Obviously it is mortifying to be wrongfully accused of being a paedophile but does anyone else get the sense that McAlpine is milking it in the hope of a gigantic secret payoff from the BBC?
Lord McAlpine
+2
bwfc71
xmiles
6 posters
3 Re: Lord McAlpine Thu Nov 15 2012, 19:30
Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
And why not? If the BBC had done their homework properly and at least had the decency to contact him before they published then the story would have been dead and buried.
Interesting to see Phil Schofield scurrying into his bolt hole when the cameras visited his humble abode.
Interesting to see Phil Schofield scurrying into his bolt hole when the cameras visited his humble abode.
4 Re: Lord McAlpine Thu Nov 15 2012, 22:52
bwfc71
Ivan Campo
Why not?
Because the BBC never said his name nor described him in the Newsnight report.
It was all done on Twitter with people second guessing who it could be - we even did that on here until his name started being banded about like wildfire. It is those on Twitter that should be made to pay!
Because the BBC never said his name nor described him in the Newsnight report.
It was all done on Twitter with people second guessing who it could be - we even did that on here until his name started being banded about like wildfire. It is those on Twitter that should be made to pay!
5 Re: Lord McAlpine Fri Nov 16 2012, 02:56
Bolton Nuts
Admin
It would be ironic if it later came out to be true. I think I used the word ironic in the wrong way.
6 Re: Lord McAlpine Fri Nov 16 2012, 06:20
Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
The settlement is £185,000. I doubt the BBC would pay it unless they didn't have a leg to stand on.
7 Re: Lord McAlpine Fri Nov 16 2012, 09:21
bwfc71
Ivan Campo
Reebok Trotter wrote:The settlement is £185,000. I doubt the BBC would pay it unless they didn't have a leg to stand on.
I think they just paid it because they have enough troubles already and don't want more. If I had been the stand-in DG I would have laughed in Alpine's face and tell him to do one.
8 Re: Lord McAlpine Fri Nov 16 2012, 11:41
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
bwfc71 wrote:
It was all done on Twitter with people second guessing who it could be - we even did that on here until his name started being banded about like wildfire. It is those on Twitter that should be made to pay!
Twitter & Facebook should be shut down. Half the problems in this world are caused by twats on social network sites.
9 Re: Lord McAlpine Fri Nov 16 2012, 12:14
bwfc71
Ivan Campo
Twitter is far worse than facebook.
Its Twitter that cause the problems.
Facebook is more of a social thing whereas Twitter is about spreading gossip and inflated ego's.
Its Twitter that cause the problems.
Facebook is more of a social thing whereas Twitter is about spreading gossip and inflated ego's.
10 Re: Lord McAlpine Mon Nov 19 2012, 12:37
xmiles
Jay Jay Okocha
The greedy bastard is after more money!
According to the BBC:
Lord McAlpine will seek a larger payout from ITV than the £185,000 he received over his libel claim against the BBC, his lawyers have confirmed.
It must be nice to be rich.
According to the BBC:
Lord McAlpine will seek a larger payout from ITV than the £185,000 he received over his libel claim against the BBC, his lawyers have confirmed.
It must be nice to be rich.
11 Re: Lord McAlpine Mon Nov 19 2012, 13:26
bwfc71
Ivan Campo
He is a very pathetic individual - if I were ITV I'd tell him to f-off as he was never mentioned and never insinuated - just like the BBC but because the Thatcherite government was mentioned he thinks he has a god given right to expect an apology!!!!
F off you greasy old money grabbing attention seeking rat!
F off you greasy old money grabbing attention seeking rat!
12 Re: Lord McAlpine Mon Nov 19 2012, 14:06
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
bwfc71 wrote:
F off you greasy old money grabbing attention seeking rat!
That's a bit like Owen Coyle calling Mark Hughes a shit manager.
13 Re: Lord McAlpine Thu Nov 22 2012, 15:14
xmiles
Jay Jay Okocha
He's only received £125,000 from ITV. Poor bastard.
14 Re: Lord McAlpine Thu Nov 22 2012, 15:58
bwfc71
Ivan Campo
Yet again i have to say its a poor showing by the broadcasters as they have nothing to be fearful about as neither the BBC or ITV have named him nor pretended that anything that was said could have led to him being named - it was all whispers and rumours from Twitter!
ITV should have fought ot, just as much as BBC should have done.
McAlpine may not be what he was accused of, but he is a complete jackass (my opinion) in the way he has gone about things and just shows how much of a moneygrabbing Tory he is!!!
ITV should have fought ot, just as much as BBC should have done.
McAlpine may not be what he was accused of, but he is a complete jackass (my opinion) in the way he has gone about things and just shows how much of a moneygrabbing Tory he is!!!
15 Re: Lord McAlpine Thu Nov 22 2012, 17:21
Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
bwfc71 wrote:Yet again i have to say its a poor showing by the broadcasters as they have nothing to be fearful about as neither the BBC or ITV have named him nor pretended that anything that was said could have led to him being named - it was all whispers and rumours from Twitter!
ITV should have fought ot, just as much as BBC should have done.
McAlpine may not be what he was accused of, but he is a complete jackass (my opinion) in the way he has gone about things and just shows how much of a moneygrabbing Tory he is!!!
What if McAlpine's name was on Schofield's list of shame ? The Television companies should do their homework before they broadcast.
16 Re: Lord McAlpine Thu Nov 22 2012, 17:41
bwfc71
Ivan Campo
Reebok Trotter wrote:bwfc71 wrote:Yet again i have to say its a poor showing by the broadcasters as they have nothing to be fearful about as neither the BBC or ITV have named him nor pretended that anything that was said could have led to him being named - it was all whispers and rumours from Twitter!
ITV should have fought ot, just as much as BBC should have done.
McAlpine may not be what he was accused of, but he is a complete jackass (my opinion) in the way he has gone about things and just shows how much of a moneygrabbing Tory he is!!!
What if McAlpine's name was on Schofield's list of shame ? The Television companies should do their homework before they broadcast.
It has been proved that the names could not be seen no matter how one tried!!
What did the BBC do wrong, didn't name him, didn't assume it was him, didn't anything apart from it was someone from Margaret Thatchers government - could have been 1 of many men?
ITV and Philip Schofield immediatley apologised when they realised that the peice of card wasn't fully right way round (and as I say its been proved any names could not be read), and that is where it should have been left.
For me the broadcasters have done no wrong.
The problem has arisen with regards to Twitter, and so many tweeting and re-tweeting his name, without proof!!!
17 Re: Lord McAlpine Thu Nov 22 2012, 18:12
Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
Which begs the question, if McAlpine is innocent then just who is the dodgy Cabinet Minister ?
18 Re: Lord McAlpine Thu Nov 22 2012, 19:08
Sluffy
Admin
There wasn't one.
The bloke who was 'attacked' was told it was McAlpine BUT shown the picture of the bloke who really did it - who wasn't the politician.
I heard on the BBC radio soon after it was acknowledged that the bloke had 'fingered' the wrong man that it was thought his attacker WAS a relative of McAlpine who had since died.
Appears that there as been more than one cock up in this story!
The bloke who was 'attacked' was told it was McAlpine BUT shown the picture of the bloke who really did it - who wasn't the politician.
I heard on the BBC radio soon after it was acknowledged that the bloke had 'fingered' the wrong man that it was thought his attacker WAS a relative of McAlpine who had since died.
Appears that there as been more than one cock up in this story!
19 Re: Lord McAlpine Thu Nov 22 2012, 19:45
Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
bwfc71 wrote:
It has been proved that the names could not be seen no matter how one tried!!
What did the BBC do wrong, didn't name him, didn't assume it was him, didn't anything apart from it was someone from Margaret Thatchers government - could have been 1 of many men?
ITV and Philip Schofield immediatley apologised when they realised that the peice of card wasn't fully right way round (and as I say its been proved any names could not be read), and that is where it should have been left.
For me the broadcasters have done no wrong.
The problem has arisen with regards to Twitter, and so many tweeting and re-tweeting his name, without proof!!!
Don't you feel better now you can space your posts properly.
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum