First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin...
Alternatively (although thanks to those creative suggestions from Mr. Cohen), we might consider taking the Sun instead. Who's with me?
(Small version slightly censored so will be safe for viewing mostly anywhere. Nothing that unsafe in the big version, the text's just readable and I didn't star out a visible swear; I did spend some time on the copy, too. Just click here to view.)
The question is - is it funny the second time? (I did a similar idea circa the Huntley verdict, which this is partially based on; it's linked to in my profile. It's not the same image at all, though.) Competition entry coming once I have an idea and the time to do it. That's surprisingly hard, I must say.
( ,
Fri 16 Jan 2004, 17:25,
archived)
(Small version slightly censored so will be safe for viewing mostly anywhere. Nothing that unsafe in the big version, the text's just readable and I didn't star out a visible swear; I did spend some time on the copy, too. Just click here to view.)
The question is - is it funny the second time? (I did a similar idea circa the Huntley verdict, which this is partially based on; it's linked to in my profile. It's not the same image at all, though.) Competition entry coming once I have an idea and the time to do it. That's surprisingly hard, I must say.
they do have a point
in that you'll never reach one of their readers with that... your typical Sun 'reader' has trouble with headlines, never mind copy...
( ,
Fri 16 Jan 2004, 17:35,
archived)
Get your point...
This one still has a lot of point in the headlines, actually; the taunting style, for example. The amount of copy on this page is *fairly* similar to today's edition; a little bit more, but most of that's taken up by huge Twentieth Century Condensed Extra Bold headlines.
( ,
Fri 16 Jan 2004, 17:44,
archived)
blogging that
in 5, 4, 3, 2...
[edit] there ya go, fella:
www.bloggerheads.com/
( ,
Fri 16 Jan 2004, 17:28,
archived)
[edit] there ya go, fella:
www.bloggerheads.com/
taking the sun...
is almost as crazy as Bush wanting to take mars...
(are you gonna wear suits made out of tinfoil? if you do, I'm with you!!!)
( ,
Fri 16 Jan 2004, 17:29,
archived)
(are you gonna wear suits made out of tinfoil? if you do, I'm with you!!!)
Since tin foil isn't actually made of tin,
does it break the Trade Descriptions Act?
( ,
Fri 16 Jan 2004, 17:32,
archived)
?
do we have a trade description act with the inhabitants of the sun?
( ,
Fri 16 Jan 2004, 17:35,
archived)
..
you seem to think we need censorship here too. You can swear as much as you like here, no one will care (apart from maybe you there, yes, you. And you, over there in the corner)
( ,
Fri 16 Jan 2004, 17:31,
archived)
Nah.
I know swearing's OK on b3ta. It's just the word "BITCH" printed over Ms. Short in fairly large text won't look nice on a work computer screen, no matter how taking the piss out of the Sun it is. Believe me, I know.
(By the way, I'm not into censorship in *that* way; I just don't like the way the Sun are treating Clare Short. OK?)
( ,
Fri 16 Jan 2004, 17:37,
archived)
(By the way, I'm not into censorship in *that* way; I just don't like the way the Sun are treating Clare Short. OK?)
I don't really have an opinion on her either, but...
The fact is, the Sun is acting like a complete playground bully on the Clare Short situation; she hasn't even tried to put another Private Members' Bill in, so they're criticising her completely unfairly for a personal opinion that does not harm anyone by her holding it (unlike the Kilroy affair).
I don't like bullies very much.
( ,
Fri 16 Jan 2004, 17:41,
archived)
I don't like bullies very much.