High Noon with George Hook.

Harry Angstrom

DeadHand wrote: »

Ah yes, how good it is to go through your day without having to confront anything so upsetting as a different opinion.

No, how good it is to listen to a show where he doesn't continuously denigrate cyclists even though he himself has been fined for speeding offences, or where he never misses any opportunity to have a pop at people who took a stand against water charges while conveniently ignoring the fact that his boss had skin in the game, or ranting about vaccines that he has sweet fcuk all knowledge about. I'm all for differing opinions, it's the gross hypocrisy and ignorance that I don't like.

Calhoun

quintana76 wrote: »

See what RTE did by bringing on Quinn with Coppinger.  It is obvious that in certain circles (RTE, IT) Quinn is portrayed as far right, (mainly because he speaks up for the RC Church).

It was a subtle (not so subtle) attempt to equate opponents of the witch hunt against Hook with being right wing.

It is media manipulation of opinion to their own ends. There are many others they could have brought on who did not have the same reputation thrust on to them by the media.

Coppinger came off a bit hysterical at times and hypoctical, she accused Quinn of shouting her down while she did the same.

Her main point don't rape courses for men = good, telling both men and women to be safe when going out on night drinking = bad.
Its beggars belief how someone like this gets into the Dail, i am so glad her cohort are a minority as we would live in a very thought controlled space if they ever got real power.

Vorenus400

DeadHand wrote: »

Ah yes, how good it is to go through your day without having to confront anything so upsetting as a different opinion.

If you listened to the show today then you would have heard the essential song section. I cant remember the last time George was that nice to Bill hughes. Usually (for show) he is argumentative and puts down everthing bill says but today he was very cordial.

Also seems to have put more research into the show and discussion

mikep

I was happy to see Hollands piece today as I believe barring preople from expressing their opinions is a dangerous road to go down.
In fairness to Hook when I used to listen to him on drivetime he often would bring people on to counter his view where he had gone off on a rant and there were those who disagreed with him
 Not many in Irish media would allow that..

ballsymchugh

Vorenus400 wrote: »

If you listened to the show today then you would have heard the essential song section. I cant remember the last time George was that nice to Bill hughes. Usually (for show) he is argumentative and puts down everthing bill says but today he was very cordial.

Also seems to have put more research into the show and discussion

do you really get that from the music slot? i always thought they were grand with each other, just trying to get rises and laughs where George thinks anything before the mid 80s is probably shyte, and Bill using the slot to show him he's wrong. May have been overly nice today, but i wouldn't have said he *wasn't* nice before.

Vorenus400

ballsymchugh wrote: »

do you really get that from the music slot? i always thought they were grand with each other, just trying to get rises and laughs where George thinks anything before the mid 80s is probably shyte, and Bill using the slot to show him he's wrong. May have been overly nice today, but i wouldn't have said he *wasn't* nice before.

I would say George plays the blow hard, Bill doesnt seem to mind. But it gets very repetitive when its done every week.

I think George is capable of much better. There was a while ago where George was saying all classical music was terrible and Buddy Holly was the peak of musical perfection. I know its all for show but some times George just shouts people down rather than explaining. Its very interesting when he mentions a song that is close to his heart and the memories it evokes.

Drumpot

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

No, how good it is to listen to a show where he doesn't continuously denigrate cyclists even though he himself has been fined for speeding offences, or where he never misses any opportunity to have a pop at people who took a stand against water charges while conveniently ignoring the fact that his boss had skin in the game, or ranting about vaccines that he has sweet fcuk all knowledge about. I'm all for differing opinions, it's the gross hypocrisy and ignorance that I don't like.

There is no one person or media outlet in this world immune from Hypocrisy or ignorance. I imagine you are regularly disappointed.

DickSwiveller

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

No, how good it is to listen to a show where he doesn't continuously denigrate cyclists even though he himself has been fined for speeding offences, or where he never misses any opportunity to have a pop at people who took a stand against water charges while conveniently ignoring the fact that his boss had skin in the game, or ranting about vaccines that he has sweet fcuk all knowledge about. I'm all for differing opinions, it's the gross hypocrisy and ignorance that I don't like.

It's not compulsory to listen to him. I think you're looking to be annoyed.

Harry Angstrom

Drumpot wrote: »

There is no one person or media outlet in this world immune from Hypocrisy or ignorance. I imagine you are regularly disappointed.

Hook does hypocrisy and ignorance far better than most.

DickSwiveller wrote: »

It's not compulsory to listen to him. I think you're looking to be annoyed.

I'm amazed that Hook's listenership numbers aren't far more than the official figures, considering the huge amount listeners/supporters who've come out of the woodwork in the past few days on this thread, most of whom have never posted anything previously about his radio shows - be it The Right Hook or High Noon.

DickSwiveller

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

Hook does hypocrisy and ignorance far better than most.



I'm amazed that Hook's listenership numbers aren't far more than the official figures, considering the huge amount listeners/supporters who've come out of the woodwork in the past few days on this thread, most of whom have never posted anything previously about his radio shows - be it The Right Hook or High Noon.

What's that got to do with anything?

Harry Angstrom

DickSwiveller wrote: »

What's that got to do with anything?

All aboard the bandwagon.

DickSwiveller

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

All aboard the bandwagon.

I've no idea what you're talking about. I'm not sure you do.

Slán go fóill.

DeadHand

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

it's the gross hypocrisy and ignorance that I don't like.

For "gross hypocrisy and ignorance" read "views that contradict the prevailing dogma".

foxtrot101

DeadHand wrote: »

For "gross hypocrisy and ignorance" read "views that contradict the prevailing dogma".

In the space of one month George went from a life long Democrat who was opposed to the death penalty, accepted climate change to a Trump supporting, death penalty proponent, climate change denier. For over a decade he was opposing Michael Grahams tea party republicanism. Then in that same month period he jump even further to the right than Graham. The main thing George has been contradicting on the "High noon" is himself.

Lady Chatterton

Something struck me today as being unusual, there has been lots of outrage in the media and social media since the weekend but in my office, there has been a deafening silence on the matter. Which is very very strange!

I work for a large company which employs people of all ages, nationalities etc. In our department, we usually discuss absolutely everything and anything that is going on in the country/the World - from the Housing Crisis to who will win Masterchef.

I had breakfast with a close friend/work colleague this morning and I asked him did he think it was strange that half the country was supposed to be calling for George's resignation but almost a week on no one in our departments had expressed an opinion or outrage.

He turned the question on me and asked if I had attempted to raise the subject within my team. I hadn't and when I thought about it, I had to admit to myself that I hadn't out of fear. The sad reality is that I know I could potentially end up at a disciplinary meeting in HR if anyone took offence to something I might say on the matter. My friend admitted that while he had sympathy for George's position he wouldn't feel comfortable talking about it at work because he managed a team (mainly females) and he wouldn't want anyone on his team to think that because he wanted George to keep his job that he condoned victim blaming.

I think everything has changed since last Friday, not only has it changed for George but I believe that any of us could find ourselves being disciplined or fired if someone took offence to a clumsy comment and a sincere apology may no longer be sufficient.

I'm expecting there will be more frequent silences in the office from now on.... because certain opinions and discussions will be completely off limits....it's a bloody depressing thought, isn't it?

hotmail.com

Lady Chatterton wrote:

I'm expecting there will be more frequent silences in the office from now on.... because certain opinions and discussions will be completely off limits....it's a bloody depressing thought, isn't it?

Saying that the victim of a rape is partly to blame is an extreme opinion nowadays so the reason people in your office are quiet about it is because they don't share that opinion.

Lady Chatterton

hotmail.com wrote: »

Saying that the victim of a rape is partly to blame is an extreme opinion nowadays so the reason people in your office are quiet about it is because they don't share that opinion.

You see, ^^^^^ this is a perfect example of what I mean. Some people take great pleasure in twisting comments.

I'm pretty sure that some of my colleagues feel as I do -

I don't condone victim blaming but neither do I agree with the vile witch hunt that George is currently being subjected to.

foxtrot101

Lady Chatterton wrote: »

I'm expecting there will be more frequent silences in the office from now on.... because certain opinions and discussions will be completely off limits....it's a bloody depressing thought, isn't it?

The High Noon has only 98,000 listeners. The amount of people active on twitter at any one time is minuscule. At a guess, there's less than 100 people posting about this on the two threads in boards, far less probably. I suspect the fact that no one is taking about it your office is A) A large portion are not aware it's going and b) those that do aren't that interested in it.

Vorenus400

Alot of people dont care about the George Hook thing. Hook stirs up crap and skates near the edge to entertain people. Even pat Kenny said he was a controversialist,when he was defending him. Hook apologised and people should move on.

This idea that this is the end of free speech is stupid. George is often the first one to calling for restriction on something someone said. He often takes offence on behalf of others. He isnt some right wing say it as it is spokesperson. George is an entertainer
He was publicly called out for saying nothing when his friend Sam Smyth was sacked at newstalk for doing his job. Where were all these defenders when Sam was let go.


The people defending him and using words like Kristallnacht/stallininst russia to describe the situation are as bad as the ones saying he advocates rape.

Ursus Horribilis

In hindsight, the outrage over the Bank of Ireland ad (the one where the couple who want to buy a house move back in with their parents to save) was the Hors d'oeuvre. We seem to have moved into an age where everything is big and bold and extreme. Opposing viewpoints are no longer tolerated. From what I've heard/observed in real life, people have very different opinions on what George Hook said. That's fair enough I believe. People are entitled to have their own opinions, even if you don't agree with them. What's depressing is how contentious topics (and I'm not just talking about George Hook here) have degenerated into one side shouting down the other. What happened to the days when people could discuss things and respect each other's opinions? The new way seems to be one side trying to shout down the other until they get the result they want. In George Hook's case, an apology will never be enough. Would a sacking even do at this stage? I propose a public hanging, drawing and quartering.

Lady Chatterton

Vorenus400 wrote: »

George is an entertainer - He was publicly called out for saying nothing when his friend Sam Smyth was sacked at newstalk for doing his job. Where were all these defenders when Sam was let go.

Sam Smyth is a journalist I have huge respect for and I feel he was very badly treated. The official line for his Today FM sacking was his listenership had dropped but we all know that his former employer in Today FM & INM took issue with some of his stories.

Dinny would later go on to sue Sam in a personal capacity, a case that could have ruined Sam but thankfully he successfully defended it. I don't blame George or any Communicorp/INM employee for not speaking out. When your boss owns almost every media outlet in the country speaking up could mean you could find yourself out of work for a very very long time.

hotmail.com

Saying that a victim is partly to blame for her own rape is the reason we're here. It's an outrageous opinion to hold.

Failing to understand is something that bothers people who don't share that view.

The Rape of Lucretia

Lady Chatterton wrote: »

You see, ^^^^^ this is a perfect example of what I mean. Some people take great pleasure in twisting comments.

I'm pretty sure that some of my colleagues feel as I do -

I don't condone victim blaming but neither do I agree with the vile witch hunt that George is currently being subjected to.

The whole problem comes from loose use of the word 'blame'.
Does blame mean the rape victim bears the responsibility for being raped, or does it mean that had they not taken particular actions they would not have been raped?
It in a strict sense it is the former.
In a looser colloquial sense it is used to mean the latter. Those who want to take offence, or are trigger (word) happy on 'rape' outrage, see the former. Even when it was used in the latter sense.
George's statement does not extend to saying that rapees bear responsibility for being raped as some want to see it doing. But he is correct nevertheless in his core statement that women can affect their risk of being raped by their own choices. And there is no denying this. What he said is correct - but vilifying him for the imprecision of the English language is more than a tad harsh.

Lady Chatterton

Well done hotmail.com, you continue to prove my point. Unfortunately, there are people like you ŵho deliberately misrepresent and twist the views of others. Is a bit perverse, actually it's very disturbing.

Goodbye & Good Luck to you, I've no intention of playing silly games with you.

Edit: @Hotmail.com - Thank you for removing the insulting and outrageous comments you directed at me

hotmail.com

Lady Chatterton wrote:

Edit: @Hotmail.com - Thank you for removing the insulting and outrageous comments you directed at me

I've no idea what you're talking about. I never directed anything personal at you?

KevIRL

Dill the wagon won't present her show on Saturday in protest at hook still being on the air.

Well done George. Getting dill and the alphabet soup parties off the air on newstalk in one week is quite the achievement

CIARAN_BOYLE

hotmail.com wrote: »

Saying that the victim of a rape is partly to blame is an extreme opinion nowadays so the reason people in your office are quiet about it is because they don't share that opinion.

All people are responsible for their actions and their actions alone.

I would never blame a woman for being raped. I would criticise a failure to exercise due care but I criticised myself for that when someone swung a knife at me.

I didn't deserve to have someone try and stab me. I wasn't responaible for someone swinging a knife at me. That doesnt mean that I was perfect in the situation.

It's not misplaced guilt that makes me relive the incident and think what could I have done better. I'm not responsible the incident but I could have ensured it went better.

It's like saying women shouldn't learn self defence because men shouldn't rape them. **** that. A chance to protect yourself is always a good thing.

DickSwiveller

KevIRL wrote: »

Dill the wagon won't present her show on Saturday in protest at hook still being on the air.

Well done George. Getting dill and the alphabet soup parties off the air on newstalk in one week is quite the achievement

Another insufferable creep gone. This is getting better and better.

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

If having George Hook on the air is the price to pay for getting Dil off the air then it's a price I think it's worth paying, twice over if needs be. Give him another slot, I don't listen anyway, but that woman's odious agendas shouldn't be anywhere near mainstream radio. Hopefully she goes to AM or DAB.

lertsnim

Alec Chubby Liposuction wrote: »

Give him another slot

Give him her slot.