Martha Hancock

Well no matter how you explain it, Kali2, you are guilty of reading this stuff. You're a reader. You are part of it. Even if you just want to be horrified.

Personally I think it's awful how the press appear to be camping outside to get photos of Hancock's wife. However she is heading out, walking her dog, going about her business. So no weeping and wailing, or even worse, that dreadful photocall we see when a couple try to put on a united front.

You're possibly right - perhaps I shouldn't comment and say
Yes, leave her alone! We do not want to see pictures of her or any press hound asking her "how she feels". if I haven't actually scoured the papers myself.

I do have sympathy for Hancock's wife, Martha. Bad enough to be going through this without the media following her and asking how she feels. Despicable man to leave his family in this mess he has made.

Well no matter how you explain it, Kali2, you are guilty of reading this stuff. You're a reader. You are part of it.

Sorry, but that's just ridiculous.

Alegrias1

^Well no matter how you explain it, Kali2, you are guilty of reading this stuff. You're a reader. You are part of it.^

Sorry, but that's just ridiculous.

Don't apologise when you don't mean it, Alegrias1

Kali has been criticising, rightly, some press outlets for sensationalism etc etc. Then she caused anyone of reading it of being the problem. Then we find out that she reads it so she can see how dreadful it is.

Maybe you just haven't read the thread properly

Callistemon

^just been right through today's paper- not a mention of Martha, no photo, nothing.^
Which one please, Kali2?

I don't normally buy a paper, the first I heard about the press hounding Mrs Hancock was on GN.
Perhaps I should cancel my membership.

Same here, Callistemon

Yes Alegrias, more than ...

I'd never ever buy those papers, as I'd be contributing. But it is important to know what is said and about whom - once in a blue moon, only to know that your opinion is not just prejudiced. And to see why some people believe what they do, and vote how they do- on many subjects.

Talullah

Alegrias1

Well no matter how you explain it, Kali2, you are guilty of reading this stuff. You're a reader. You are part of it.

Sorry, but that's just ridiculous.

Don't apologise when you don't mean it, Alegrias1

Kali has been criticising, rightly, some press outlets for sensationalism etc etc. Then she caused anyone of reading it of being the problem. Then we find out that she reads it so she can see how dreadful it is.

Maybe you just haven't read the thread properly

OK, I won't apologise this time, you're right.

You are also either being disingenuous as a way of finding fault with Kali, or you don't really understand the purpose and business model of the gutter press.

Well done Martha Hancock. Quietly going about her business and not allowing the world to witness how she must really be feeling. The devastation her husband has brought upon her and his children is unforgivable. I hope she has family and friends to offer her support in getting through this.

Hancock is the one who is humiliated surely.

I'm not finding fault with Kali! I have no idea who Kali is. How kind of you to jump to her defence. I just wanted to know what newspaper she read where there was no mention of Hancock and his wife. I was interested.

Of course I don't understand anything, Alegrias1. I am totally clueless and ridiculous and my opinion counts for nothing in your superior eyes.

vegansrock

Hancock is the one who is humiliated surely.

Exactly.

Kali2

Yes Alegrias, more than ...

I'd never ever buy those papers, as I'd be contributing. But it is important to know what is said and about whom - once in a blue moon, only to know that your opinion is not just prejudiced. And to see why some people believe what they do, and vote how they do- on many subjects.

Now that really is ridiculous.

Talullah

I'm not finding fault with Kali! I have no idea who Kali is. How kind of you to jump to her defence. I just wanted to know what newspaper she read where there was no mention of Hancock and his wife. I was interested.

Of course I don't understand anything, Alegrias1. I am totally clueless and ridiculous and my opinion counts for nothing in your superior eyes.

Oh good, there's something we agree on then

(too much?)

'Well no matter how you explain it, Kali2, you are guilty of reading this stuff. You're a reader. You are part of it. Even if you just want to be horrified. '

how do you call this 'not finding fault'?

There, I have said what I wanted to say- and will leave it at that.

I saw it on twitter, so difficult to avoid.

I don't go on Twitter either

This is a warning to all who might go into a café and pick up an undesirable newspaper to read along with their latte and smashed avocado on toast - they may find someone judging them by their choice of reading material.

.

This thread is morphing into Alice going through the looking glass!

Eat Me!
Read Me!

I don’t remember seeing photos etc of Martha Hancock in the Guardian, I may be wrong as it may not have registered.

Callistemon. Good one ?

If there was no market for pictures of the innocent wife/the injured party/ the grieving widow/the orphaned children - whichever intrusion of privacy you care to name, there would none of the above.
Now you and I might not buy the more sensationalist tabloids or even read them for free in the Waitrose coffee shop, or look up articles in Mail on Line - but enough people do for this sort of intrusive journalism to thrive. Even reading it to see how dreadful it is is feeding the beast., is this what you meant Tallulah when you wrote

Well no matter how you explain it, you are guilty of reading this stuff. You're a reader. You are part of it. Even if you just want to be horrified

Once seen, once read, never forgotten.

Well no matter how you explain it, you are guilty of reading this stuff. You're a reader. You are part of it. Even if you just want to be horrified

Even reading it, thinking that it is dreadful, this is shocking, how dreadful, how can people read this! you have become part of that readership.