If I were violent, I’d have people like this shot

It’s getting monotonous – yet another know-nothing young chick parachuted into a major societal role.

I’ve only just finished reading about Zenna Bloody Atkins’ latest and one article on her wondered how the hell she got all those roles – quite senior roles she had no qualification or experience for, let alone her total ineptitude and big-mouthed ideas she tried to ram through.

And this Stansiwhateverhernameis – how the hell did she even get inot that position in the first place? Total non-comp, no life experience, marinaded in the narrative.

Anyway, from WikiGuido via IPJ:

Increasingly isolated NUJ boss Michelle Stanistreet has unilaterally announced the union’s support for state regulation of the press. Somewhat unbelievably not asking members first, Stanistreet blustered:

“We believe that if we are to achieve independent, accountable regulation it needs to be underpinned by statute enabling a framework for a new body to be established with clear terms of reference and a structure that involves journalists and civil society as key stakeholders.”

Just who are the “we” she was speaking for remains unclear. Certainly several prominent journalists have expressed their disbelief that such a decision would be made without balloting members first:

Extraordinary that the NUJ’s wretched leaders are supporting statutory regulation of press, we have been fighting that since the 1640s—
Nick Cohen (@NickCohen4) November 05, 2012

NUJ is betraying journalism by demanding state regulation after 300yrs of press freedom – If you’re a member, demand a national ballot NOW—
Neil Wallis (@neilwallis1) November 06, 2012

I have just cancelled my NUJ membership after 17 years. RT @tabloidtroll storify.com/tabloidtroll/d…
Kirsty Walker (@kirstywalker1) November 06, 2012

Hell’s bells and save the little children.

13 comments for “If I were violent, I’d have people like this shot

  1. Tarka the Rotter
    November 6, 2012 at 4:12 pm

    “If you write nothing offensive you have nothing to fear…’ heh heh

  2. mikebravo
    November 6, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    Blah blah blah regulation…..blah blah blah framework…..blah blah blah key stakeholders.
    Where did put that piano wire?

    • November 7, 2012 at 8:49 am

      Though shooting is extreme and I support freedom of speech, could we possibly find some acceptable way to deal with anyone who uses the term ‘stakeholder’ without a cynically raised eyebrow?

      (This would, of course, discriminate against those who have had Botox for cosmetic reasons, but I don’t think that would present too much of a problem…)

      • mikebravo
        November 7, 2012 at 4:19 pm

        How about the stocks for a first offence?

      • nisakiman
        November 7, 2012 at 4:30 pm

        I think being a stakeholder is pretty cool. I read all about it in a Bram Stoker novel. It has to be oak, doesn’t it?

        • mikebravo
          November 7, 2012 at 4:56 pm

          I think they used an old sausage once in Viz.

  3. Tatty
    November 6, 2012 at 5:08 pm

    What is this “regulation” of which they speak ? We already have lots and lots of “laws”.

    Let’s enforce them and see what else needs to be done, if anything.

    So many problems with so many solutions already in place but none prepared to use them. Oi vey, UK.

  4. Greg Tingey
    November 6, 2012 at 6:41 pm

    Lights on, no-one home!

  5. November 6, 2012 at 8:34 pm

    Do feel we need to watch this one. There’ve been internet campaigns before and when the issue is universal, e.g. Uzmanov, we were all pretty effective in combination. The journos would probably raise merry hell before it got to that though.

  6. November 6, 2012 at 11:19 pm

    Somewhat unbelievably not asking members first, Stanistreet blustered

    This has nothing to do with a young chick or anyone (male of female) being parachuted into a role.

    It has all to do with the person in question feathering their own nest and in the case of a Trade Union Senior Official selling out on their own members. Forgetting that they are there to represent what the members of the union vote for (and also that they were voted into that position by their members).

    I illustrated this type of behaviour (not asking members) in 2010 when I posted about the government’s tactics (and the various union responses) in regard to the Civil Service compensation scheme. On that occasion the union leaders that sided with the state rather than their members were male. The members of those unions were disgusted at their leaders actions.

    In conclusion why did those Union Leaders choose that path?

  7. Vir Cantium
    November 7, 2012 at 8:08 am

    In an unguarded moment she’s just reverted to her instinctive lefty statism, then her members exhibit some classic lefty hypocrisy. Regulate the plebian masses, sure (as long as we’re doing the regulating), but regulate us? Never!

  8. November 7, 2012 at 6:39 pm

    Well, those suggestions are worth considering and thanks, Cherie, for popping by.

  9. malade
    November 8, 2012 at 3:09 pm

    Oh dear – it seems that journos are more than happy to follow the NUJ line when it comes to the ‘no platform’ rule for the BNP and yet aren’t so keen for their own wings to be clipped. What’s that famous quote again? ‘First they came for the…’

    Perhaps if they really believed in a free press they’d have told the NUJ to get fcucked.

Comments are closed.