Charlie Gilmour sentenced to 16 months in prison

[snifferdog]

It's easy to be a rebel when you're not really one of the common people.

[J Ed]

there was an article on this on pg2 of a Canadian paper I was reading this weekend
why? its surely not news here, we've got our own riots to worry about and who was really responsible
but it had a big picture of the young lad with his famous rockstar father and his pretty mum
i.e. it was celebrity gossip of interest to Toronto rock fans

has there been any other coverage of anybody else involved in the riot who's not a famous rockstars son?
from what I can tell the courts are making an example of him, and not the next rioter, because of who his father is and the sure knowledge that his sentencing will get disproportionate publicity
thus intimidating any followers of the story from using their democratic right to organise in the street and express an unpopular opinion

anyway the whole world now knows how the British media works and its incestuous relationships with government and the police, thus I'm not impressed at you Brits' moral outrage: you're being programmed

[pastchristmas]

I think community service would be more humane and could actually serve to rehabilitate instead of wasting tax payer's money on throwing yet another youth in our over-crowded prisons. Only career criminals and those comitting the most serious of crime (murder, rape etc.) should be getting locked up. Its uncivilised!

This is true. Jail is not always the answer. A lot more good can be done with counseling, community service and other types of rehabilitation programs designed to address the reason behind the behavior and not just punish it.

[Stephen]

They should sentence him to a year in Roger Water's custody and then he could get to hear his views on desecrating war memorials.

[ultraviolet]

there was an article on this on pg2 of a Canadian paper I was reading this weekend
why? its surely not news here, we've got our own riots to worry about and who was really responsible
but it had a big picture of the young lad with his famous rockstar father and his pretty mum
i.e. it was celebrity gossip of interest to Toronto rock fans

has there been any other coverage of anybody else involved in the riot who's not a famous rockstars son?
from what I can tell the courts are making an example of him, and not the next rioter, because of who his father is and the sure knowledge that his sentencing will get disproportionate publicity
thus intimidating any followers of the story from using their democratic right to organise in the street and express an unpopular opinion

anyway the whole world now knows how the British media works and its incestuous relationships with government and the police, thus I'm not impressed at you Brits' moral outrage: you're being programmed

Actually, it isn't how the British media works as a whole and it's disingenuous to tar every journalist or media outlet with the same brush. But don't let the facts stand in the way of a good sweeping statement. And hey, the "being programmed" thing sounded cool and subversive, right???
It's one group of people at one newspaper owned by one media company involved in the phone hacking scandal. Not the entire media industry. It's a company which has always wielded political influence in a completely biased way not only in the UK, but in the US and the Asia Pacific.
I know a lot of journalists who work bloody hard to do their jobs well for rubbish money, and they themselves have to do battle with the tabloids who pay sources for stories and think nothing of crossing ethical lines to to what they want. It drives me mad when people just generalise about how evil the media and all journalists are.
As for Charlie being made an example of, well such is the cult of celebrity, and if people in Canada and the rest of the world didn't buy tabloids and read the rubbish written about people who really don't matter then there wouldn't be a market for it and tabloids wouldn't outsell broadsheets.
Anyway, being photographed during the riot by all those nasty news photographers meant Charlie was quite easy to identify. The police must have been cheering. I think they are still looking for the smarter rioters who covered their faces while attacking the royals' car and attempting to light fires outside the Supreme Court and smashing windows ect ect ect. I imagine any other cases which make it to court will be covered, not the least because of the cost of the damage done and the fact that a member of the royal family being attacked is always going to be news. After all a few hundred years ago it wouldn't have been prison for doing that, but off with their head.
I think examples will be made of anyone who is charged over the riots, it wasn't just a scuffle and it wasn't just people organising on the street to express an unpopular opinion. It got nasty, but then maybe you believe mob violence is justified, seeing as people in your country thought violence was a good response to losing a game of sport.

[J Ed]

lets look at some of the other high minded socially responsible journalism found in the newspaper Kieth linked to in his original post
here's one: Jessica Simpson pours her curves into a VERY clingy dress
breaking news: some celebrity has a hot bod
here's another: Bridesmaids star Melissa McCarthy shows off her lingerie 'body'
even more important, another celebrity does not have a hot bod
here's my favourite: Embarrassed Charlotte Church caught short on camera
a vigilant journalist has managed to document a third celebrity trying to take a pee
sure more interesting than talking about the Murdoch whistleblower found dead yesterday under nonsuspicious circumstances

a quick bit of net research shows me the Daily Mail is not a Murdoch owned newspaper, so we will let it speak for itself based on this random sampling of other contemporary headlines, and not tar all British media with the same brush
"subversive" that I am I must conclude the journalistic souce used as basis of this thread looks precisely like celebrity gossip to me

[ultraviolet]

Keith may have used the Daily Mail as the source on his post, but that hasn't got all that much to do with the opinions you expressed in yours it seems to me. I was commenting on your statement that the "whole world now knows how the British media works", because it's just not the case. You are referencing a separate issue. The phone hacking scandal is indicative of the corporate culture at News International, not the state of the British media in general, and it doesn't have anything to do with the coverage of Charlie Gilmour's sentence. In terms of the headlines you found from the Mail, of course they are all ridiculous celebrity gossip stories and nothing of any substance. No, it isn't owned by Murdoch, but it is a tabloid. But believe it or not, there's a lot more to the British media than tabloids - the Telegraph, the Guardian, the BBC for instance. Far from being programmed, anyone with intelligence sees the Mail for what it is, and gets their actual news elsewhere. That isn't to say that the Gilmour story isn't legitimate news, because, for the reasons I stated in my earlier post, it is. As will any other trials to do with the riots be legitimate news stories.

[Idisaffect]

I know a lot of journalists who work bloody hard to do their jobs well for rubbish money,

Are you a journalist?

maybe you believe mob violence is justified, seeing as people in your country thought violence was a good response to losing a game of sport.

Unlike people in your country?

And hey, the "being programmed" thing sounded cool and subversive, right???

No. It sounded like the truth.

[Keith Jordan]

Keith may have used the Daily Mail as the source on his post,

The original thread here was mocking The Mail (which I called a filthy rag) due to their very poor journalism because they originally put in the story linked to that David Gilmour was, indeed, Pink Floyd's drummer.

The thread has moved on since then but I am at odds as to why we are now talking about News International? That is nothing to do with this young lad being locked up. Completely separate and unrelated issue.

Charlie Gilmour didn't hurt anyone or damage property that much yet still received a 16 month prison sentence which is quite wrong, even in my very Conservative with a big C view!

[nosaj]

1. The thread has moved on since then but I am at odds as to why we are now talking about News International? That is nothing to do with this young lad being locked up. Completely separate and unrelated issue.

2. Charlie Gilmour didn't hurt anyone or damage property that much yet still received a 16 month prison sentence which is quite wrong, even in my very Conservative with a big C view!

1. This thread has moved in a sideways manner for random reasons...however, I think there is a sense that there is a stronger mainstream tabloid tradition in the UK than where JEd comes from (I indeed read the very article printed in Canada he is referring to)A ND it is very topical right now...but, on to the topic...

2. Well, it does seem a bit harsh overall.

[Idisaffect]

Great. Another damn Canadian weighs in.

[snifferdog]

Perhaps the issue of tabloidism/News International is a subject for another topic? The stuff coming out now about Rupert Murdoch and his pals I find fascinating but that might be just me

16 months does seem a bit harsh but Charlie's a lucky young man they didn't charge him with more things. Attempted arson is one which springs to mind.

[scarecrow]

Charlie Gilmour didn't hurt anyone or damage property that much yet still received a 16 month prison sentence which is quite wrong, even in my very Conservative with a big C view!

I think the sentence is relatively heavy because this was a significant civil disturbance/ riot on a largish scale, and its not all that often that police produce hard evidence of people being involved in looting and inciting other people to riot and 'leading' rioters. The sentence for incitement to riot could have been a lot heavier actually.

Obviously the British media is diverse and its a massive and quite absurd assumption that people commenting on this forum have somehow been duped and don't have the intelligence to compare one newspaper/ website report from another. Personally I think the 'radical' press and blogosphere are just as guilty of dumbing down discussion of student marches etc. I've read countless diatribes about police acting as state agents to protect property and business. Of course its the police's job to protect businesses from being smashed up and of course people are going to be arrested for doing this. And of course the vast majority of the public support the police in doing this.

People will tell you that smashing things up is a valid and strategic form of protest; I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that people's motivation for violence (or smashing things up, if you don't want to call that violence) at protests is because it makes them feel good/ empowered and chaos/ destruction is satisfying in some way. This case and other recent prosecutions seem to confirm this. Impressionable people can get mixed up in it, but its no excuse. Either way, this and so-called 'black block' tactics really do not work on any level and nothing good comes out of it.

[my breakfast.]

Perhaps the issue of tabloidism/News International is a subject for another topic? The stuff coming out now about Rupert Murdoch and his pals I find fascinating but that might be just me

16 months does seem a bit harsh but Charlie's a lucky young man they didn't charge him with more things. Attempted arson is one which springs to mind.

Who the hell ever burned down a set of doors by lighting a pile of glossy fliers infront of the door? Those guys don't burn very hot and make a lot of smothering ash. Dumbass.

[Meandthem]

These doors are probably 2½" oak and wouldn't burn if you lit them up with napalm, but never the less it's an attempt on arson ...
The ones that doesn't have kids this age shouldn't comment on this thread!!
Don't give me the bullocks with "he deserved it" or even worse "Beware of the showers!"
Believe me, you can talk up'n'down the walls on morals, ethics and common behavior, but their heads are screwed up and they think they're sooooo wise. (I, for one, should know - I'm still 16 or 19 or 21 years old in mind, ha ha)
He'll have his senses back in a year or two!
Prison doesn't help a shit - let him do his chore with kids or old folk that need help, instead!
My thoughts goes to David and Polly...