Van Dammer Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Hes hardly a scumbag, that should be reserved for criminals and generally bad people, he'd just obnoxious and highly opinionated, I find it quite entertaining at times. Â yeah not like he give the ok to mak false claims against british army is it? Â As far as im aware he gave the ok to print what he believed to be a legitimate story? Then when it came to light that it wasnt legitimate they printed a full, front page apology? He also lost his job over it, although it was technically what made him the TV personality he is today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnum Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Hes hardly a scumbag, that should be reserved for criminals and generally bad people, he'd just obnoxious and highly opinionated, I find it quite entertaining at times. Â yeah not like he give the ok to mak false claims against british army is it? Â As far as im aware he gave the ok to print what he believed to be a legitimate story? Then when it came to light that it wasnt legitimate they printed a full, front page apology? He also lost his job over it, although it was technically what made him the TV personality he is today. Â Yeah, that's my attitude to it. It's not like he falsified the story himself, and I don't take the view that the press shouldn't print anything negative about the armed forces, because then you get into a dicey area about covering up legitimate war crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members unfitfinlay Posted June 5, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 5, 2011 Owen should just point out that it's better to be a bench warming footballer than a disgraced former journalist who is reduced to trying to wind celebrities up on Twitter to try and keep a hold of some kind of fame. I'm not exactly a huge fan of Owen as a player but Morgan is a complete scumbag. Â He does of course have a show on U.S TV show and I'd say is a bigger celebrity than Owen. Â Yeah, isn't he the replacement for the legendary Larry King? He must be doing huge numbers over there. Â I'm with unfitfinlay in the "Piers Morgan is a scumbag" camp, though. Â His first episode did 2.1 million viewers. Unless I'm misreading http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com, he's now down to around half a million. Â Hes hardly a scumbag, that should be reserved for criminals and generally bad people, he'd just obnoxious and highly opinionated, I find it quite entertaining at times. Â What about Newspaper editors who empty their bank accounts to buy stock of a company just before it gets tipped in the financial pages of their newspaper? Private Eye has made some interesting allegations about phone hacking when he was editor of the News Of The World recently as well. Â Would you not? Â No. Â That would be Insider Trading, which is illegal. Not to mention that you'd basically be making a profit by conning your readers out of money, which is scummy beyond belief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Dammer Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Owen should just point out that it's better to be a bench warming footballer than a disgraced former journalist who is reduced to trying to wind celebrities up on Twitter to try and keep a hold of some kind of fame. I'm not exactly a huge fan of Owen as a player but Morgan is a complete scumbag. Â He does of course have a show on U.S TV show and I'd say is a bigger celebrity than Owen. Â Yeah, isn't he the replacement for the legendary Larry King? He must be doing huge numbers over there. Â I'm with unfitfinlay in the "Piers Morgan is a scumbag" camp, though. Â His first episode did 2.1 million viewers. Unless I'm misreading http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com, he's now down to around half a million. Â Hes hardly a scumbag, that should be reserved for criminals and generally bad people, he'd just obnoxious and highly opinionated, I find it quite entertaining at times. Â What about Newspaper editors who empty their bank accounts to buy stock of a company just before it gets tipped in the financial pages of their newspaper? Private Eye has made some interesting allegations about phone hacking when he was editor of the News Of The World recently as well. Â Would you not? Â No. Â That would be Insider Trading, which is illegal. Not to mention that you'd basically be making a profit by conning your readers out of money, which is scummy beyond belief. Â Is it technically though? Is going by a tip or write up in a newspaper actually insider knowledge? The insider trading rule is one massive pot hole anyway, its so vague its unreal. Going by that, you wouldnt be allowed to have financial reporters or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Ron Simmons Posted June 5, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 5, 2011 Hes hardly a scumbag, that should be reserved for criminals and generally bad people, he'd just obnoxious and highly opinionated, I find it quite entertaining at times. Â yeah not like he give the ok to mak false claims against british army is it? Â As far as im aware he gave the ok to print what he believed to be a legitimate story? Then when it came to light that it wasnt legitimate they printed a full, front page apology? He also lost his job over it, although it was technically what made him the TV personality he is today. Plus they never actually found out where the pictures came from, or provided any real evidence they were false - something that pisses off Piers Morgan to this day, I'm pretty sure from reading his books he's still not convinced they're fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members unfitfinlay Posted June 5, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 5, 2011 Is it technically though? Is going by a tip or write up in a newspaper actually insider knowledge? The insider trading rule is one massive pot hole anyway, its so vague its unreal. Going by that, you wouldnt be allowed to have financial reporters or anything. Â It is illegal for a journalist to print an article recommending stock that they own solely to inflate the share price and make themselves a profit, yes. The two journalists that actually wrote the column were convicted for it, and Morgan was very lucky to escape prosecution because of "lack of evidence" at the time (though more on his involvement came out later). Â Hes hardly a scumbag, that should be reserved for criminals and generally bad people, he'd just obnoxious and highly opinionated, I find it quite entertaining at times. Â yeah not like he give the ok to mak false claims against british army is it? Â As far as im aware he gave the ok to print what he believed to be a legitimate story? Then when it came to light that it wasnt legitimate they printed a full, front page apology? He also lost his job over it, although it was technically what made him the TV personality he is today. Plus they never actually found out where the pictures came from, or provided any real evidence they were false - something that pisses off Piers Morgan to this day, I'm pretty sure from reading his books he's still not convinced they're fake. Â Hasn't it been proven that the type of Vehicle shown in the pictures had never been deployed in Iraq? Â I don't really have a problem with him over those pictures though. He's not the first Newspaper Editor to be fooled by fakes. (Remember the pictures of "Diana" shagging "Dodi" that the Sun printed shortly before she died?) Surely he should know where the pictures came from though? Or at least who sold them to the paper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Dammer Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Is it technically though? Is going by a tip or write up in a newspaper actually insider knowledge? The insider trading rule is one massive pot hole anyway, its so vague its unreal. Going by that, you wouldnt be allowed to have financial reporters or anything. Â It is illegal for a journalist to print an article recommending stock that they own solely to inflate the share price and make themselves a profit, yes. The two journalists that actually wrote the column were convicted for it, and Morgan was very lucky to escape prosecution because of "lack of evidence" at the time (though more on his involvement came out later). Â Yeah I understand that, I just cant see where you draw the line. Whos to say they didnt buy the stock because the info they were reporting was actually genuine and was a decent position to have? Theres just no defining line at all. The same can be said for sports gambling, if they operated under the same rules a tipster in the Racing Post could be convicted for backing a horse he tipped up in the morning paper. You are going to follow info if you get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhalen2007 Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Heres the original share story for reference btw  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4401404.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
METAL ON METAL Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Sort of related, well its to do with Twitter anyway.  Some woman is on twitter dishing the dirt on Darren Bent. Saying that among sleeping with his team mates girlfriends (including Defoe's lass) and having 4 girls on the go at one time - he made one girl get multiple abortions.  Could well be BS but it seems way to specific in detail and those accused aren't denying it but instead saying "'please don't air dirty laundry in public, we're not kids" seems to add weight to the rumours.  Link here   If true, no wonder he was in a hurry to leave the North East or that alot of his team mates didn't like him - truly scummy person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Checkmate Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 I heard he left sunderland cause he was shagging Steve Bruce's daughter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members unfitfinlay Posted June 5, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 5, 2011 Is it technically though? Is going by a tip or write up in a newspaper actually insider knowledge? The insider trading rule is one massive pot hole anyway, its so vague its unreal. Going by that, you wouldnt be allowed to have financial reporters or anything. Â It is illegal for a journalist to print an article recommending stock that they own solely to inflate the share price and make themselves a profit, yes. The two journalists that actually wrote the column were convicted for it, and Morgan was very lucky to escape prosecution because of "lack of evidence" at the time (though more on his involvement came out later). Â Yeah I understand that, I just cant see where you draw the line. Whos to say they didnt buy the stock because the info they were reporting was actually genuine and was a decent position to have? Theres just no defining line at all. The same can be said for sports gambling, if they operated under the same rules a tipster in the Racing Post could be convicted for backing a horse he tipped up in the morning paper. You are going to follow info if you get it. Â A tipster isn't going to make more money off a horse solely because they tipped it though. Morgan doubling his money in a day was ENTIRELY because the Mirror's tip sent the stock's value soaring. Â A better equivalent (certainly from a breach of trust point of view) would be a tipster recommending people back a horse that he knows is unlikely to win while, at the same time, giving great odds on it to win on betfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Van Dammer Posted June 5, 2011 Share Posted June 5, 2011 Is it technically though? Is going by a tip or write up in a newspaper actually insider knowledge? The insider trading rule is one massive pot hole anyway, its so vague its unreal. Going by that, you wouldnt be allowed to have financial reporters or anything. Â It is illegal for a journalist to print an article recommending stock that they own solely to inflate the share price and make themselves a profit, yes. The two journalists that actually wrote the column were convicted for it, and Morgan was very lucky to escape prosecution because of "lack of evidence" at the time (though more on his involvement came out later). Â Yeah I understand that, I just cant see where you draw the line. Whos to say they didnt buy the stock because the info they were reporting was actually genuine and was a decent position to have? Theres just no defining line at all. The same can be said for sports gambling, if they operated under the same rules a tipster in the Racing Post could be convicted for backing a horse he tipped up in the morning paper. You are going to follow info if you get it. Â A tipster isn't going to make more money off a horse solely because they tipped it though. Morgan doubling his money in a day was ENTIRELY because the Mirror's tip sent the stock's value soaring. Â A better equivalent (certainly from a breach of trust point of view) would be a tipster recommending people back a horse that he knows is unlikely to win while, at the same time, giving great odds on it to win on betfair. Â Thats completely untrue. Pick up a copy of The Racing Post in the morning and see how the price of horses that are strongly tipped up in there tumble, particularly from the top tipsters and given how sports and racing can be traded in the very same way stocks are a tipster can make fortunes purely from backing a horse before its tipped and then trading out his position before the race is even run. The same goes for any successful independent tipster too, as soon as they've tipped it up a price tumbles, the very top tipsters can make a price crash from 20/1 to 3/1 very easily, sometimes even more extreme than that. In my time at an independent bookmaker I saw horses shorten from 7/1 into Even money purely on the basis of a shrewd tipster mentioning the horse in his blog. Â Its just something that cannot be regulated and limited. Â And whos to decide that the info put in the Mirror wasnt genuine? To insinuate that someone has tipped up a shit market purely for a profit is highly difficult to prove, particularly the idea of a stock price jumping based on the Daily Mirrors financial section is very unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GalaxyV.2 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 I heard he left sunderland cause he was shagging Steve Bruce's daughter  Still is I think, shoudl make Christmas interesting. She gets about Bruce's daughter doesn't she? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Checkmate Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Not 100% sure but I heard when Steve Bruce was manging Birmingham she was shagging Lee Hendrie who was at aston villa at the time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators neil Posted June 6, 2011 Moderators Share Posted June 6, 2011 Piers Morgan reminds me of Jeremy Clarkson a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.