Not signed in (Sign In)
This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.

London Zoo: I want my editor back...

Bottom of Page

1 to 13 of 13

  1.  
    • CommentAuthorRedwynd
    • CommentTimeDec 27th 2007 edited
     (394.1)
    This is disturbing.

    As much as it bothers me, somehow this is not surprising in the slightest.

    This was appearedat eleven o'clock, EST, December 27, 2007.
  2.  (394.2)
    Yeah, this just sums up how stupid people are. "Yes, let's look at the useless blonde bitch, yes... where is Pakistan, aniway?"

    As for my reaction to the headline itself:

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! YES! Thank you, Barron, THANK YOU, for giving this money to charity and not to that stupid useless bitch. Let's hope it's money put to good use.

    I have absolutely no sympathy at all for Paris Hilton. She's a hedonist jackass. That's bad enough. But she's a LOUD hedonist jackass who needs attention and fame. She's not happy with less than twenty headlines of her per day.

    The need to sell as much newspapers as possible will always keep bitches like her in the front page, blotting out the REAL news.
  3.  (394.3)
    Worse really: this is not news even in the most basic sense of new information. I think this has been known for years, and more so its WHY the freak started doing all that reality TV. It seems to pop up on the net as news once a year.
  4.  (394.4)
    Worse really: this is not news even in the most basic sense of new information.


    Editors want money, not news, unfortunately. But in this case, it's not the editors. It's the people who clicked on that article that made it reach the top of the ranking.

    Fortunately, this particular article is good news (charity wins over Paris), although FAR from being as important as - well - anything.
    • CommentAuthorElohim
    • CommentTimeDec 27th 2007
     (394.5)
    I too was happy.

    I have seen little of Paris Hilton except when walking through a room where my sister is watching telly.

    Useless cow.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAlan Tyson
    • CommentTimeDec 27th 2007
     (394.6)
    And this is why I, an American, read the BBC. You have to scroll to find anything pertaining to Paris Hilton.

    God dammit, where's Mitch Royce when you need his pie-spewing ass?
    •  
      CommentAuthorDoc Ocassi
    • CommentTimeDec 27th 2007
     (394.7)
    The only good story I remember regarding this entity was Paris Hilton targeted in CD prank. - BBC.

    I had a good chuckle over that one, keep up the good work Banksy!
  8.  (394.8)
    I just went to the BBC page, and I did not have to scroll for my daily hit of Paris Hilton. Maybe I shouldn't have such a big screen on my computer, but it would appear Paris Hilton's terrifyingly huge presence on this planet is inescapable.

    I'd seen that CD prank before, didn't realise it was Banksy. You've got to appreciate the fact that none of the major chains seemed to mind.

    Has anyone else here ever seriously considered being a fucking asshole for a living?
    •  
      CommentAuthorARES
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (394.9)
    #1 and #5. Buh?
    • CommentAuthorRedwynd
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (394.10)
    @Andre

    You say hedonist jackass like it's a bad thing....I happen to be proud of being a hedonist jackass. What matters is what you're doing while being such, and in her case that's nothing. Malign her for being a useless cunt, not a hedonist.

    Also, I want the return of editors who could sort out news worth knowing (i.e. Pakistan) from that not worth knowing (i.e. anything to do with the celebutard culture). This populist bullshit just shows ever more why I should hate the unwashed masses. I have been somewhat molified, however; my daily newspaper's entire cover was devoted to Bhutto, five full pages of coverage and commentary. Kudos, Toronto Star!
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeDec 28th 2007
     (394.11)
    I have a certain admiration for Paris Hilton. Most women who suck cock for a living don't get paid nearly as well for it.

    Furthermore, much as I loathe every single video/song/TV show/movie she makes, she is actually working and earning her own way.

    Even on the relatively modest trust fund she's got now and the money she's still be getting from her family fortune, it would have been relatively easy for her to bounce between night clubs and rehab and some fake-ass career as a buyer for an upmarket department store or PR flak.

    Instead she took that crappy sex video and parlayed it into a multi-media career that's earned her a shit-ton of money in the absence of any discernible talent, intelligence or looks.
  12.  (394.12)

    You say hedonist jackass like it's a bad thing....I happen to be proud of being a hedonist jackass. What matters is what you're doing while being such, and in her case that's nothing. Malign her for being a useless cunt, not a hedonist.


    Being hedonist is okay, but being a jackass is not exactly a good thing. That's why I added the word "jackass". That's where the emphasis was, not in "hedonist".

    But you're right. "Cunt" suits her much better.
    •  
      CommentAuthorDoc Ocassi
    • CommentTimeJan 3rd 2008
     (394.13)
    A nice article in Technology Review.
    "You Don't Understand Our Audience"
    - By John Hockenberry

    What I learned about network television at Dateline NBC.

    The article reminds me of Howard Beale, which is kinda depressing.

1 to 13 of 13

  1.  

This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.