No Sleeep

It’s certainly not fair if the validity of the evidence that initially secured the conviction has since been called into question.

I think it’s a big misstep, the VMAs isn’t the platform it once was anyway. They won’t make her much bigger than she is currently, I think in the long-term doing the shows would have been the right decision. It could have been kind of iconic, like Madonna performing at Camden Palace right at the start of her stardom, those fans that got to go would have cherished that memory. Now she’s pissed off European fans, at this stage in her career that’s not wise. Touring is something that you really need to build a good reputation for, I’m a Janet stan but the amount of tours she’s cancelled really puts me off making any solid plans to see her. Same with artists like JLo and Gwen that just didn’t really bother to tour very much at the peak of their fame and now struggle to sell out shows when they do tour, you really need to be consistent. Not to start any rivalries but Taylor’s Vienna shows were only the third time she’s cancelled shows in her two decades of performing, and she cancels only under the most dire of circumstances. I’m not a massive Taylor fan but I admire her work ethic. Artists nowadays are much too flippant with cancelling shows and treating these commitments like they’re optional, of course they’re human too but literally thousands of people are losing out on hundreds if not thousands of their hard-earned cash because something better came up for the artist. It’s really not on and not justifiable in this case.

Not an Oasis fan but at all but since when was Live Forever their biggest hit? :???:

Does it have to win album of the year at the Brits to count as a “Brit award winning album”, or does it count if just a single from it won something?

I think you are or were defending one and that’s what I’m unhappy about. No need to put words in my mouth

That part was in reply to J00prstar. And I highly doubt Huw Edwards or Phillip Schofield or their lawyers are ever going to see my posts on this forum.

The victim deciding not to press charges does not mean no crime has taken place. Children cannot consent. And as for the highlighted part, that has literally no relevance to this case. Just nonsense.

I’m not going to apologise for having an opinion. Not just about Huw Edwards, but to attempt to call me out for my “inflammatory comments” about Phillip Schofield is pretty unbelievable! I’m not going to apologise for having a negative opinion about men accused of doing horrible things to children

Compared to a 17 year old boy, yes

I said it wasn’t JUST directed at the people on here. And I stand by being disgusted by it. You really need to take a look at what you’re defending. A 17 year old boy was co-erced (allegedly etc.) into sending nude pictures to an elderly man. I just can’t get over this being deemed acceptable by anyone.

Did I specify that it was only the people on this forum that should be ashamed? And I stand by it, people were trying to attack the victims family, calling them homophobic chancers etc. it was disgusting.

How is that any different from you bringing up my previous defence of Lucy Letby and condemnation of Phillip Schofield, as well as calling me a gaslighter and rude? And if you want to defend Phillip Schofield then I think that is definitely where I have to draw the line with this conversation lol. Harvey Weinstein’s conviction was overturned, I suppose you’ll be defending him next? ETA: also, I’m not a journalist, if I want to call a middle aged man a groomer for having relations with teenage boys I will

This thread isn’t about Lucy Letby, but if you think the coverage during the trial wasn’t biased then you must be very naive. Of course they can’t straight up brand her a murderer or they’d be sued into oblivion. But the coverage was not balanced at all. And the exact same tactics were used for Russell Brand, not saying that’s right either , but you didn’t see many people running to his defence the way they did for Huw. I’d also like to know more about exactly what I said about Phillip Schofield that you consider “inflammatory” - is the man not an accused child groomer? Also I’ve seen you do this thing in a few threads recently where you aggressively and persistently take on anyone with a dissenting opinion from the herd as if that makes you somehow righteous. Is there a need for it?

Ah yes, the famously infallible British justice system :rolleyes: I find it ironic the same people that have issues with The Sun’s coverage of Huw’s accusations have none of the same anger towards the biased coverage of the Letby trial, long before she was convicted. I suppose not, they were just defending an accused pedophile. I didn’t single any members out like you’ve done with me. And in fact I was not just referring to Buzzjack posters, I saw the same sentiment across social media last year. And honestly I’m a bit disgusted by the anger towards the victims family at the time, accusing them of homophobia for coming forward with the accusations.

Please explain to me and provide examples of how I have gaslit anyone here. You’re using very extreme language. Hypocrisy? It’s two completely different cases. Huw pled guilty, Lucy maintains her innocence to this day. Again, this isn’t relevant to this particular discussion, no idea why you brought it up.

Why do you have a problem with my “inflammatory comments” about an (alleged) child groomer? Plenty of abusers aren’t convicted for their crimes. What does my questioning Lucy Letby’s conviction have to do with this exactly? So because I think one person may have been wrongfully convicted I’m not allowed to believe in anyone else’s guilt?

Because people seem to keep emphasising that this is completely separate from the issues reported last year, which resulted in his leaving the BBC. It’s clearly not a coincidence and it is evidence of a pattern. Just because he wasn’t convicted of anything last year, it’s still definitely worthy of taking into consideration that he was chatting up teenage boys. I think it’s also quite naive to think he received these images against his will, no matter what his defence team says. Unless he blocked the man immediately and reported the images, then there is no defence.

He clearly has a pattern of targeting young boys. Why was he in that group chat in the first place?

Well there you go. I hope the people that defended this pedophile are ashamed https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crgr49q591go.amp

Where do I sign up?

I’m not mad about it but I do wish we were getting a new album instead.

Unless the Alexa scam kicks in like it did for Dance Alone lol

Red Wine Supernova sounds like such a smash, Good Luck Babe just doesn’t, I will never understand the general public’s taste nowadays

I don’t think that word means what you think it means

Well not really because from Q1 2022 to Q1 2023 it increased by 93 million. Just 7 million less. So it doesn’t explain why streams have went through the roof this year but were very low at the top last year. It’s went from 300k being enough to get a #1 some days to 600k being seen as a low number #1. Those numbers don’t explain that.