all's fair ...

[ramtops]

perlmonger and I went to the greasy spoon for lunch. This is not important, except as background for why we were "reading" the Daily Mirror and the Sun.

the usual page 3 girls were well in evidence, and further into the paper were photos from this Royal Marine initiation thing that's all over the news, with nekkid soldiers and so forth. And both papers hid the soldiers genitalia, either by blacking them out, or pixellation.

is it me, or is this hypocrisy of the highest order?

Comments

[jozafeen.livejournal.com]

Does page 3 show minge now then?

I'm sorry but norks and nips don't constitute genitalia and the marines don't have their nips blocked out do they?

[ang-grrr.livejournal.com]

Not really. I assume that the girls have given permission for their boobs to be splashed over page while the soldiers haven't given permission for us to see their willies.

Obv. I know that isn't the disctinction in this case.

[syllopsium.livejournal.com]

No, for the reasons they said. Page 3 is only topless.

[purple-peril.livejournal.com]

No, as long as the Page 3 Girls' public regions were covered.
If they had split beaver shots of the girls, but covered up the willies, *that* would be hypocrisy.
I also suspect there is some law or press guideline somewhere that decrees that boobs are not as rude as willies, so the paper isn't allowed to show the willies.

[captainblue.livejournal.com]

Yes it is: how dare you read the Sun or the Mirror*?

*Except just at the moment I like what's happening with the Bush/Al-Jazeera stuff.

[aca.livejournal.com]

Does the Mirror still do page 3?