Superb Banner
- Thread starter cochyn
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
I spotted that, let's hope a paper runs with it tomorrow, though I doubt it.
[quote author=Whaddapie link=topic=35790.msg942527#msg942527 date=1252777398]
That's brilliant.
[/quote]
no its not, its equating somebody convicted with seriously injuring somebody (albeit with substantial doubts) with people completely uninvolved with any crime.
its a silly banner IMHO
That's brilliant.
[/quote]
no its not, its equating somebody convicted with seriously injuring somebody (albeit with substantial doubts) with people completely uninvolved with any crime.
its a silly banner IMHO
S
Squiggles
Guest
Because both events feature on the same banner it doesn't automatically assume they're of equal importance. That's ridiculous.
They're tied together not by equality or significance but by the misjustice involved in each case, and this banner is solely designed to keep the pressure on the Government to deliver on their word.
They're tied together not by equality or significance but by the misjustice involved in each case, and this banner is solely designed to keep the pressure on the Government to deliver on their word.
[quote author=Squiggles link=topic=35790.msg942629#msg942629 date=1252786966]
Because both events feature on the same banner it doesn't automatically assume they're of equal importance. That's ridiculous.
They're tied together not by equality or significance but by the misjustice involved in each case, and this banner is solely designed to keep the pressure on the Government to deliver on their word.
[/quote]
Yep.
Because both events feature on the same banner it doesn't automatically assume they're of equal importance. That's ridiculous.
They're tied together not by equality or significance but by the misjustice involved in each case, and this banner is solely designed to keep the pressure on the Government to deliver on their word.
[/quote]
Yep.
[quote author=Dee link=topic=35790.msg942658#msg942658 date=1252793449]
I share Molbystwin's concern.
The case for the '96' is clear, simple and an embarrassment to both the former and current UK governments. Tying it to any other cause runs a real risk of diluting it's impact to the wider public.
[/quote]
I supported the Michael Shields cause, but I agree that opportunistically linking Shields with the 96 has the potential for rather unfavourable interpretation by people out there. That said, it is a banner for the fans in Anfield rather than a wider slogan, and everyone in the stadium can appreciate the point.
I share Molbystwin's concern.
The case for the '96' is clear, simple and an embarrassment to both the former and current UK governments. Tying it to any other cause runs a real risk of diluting it's impact to the wider public.
[/quote]
I supported the Michael Shields cause, but I agree that opportunistically linking Shields with the 96 has the potential for rather unfavourable interpretation by people out there. That said, it is a banner for the fans in Anfield rather than a wider slogan, and everyone in the stadium can appreciate the point.
[quote author=Dee link=topic=35790.msg942658#msg942658 date=1252793449]
I share Molbystwin's concern.
The case for the '96' is clear, simple and an embarrassment to both the former and current UK governments. Tying it to any other cause runs a real risk of diluting it's impact to the wider public.
[/quote]
I wholeheartedly agree. Although I doubt the creators of the banner considered that the above. Its really just a tabloid style headline to catch the eye.
I share Molbystwin's concern.
The case for the '96' is clear, simple and an embarrassment to both the former and current UK governments. Tying it to any other cause runs a real risk of diluting it's impact to the wider public.
[/quote]
I wholeheartedly agree. Although I doubt the creators of the banner considered that the above. Its really just a tabloid style headline to catch the eye.
S
Squiggles
Guest
It's certainly not "superb" as the thread title suggests but as Spoin says: it's simply there to catch the media's eye.
As for "diluting" the public's opinion I think that's verging on paranoia. For the most part people are smarter than that - as if Liverpool fans are the only ones who would get the point of it.
As for "diluting" the public's opinion I think that's verging on paranoia. For the most part people are smarter than that - as if Liverpool fans are the only ones who would get the point of it.
[quote author=doctor_mac link=topic=35790.msg942733#msg942733 date=1252825103]
[quote author=Dee link=topic=35790.msg942658#msg942658 date=1252793449]
I share Molbystwin's concern.
The case for the '96' is clear, simple and an embarrassment to both the former and current UK governments. Tying it to any other cause runs a real risk of diluting it's impact to the wider public.
[/quote]
I supported the Michael Shields cause, but I agree that opportunistically linking Shields with the 96 has the potential for rather unfavourable interpretation by people out there. That said, it is a banner for the fans in Anfield rather than a wider slogan, and everyone in the stadium can appreciate the point.
[/quote]
I don't see it in quite that light, actually.
It's actually a clever banner; because with due respect to Shields , JFT 96 is a far more passionate issue.
It seems to me that banner is highlighting failed priorities.
[quote author=Dee link=topic=35790.msg942658#msg942658 date=1252793449]
I share Molbystwin's concern.
The case for the '96' is clear, simple and an embarrassment to both the former and current UK governments. Tying it to any other cause runs a real risk of diluting it's impact to the wider public.
[/quote]
I supported the Michael Shields cause, but I agree that opportunistically linking Shields with the 96 has the potential for rather unfavourable interpretation by people out there. That said, it is a banner for the fans in Anfield rather than a wider slogan, and everyone in the stadium can appreciate the point.
[/quote]
I don't see it in quite that light, actually.
It's actually a clever banner; because with due respect to Shields , JFT 96 is a far more passionate issue.
It seems to me that banner is highlighting failed priorities.
[quote author=Molbystwin link=topic=35790.msg942618#msg942618 date=1252785256]
[quote author=Whaddapie link=topic=35790.msg942527#msg942527 date=1252777398]
That's brilliant.
[/quote]
no its not, its equating somebody convicted with seriously injuring somebody (albeit with substantial doubts) with people completely uninvolved with any crime.
its a silly banner IMHO
[/quote]
That's not how I took it at all, mate.
I took it as highlighting how two seperate fights for justice have been running simultaniously for quite a while now, and as one closes, we should not allow authorities to forget the other one.
But to each their own...
[quote author=Whaddapie link=topic=35790.msg942527#msg942527 date=1252777398]
That's brilliant.
[/quote]
no its not, its equating somebody convicted with seriously injuring somebody (albeit with substantial doubts) with people completely uninvolved with any crime.
its a silly banner IMHO
[/quote]
That's not how I took it at all, mate.
I took it as highlighting how two seperate fights for justice have been running simultaniously for quite a while now, and as one closes, we should not allow authorities to forget the other one.
But to each their own...
- Status