Well, the article certainly provoked some debate! Judging by the
message from Bill Albert, the Metro report was probably lifted from the
Sunday Times article, and as this is usually available on the net, you
may like to look there Gregor.
The thing I find quite worrying (taken up in Mairian's posting) is that
the "London Metro" really is more likely to reach many people from all
walks of life, as it is given away free at South London train stations
to commuters on their way to and from work each day. Given a thirty
minute journey and a free paper, it is probably more likely to be read
by people who would not ordinarily buy the Sunday Times, say, or some
other quality newspaper. I believe that this makes it more powerful in
its impact on the "ordinary person in the street".
As Timothy Lillie points out, the phrases used such as "sin" were the
words of the person in the article, not the paper itself, and appears to
be confirmed by the reporting of the same speech in the Sunday Times, so
it doesn't appear that the "trashy newspaper" label is necessarily
applicable here. Actually, I have glanced at several copies of the
Metro (as my daughter gets it each day on her way to her job in London),
and actually feel it picks out quite a few interesting subjects and
snippets from elsewhere. I think I would far rather glance at that than
something such as the Sun, or more appallingly, the Daily Sport!
I look forward to reading further postings. When I can sort out my own
angry feelings about the comments in the article, I will try and see if
I can pluck up the courage to put them on the drl!
Janet Iles
Student, M.A. Disability Studies (distance learning)
Leeds University
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|