

It's a choice of paper based partly on cultural norms, partly on the tits and arse, partly on the funnies. It has no bearing on the intelligence of readers, only on their stock of knowledge of current affairs, and possibly, long term, on their likely reading habits (ie they're less likely to read dense text if they're used to a certain style of writing - Times readers may find Dickens hard work, as a comparison).

I know loads of Sun readers who are a hell of a lot smarter than I am (not unsurprisingly seeing as there's a good 3.2m sold, approx 9m read), they just prefer to have light reading in the morning before they got to work.

Stop being such a fucking snob.

 

[8ball]

How do these Sun readers (that are smarter than you) feel about the jingoistic flag-waving Iraq 'coverage', rampant sexism, thinly-veiled racism, Septic imperialist cock-munching and moronic editorials?

Well, at least the reading age is quite low so it won't tax your ickle brain too much while you're eating your cornflakes



Still, I hear the football coverage is good . . .

 

[exleper]

Daily Mail readers are angry and bitter; Sun readers (at least the ones who read it as gospel) are plain stupid

Just because somebody reads a newspaper, doesn't mean that they agree with its political perspective. With the number of lefties here who read the Telegraph or the Financial fucking Times, you'd think a few more people would grasp this. But no, they read the Sun therefore they are thick and/or misinformed

 

[Rob Ray]

Are you this obnoxious in real life? Yes that's right, 9m people, all thick as pig shit, all racist, all pro Iraq (lets forget the actual opinion polls on this subject for a minute and the deafening lack of major racist incidents post 7/7), all sending in their sexist moronic diatribes to the paper.

Or, just maybe, you're doing a pathetic generalisation of millions of people based on your own ill-informed prejudices, which are no better than those of people who generalise all travellers as theieve and thugs.

Prick.

 

[reallyoldhippy]

.........The sort of people who read it, or the Daily Star, may also read Nuts, Zoo, FHM or whatever else, none of which proves stupidity...........

It's as good a definition of "stupidity" as anything else.

 

[exleper]

All right, all right, no need to go on the offensive. Of course I don't think the 9m readers are racist thugs. And yes I'm generalising, based on the assumption that there must be somebody who reads the Sun and believes and agrees with what it says; there are a lot of impressionable people out there. My comment earlier was flippant, I'll admit, but I'm not trying to be snobbish here.

 

[Rob Ray]

Reading light entertainment doesn't prove you are stupid, writing off people who read light entertainment as beneath you might well do.

 

[Rob Ray]

Well yeah i'd say if people read the sun and then follow precisely what it says to the letter it either implies a degree of institutionalisation, or gullibility. However I don't think most Sun readers do that. I've rarely met any Sun readers who don't freely admit the paper's news is a pile of shite.

 

[8ball]

Yes that's right, 9m people, all thick as pig shit, all racist, all pro Iraq (lets forget the actual opinion polls on this subject for a minute and the deafening lack of major racist incidents post 7/7), all sending in their sexist moronic diatribes to the paper.
Prick.

1. The moronic diatribes were the editorial, not the letters page. They have a few regular contributors for this bit - it's not on a rotational system between all 9m readers.

2. Reported racist hate crimes up c. 30% - not sure if any of them were what you'd call 'major' perhaps a major bombing in an ethnically diverse area is what you're after.

3. The ad hominem nonsense cuts no ice with me.

 

[exleper]

I've rarely met any Sun readers who don't freely admit the paper's news is a pile of shite.

Really? I've met or heard plenty of people unironically describe it as a 'good paper'.

 

[8ball]

Maybe people really ARE aware it's a pile of shite.

Maybe they just put the racism and such in there to make sure the BNP faithful don't defect to the Grauniad, knowing the intelligent majority who are in it for the tits&ass pages, football coverage and light Europhobic etertainment are never going to look at that stuff.

 

[In Bloom]

Fair dos, maybe yours was the wrong post to quote here, but you can't deny that some people on this thread have generalised Sun readers as thick/unimformed/racist/sexist, which is bollocks.

 

[Badger Kitten]

.

 

[Badger Kitten]

don't just tut tut DO something

If you object to the putting of words he would never use into this victim's mouth, and him being presented as an endorsing poster boy for the PM''s failed habeas-corpus-busting 90 day internment policy...

then you can do something about it; bloggerheads tells you how you can complain to the PCC.

Thank you.

 

[8ball]

Fair dos, maybe yours was the wrong post to quote here, but you can't deny that some people on this thread have generalised Sun readers as thick/unimformed/racist/sexist, which is bollocks.

Nah - I think that pretty much nails it.

I know some decent people who dip into the Scum from time to time but these are usually the 'uninformed' brigade and freely admit it. They're generally after celeb gossip/TV pages. A few others like the football coverage.

It would be more accurate to say my experience sums up Sun readers as thick/uninformed(tv/celeb gossip)/racist/sexist/footie fans.

And people whose job partly involves monitoring the racist scum right-wing gutter press.

edit: and fair point made there, Bagder Kitten

 

[Rob Ray]

8ball we weren't talking about the content of the paper we were talking about your stereotyping of Sun readers as stupid, which you have agreed was out of order.

In the main, I don't think you're too far off with the Sun readership not really buying it for the political commentary. The most read pages are sport, agony aunt, funnies, horoscope and page 3 (the celeb bitching is also quite popular I believe, which is why they run it on the front page so often). Oddly enough, if people want to learn a bit about a particular political stuation they're involved with they tend to go to more in-depth sources.

On the subject of the Sun's content, I agree it's a pile of wank (Times reader myself, which is also shite but does a good business page), I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve by attempting to link me into a defence of it.

The Sun is a good paper. That's why it sells so well. What it isn't is a good news paper. It's amazing how often hysterical anti-sun types et that mixed up. As I've already repeatedly said, news is a very small part of why people buy it. Are you left wing? Because if you are you seriously need to get a bt more sophisticated about this. If you persist on blaming the success of the Sun on the stupidity/ignorance/racism of the masses you're writing off a very large chunk of the working class.

 

[8ball]

8ball we weren't talking about the content of the paper we were talking about your stereotyping of Sun readers as stupid, which you have agreed was out of order. .

I actually don't think they're all stupid, but plenty are. The rest are generally uninformed, with a few exceptions I have mentioned above.

On the subject of the Sun's content, I agree it's a pile of wank . . ., I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve by attempting to link me into a defence of it.

Can't see where I did that - I took your earlier posts as a badly-targeted anti-snobbery tirade rather than a pro-Sun tirade.

The Sun is a good paper. That's why it sells so well. What it isn't is a good news paper.

Oh dear . . .

Are you left wing? Because if you are you seriously need to get a bt more sophisticated about this. If you persist on blaming the success of the Sun on on blaming the success of the Sun on the stupidity/ignorance/racism of the masses you're writing off a very large chunk of the working class.

Of course, one could argue that the Sun exists in order to keep the working class away from matters of any weight, and to justify elite claims that the plebs have no place in political disourse.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

It is impossible and stupid to generalise about Sun readers. Some may be intelligent, some stupid. But there are some who kneejerk defend "working class" culture just because it's working class. Of course, the Sun is entirely a product of the ruling class (Murdoch) but lets not let that get in the way of an anti-middle class rant

But an ugly question i always like to raise is regarding what the readers "demand"

The Scum (and star) specialise in what I call "celebrity rape" stories - the salacious coverage of sex abuse generally. They especially get exited when a kid goes missing. They also have a hate list going down the years that is pure Nuremburg - gypsies, gays, immigrants etc.

The capitalists tell us there is a "demand" for this. Ergo, it must be Sun readers demanding it. If I were advancing left wing causes myself I would not be leaping to the deefnce of The Scum or what would seem to be a lot of their readers, very quickly.

 

[Rob Ray]

I actually don't think they're all stupid, but plenty are. The rest are generally uninformed, with a few exceptions I have mentioned above.

Oh I'm sorry I didn't realise you are omniscient, my mistake I thought you were relying on some anecdotal evidence of a few people you know (and from your tone, don't like and presumably don't know very well?) to make up your mind about millions of people, and after being called on it backtracking slightly to manganimously allow some of them to be just misinformed .

Oh dear . . .

That attitude is why I called you a snob. You don't seem to be able to understand that popularity cannot be solely based on a substandard product. I bet you think pop music is mindless drivel too don't you. Don't understand why the working class can't have a bit more taste perhaps?

Of course, one could argue that the Sun exists in order to keep the working class away from matters of any weight, and to justify elite claims that the plebs have no place in political disourse.

The Sun exsts to make money you idiot, just like any other capitalist enterprise. It agrees with the elite consensus and pushes those views because it needs the ad revenue and stock market investment, just like every other major paper in the world.

 

[Rob Ray]

I'm not defending the Sun, I'm defending the large percentage of its readership who don't deserve to be lumped into some homgeonous mass, and will have a far more varied range of thought (might be anti-racist but dislike europe for example).

Personally I AM middle class, I have no idea whether 8ball is, nor do I care.

 

[8ball]

Oh I'm sorry I didn't realise you are omniscient, my mistake . . .

Common error, no offence taken.

I bet you think pop music is mindless drivel too don't you. Don't understand why the working class can't have a bit more taste perhaps?

Well I AM working class unless you're one of those people who reckon going to Uni magically conveys middle-class status. My taste in music is often up for debate.

The Sun exsts to make money you idiot, just like any other capitalist enterprise. It agrees with the elite consensus and pushes those views because it needs the ad revenue and stock market investment, just like every other major paper in the world.

Newspapers often aren't terribly profitable but give a lot of power and influence to those who control them. Like our career politicians these days, those in high positions in newspapers aren't in it for the salary or share options, pension etc, it's the other kickbacks that make it worthwhile for them

The Sun doesn't seem to particularly agree with an elite consensus (elites are often in competition with one another, anyway), the editorial tends to be rabid bollocks rather than agreement with any consensus I can think of.

Different sections of the media perform different functions. The Sun is in the market of distraction, rather than the agenda-setting market of rags like the Times.

The fact that it's a market is irrelevant - The Sun it pushes nothing but light diversion and bigotry.

 

[Harold Hill]

Are all Guardian readers automatically intelligent until proved otherwise?

 

[Pickman's model]

Are all Guardian readers automatically intelligent until proved otherwise?

the opposite, i think you'll find.

 

[8ball]

Do we not have a 'reasons to hate the Guardian' thread for this?

 

[Pickman's model]

Do we not have a 'reasons to hate the Guardian' thread for this?

for what? attracting people to their liberal-fascist rag?

 

[8ball]

A 'reasons to hate the Guardian' thread to attract people to their 'liberal-fascist' rag.

It's an advertising strategy they've not hit upon yet, I'll grant you.

 

[Harold Hill]

the opposite, i think you'll find.

Thats the thing. There does seem to be a presumption that only right wingers are capable of swallowing everything they read.

 

[8ball]

I'm not sure that's true - there's plenty of posts on Urban accusing other posters of being gullible 'liberal-fascist' lentil-munching Grauniad readers.