Frankie Boyle - Don't give it if you can't take it?

[AJS-]

So he wants to choose how he can be criticised? Offensive, close to the edge or controversial please. Not racist as it might make me less popular with my chums at the Guardian and the BBC.

On the other hand where did the "racist" label actually come from? Did the Mirror just make it up?

[glazbagun]

Astacus said:

Personally I think the bloke is a tt. Never the less, I really want to see him win this.

To accuse some one of being a racist today, is a vile insult that tends to stick and does untold damage. It is also far to easy to sling about and justify on tenuous grounds later.

Also I fking hate journalists

Pretty much sums up my view. Hope they get forced to print a full front page retraction. Before.being shot and buried under the ruins of their paper.

[pork911]

AJS- said:

So he wants to choose how he can be criticised? Offensive, close to the edge or controversial please. Not racist as it might make me less popular with my chums at the Guardian and the BBC.

On the other hand where did the "racist" label actually come from? Did the Mirror just make it up?

libel isn't criticism

and part of his claim involves what they said about him leaving the bbc

[audidoody]

Astacus said:

Also I fking hate journalists

Interesting. Which journalists specifically? The journalists who hacked into the voicemails? Or the journalists who broke the story of the News International hacking scandal? The journalists who work for the motoring press and web sites whose road tests I suspect you avidly read? Or the show biz journalists who cover X-Factor, BB etc? The journalists who investigate expenses and tax-fiddling by MP's? Etc etc.

Of course, if you happen to be a tax-fiddling, rogue-trading banker/MP/Plumber/Drug Dealer/Used Car Salesman etc I can understand why you fking hate journalists

[elster]

AJS- said:

So he wants to choose how he can be criticised? Offensive, close to the edge or controversial please. Not racist as it might make me less popular with my chums at the Guardian and the BBC.

On the other hand where did the "racist" label actually come from? Did the Mirror just make it up?

I imagine he doesn't want to fall in the Jim Davidson camp and be exiled from public life for being a racist.

Mirror said as he used the N word he was a racist.

[mrmr96]

I think he has fair grounds for a complaint. Being told you're offensive is one thing - because that's an opinion. However being told you're a racist is something else - because that's a label with stigma.

[roachcoach]

AJS- said:

So he wants to choose how he can be criticised? Offensive, close to the edge or controversial please. Not racist as it might make me less popular with my chums at the Guardian and the BBC.

On the other hand where did the "racist" label actually come from? Did the Mirror just make it up?

Libel/slander isn't the same as criticism.

As a country we're basically (is it even that tenuous?) in a place where it is illegal to be racist - it's effectively calling him a criminal.

Mind you, he did call the Pope the King of the Paedos....so....oh yeah, slander has to be false

Edited by roachcoach on Tuesday 16th October 14:38

[AJS-]

I know exactly what he wants - he wants to be considered risque, anti establishment and "controversial" but he still wants to be invited onto Have I Got News for You, and get to write columns for the Guardian.

It's not illegal to be racist, certain words and actions used at certain times relating to race are illegal.

Anyway I don't really care one way or the other about his libel case, I just smell a lot of liberal hand hypocrisy in it.

[Rotaree]

I think he's a vile obnoxious wker and, while I don't necessarily agree with the case, anything that stands any chance of getting him out of public life is fine in my book.

[zax]

Isn't it still technically possible to be classed as racist even if you "hate everyone"?

"Why is it that it’s okay to call a white person “mate” yet it’s not okay to call a black guy “primate”? - said by Frankie Boyle according the the internet, no idea if it's true. But if so is that racist or ironic? What if Bernard Manning had said the same thing?

I don't care for his comedy but I'm happy for him to continue mouthing off. I can ignore him. But his legal action? He needs to man the fk up.

[XCP]

zax said:

Isn't it still technically possible to be classed as racist even if you "hate everyone"?

"Why is it that it’s okay to call a white person “mate” yet it’s not okay to call a black guy “primate”? - said by Frankie Boyle according the the internet, no idea if it's true. But if so is that racist or ironic? What if Bernard Manning had said the same thing?

I don't care for his comedy but I'm happy for him to continue mouthing off. I can ignore him. But his legal action? He needs to man the fk up.

I would say that quote is questioning the definition of racism. It does not mean that he is a racist. The subtlety of that point may be lost on a jury though.

[AJS-]

I would say it's getting a laugh from his audience by sailing close to the wind. Fine with me but seems a bit odd to then complain about being called racist while revelling in being called vile and offensive.

[Halb]

Blib said:

A pretty stupid way for the Mirror to start an article about anyone short of Eugene Terreblanche, IMO.

Quite. A stupid paper now is going to pay for being stupid.
Oh well.

[Astacus]

audidoody said:

Interesting. Which journalists specifically? The journalists who hacked into the voicemails? Or the journalists who broke the story of the News International hacking scandal? The journalists who work for the motoring press and web sites whose road tests I suspect you avidly read? Or the show biz journalists who cover X-Factor, BB etc? The journalists who investigate expenses and tax-fiddling by MP's? Etc etc.

Of course, if you happen to be a tax-fiddling, rogue-trading banker/MP/Plumber/Drug Dealer/Used Car Salesman etc I can understand why you fking hate journalists

You make a fair point. I exagerated.

Let me be a bit more specific.

I despise journalists who consider themselves to be the fourth estate, but fail to realise that, with such lofty station comes responsibility.

I definitely dislike journalists who decide that certain individuals are fair game and they can therefore write what they like about them. After all, everyone (they know) dislikes Danny Boyle right? Because we are all right on around here right? and they will get serious Brownie points in the Coffee Shop for taking a swipe at him right?.

Its facile, trite and intellectually bankrupt and and I really hope he wins, big time. *

I particularly despise journalists who write about topics they barely understand, having done cursory research and then publish articles that destroy years of work by dedicated and selfless individuals who do know about the subject. Especially those who, through ignorance, alight on a topic they think will be a "real shocker" and set out to do an "expose" with scant regard for the facts.

The moving pen writes, and having writ, moves on....

I am thinking of a particular set of articles by a certain daily in the last few days relating to a topic about which members my family are particularly knowledgeable (which is why I am particularly cross)

So no, not all varieties of journalist are scumbags, but the scumminess of a few leaves a bad smell that taints the others.

We certainly need something to hold potentially untouchable people to account. I think its sad that, hiding under the wing of the fourth estate are a bunch of parasites, who get the protection that we bestow on the rightous, but do little but suck blood.

• ETA, but he is still a tt

[FarleyRusk]

Rotaree said:

I think he's a vile obnoxious wker and, while I don't necessarily agree with the case, anything that stands any chance of getting him out of public life is fine in my book.

+1
Unfunny left wing twunt IMHO.

[FrankTing]

He's a talentless hack anyway.

[Ayahuasca]

I feel the same about him as I did about John Terry. He may or may not be a racist but he is certainly a .

[CommanderJameson]

Astacus said:

I definitely dislike journalists who decide that certain individuals are fair game and they can therefore write what they like about them. After all, everyone (they know) dislikes Danny Boyle right? Because we are all right on around here right? and they will get serious Brownie points in the Coffee Shop for taking a swipe at him right?

I quite enjoyed Slumdog Millionaire, and you'd have to be some kind of nutter to not recognise that Trainspotting was a brilliant film. In fact, if we quickly gloss over Sunshine, I don't think he's made a genuinely bad film.

[hairykrishna]

AJS- said:

I know exactly what he wants - he wants to be considered risque, anti establishment and "controversial" but he still wants to be invited onto Have I Got News for You, and get to write columns for the Guardian.

It's not illegal to be racist, certain words and actions used at certain times relating to race are illegal.

Anyway I don't really care one way or the other about his libel case, I just smell a lot of liberal hand hypocrisy in it.

I don't understand, how is it hypocrisy? A newspaper presented something about him as fact which appears to be untrue, and could be damaging, so he's suing them.

[Ayahuasca]

hairykrishna said:

AJS- said:

I know exactly what he wants - he wants to be considered risque, anti establishment and "controversial" but he still wants to be invited onto Have I Got News for You, and get to write columns for the Guardian.

It's not illegal to be racist, certain words and actions used at certain times relating to race are illegal.

Anyway I don't really care one way or the other about his libel case, I just smell a lot of liberal hand hypocrisy in it.

I don't understand, how is it hypocrisy? A newspaper presented something about him as fact which appears to be untrue, and could be damaging, so he's suing them.

Boyle can state that the Saudi Paralympic team are mainly thieves, and he thinks that is OK but he believes a newspaper cannot say that he is racist. There is your hypocricy.