Page 1 of 1
Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 4:27 pm
by Samanfur
More details in the link to the original
Guardian article:
British billionaire's "I Am Not A Pornographer" letter raising questions already answered by the letter
Richard Desmond, a British billionaire who was formerly the propreitor of adult television channels and wank mags, does not wish to be known as a pornographer. In fact, he apparently feels it is illegal to call him such and is demanding that Wikipedia cease doing so.
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 4:36 pm
by Andy McDandy
Well, he shouldn't have run that company that published wank mags and shot and aired pornographic films then.
Fun fact - remember the old Express ads with a cheery paperboy shouting "Express delivery!"? Well, the voice came from Des's own son, and the ad was recorded in the Television X studios. Hope the kid was wearing shoe protectors.
In fact, "Express delivery!". Fnar fnar.
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 5:14 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
When #3 son was looking for work as a photographer/graphic designer a mate got him an interview at a place he didn't know much about.
Halfway through the interview two completely naked models showed up. Which surprised him, as the nature of the company hadn't been divulged at that point. Apparently they did this (they said) to see how he would react to nude women. I think it was a bit seedier than that.
Desmond's Filthorama.
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 8:28 pm
by Andy McDandy
The same story appears in "The Pornographer Diaries" by former wank mag journalist Danny King. Apparently a standard phasing test for new staff.
In fact, in the book the company owner bears a striking resemblance to guess who...
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 8:41 pm
by Abernathy
Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 5:14 pm
Apparently they did this (they said) to see how he would react to nude women.
What did they expect him to do? Whip out his todger and start frantically rubbing it like Aladdin summoning the genie ?
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 8:44 pm
by Oboogie
Abernathy wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 8:41 pm
Malcolm Armsteen wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 5:14 pm
Apparently they did this (they said) to see how he would react to nude women.
What did they expect him to do? Whip out his todger and start frantically rubbing it like Alladin summoning the genie ?
That's a fine image for a proud father to wrestle with....
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Fri Nov 05, 2021 8:54 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
I think a lot of people expressed a degree of embarrassment...
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:28 pm
by Youngian
former wank mag journalist Danny
Is this a career option? Things I’d wish I’d known at 18. Heard people speak highly of working for David Sullivan. A freelance sub on the newly launched Sunday Sport said it was a haven of peace when Fleet Street was at war with the unions.
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Sat Dec 04, 2021 12:50 pm
by Andy McDandy
King described it as like applying for any job in journalism: take along some cuttings of your best bits, do a WPM typing test, show that you know the magazine's circulation and target demographic. Then once employed, write copy in time for the next edition.
He said that the main questions he was asked were do you meet the models, have you dated a model, are the letters real, and can you get me some free magazines? To which his answers were rarely, hell no, the mad ones yes and the competently written sexy stories no, and yes that I can do.
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2022 12:05 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
Epic Express fail in taking parody account for real - or did they?
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2022 12:56 pm
by Bones McCoy
Samanfur wrote: ↑Fri Nov 05, 2021 4:27 pm
More details in the link to the original Guardian article:
British billionaire's "I Am Not A Pornographer" letter raising questions already answered by the letter
Richard Desmond, a British billionaire who was formerly the propreitor of adult television channels and wank mags, does not wish to be known as a pornographer. In fact, he apparently feels it is illegal to call him such and is demanding that Wikipedia cease doing so.
Not a pornographer - a wank magnate.
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2023 12:57 pm
by Abernathy
The Express online these days seems to consist entirely of "stories" about what was on the telly last night:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment ... dcbcfb17ea
I mean, the John Bishop show is a load of old shite, but what it definitely
isn't is "too political".
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2023 2:05 pm
by Malcolm Armsteen
The only evidence for that claim being
However, some ITV viewers claimed to "switch off" the programme within minutes, with many complaining it was "too political" for them.
No citations, of course.
And what was the 'crime'?
"Every show I try to start by talking about the events of the week and last week, I tried to avoid talking about politics.
"Because the problem with talking about politics on television is that you've got to provide a bit of a balance, and it's difficult.
"It's got so bad that even little Rishi Sunak has been asked whether the job is too big for him.
Wow, JB quoted Keir Starmer and the snowflakes had to switch off...
Chinny reckon.
>edit<
All I could find was this:
a Tweet by some knobhead.
Re: Desmond's discharge (redux)
Posted: Sun Jan 29, 2023 3:12 pm
by Andy McDandy
Yes because everyone on the telly has a scrolling feed detailing all their political affiliations and opinions throughout their screentime.
I can't bear those flashing signs saying "Caution: her dad's a duke or something" whenever Kirstie Allsopp is on. Oh wait, no.