Re: Media

[STEADIRIC@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/2/97 3:20:27 PM, quk@isham-research.demon.co.uk (Phil
Payne) wrote:

>OK.
>
>So it's doing 60mph.  Then it's doing 121mph.  Now it's doing 60mph again.
> 
>It exploded.  No, it didn't.
>
>A motorcycle papparazo swerved in front of the car.  No, the nearest was
100m 
>behind it.
>
>Then no one was belted in.  Then the bodyguard was.
> 
>It's an MB600.  No, it's a 280.
> 
>It's armoured.  No, it's not armoured.
> 
>Quite apart from the morality of the media chasing public figures - what's
the
>
>point?  Every single 'fact' reported so far has been incorrect.  


So why do we need to hear about again.....................




Confused when your always the first to bitch about wasted bandwidth and how
you pay for it by the byte......


Eric