Arrogant Herald

“Local newspapers seem to think they can do what they like. Yes they should ban comments that are personally abusive, those that are homphopic along with those people who make them. However they do think they have the right to ban freedom of speech which to me is totally out of order.
Up in Leicestershire, the Leicester Mercury banned all comments regarding the disappearance of Madeline McCann. I think the reason was due to some rather sick comments but the vast majority of people I believe either wanted to support the family or in most cases offer what I would call constructive criticism. But no, the Leicester Mercury took it upon itself to ban everyone from commenting.
The local media has falling readership, the quality on offer is generally very poor. They need to up their game and quickly to stop more of them becoming weekly.”

“The Herald has a long story of nepotism and corruption. In their language, 'The Voice of Plymouth' translates as 'and anyone who disagrees with us can shut their mouth'. It's very easy to spot when The Herald their run their games, either the yearly same news stories, or a spelling mistake which looks accidental yet is often deliberate in order to spur doubt in the mind to be used in a group session of coercion and negative nagging. Over the last five years I have placed many adverts in counter.”

“I think that Kevin Roche is correct in the respect that the Herald is wrong to regard itself as the "Voice of Plymouth".

My main bone of contention is that the news media should be independent of politics and political parties - I believe that the Herald has sometimes in the past not only been content to report parties' policies, but also seemed to be endorsing those policies.

In recent years there has been too much of a Common Purpose between those bodies that have imposed their policies on an electorate who have not been consulted, an electorate that at times were totally ignored.

Some of those bodies, Regional Assemblies and other agencies, were unelected and unaccountable.

It should be the job of a good newspaper to question this sort of thing, unfortunately the Herald didn't do this - they became part of it.”

“Totally agree with Nevman, 7.36. Plymouth is getting an incinerator to take the waste of most of the South Hams up to Torquay. All that open space but they would not have it forced on them would they? Even the people of Buckfastleigh have stopped the ash residue being dumped on them, so it looks like St. Budeaux/Camel's Head will probably get that as well.

As for the airport - it is true that we did not use it much but relatives coming to visit certainly did.

I've lived in Plymouth all my life and whether Lab or Tory Council they are both as useless as each other - promises, promises...until we get in power.”

“Kevin... (to borrow a phrase!) 'In my view' I quite often find that having cake and not being able to eat it kind of negates the point of cake!”

“About the only part of Kevins post I agree with is the first line the Herald is indeed arrogant and wrong to call itself the voice of Plymouth - it is not, it censors peoples comments, does not allow comment at all on matters it considers inappropriate, so you are correct in that Statement 100%. If the Herald was truly a voice of Plymouth it would not censor peoples opinions or comments, even if they are controversial and allow others to respond to them as they see fit. It would appear that the Herald has more censorship going on than the average 1970`s Russian newspaper all in the name of freedom of speech.
What the Herald seems to forget is that people do have radical views, not everyone agrees with todays policies or descisions, some people have views that go against what we are told MUST be th norm these days, denying such people the right to be published is not representing the people, it is in fact denying the average person the cahnce to engage such radical thinkers and challenge their way of thinking thus provoking debate and promoting understanding between people with differnet views and opinions.
So long as the Herald continues to censor free speech no matter how unpalateable it might be it cannot and should not be allowed to proclaim itself as `The Voice of Plymouth` it is not, no more than I am.”

“Isn't it just, blogtodi!”

“someones got to be the voice of Plymouth because the people certainly don't have one, voting in Tudor Evans with such a low turn out at the polls is hardly a ringing endoresement of him or his cronies who spout nonsense just like his predecessors”

“I don't mind the Herald being 'The voice of Plymouth' but I think they are censoring comments that aren't necessarily PC, and that is wrong. I keep saying it; people are entitled to be offended and people are allowed to be offensive, as long as they don't resort to bad language or threats. A differing view, whether we like it or not, is still a view.”

“Wow, Nevman! That's a lot of negative votes there. So early too.”