Scumbag British Gutter Press

[chuckwoww]

Reebok is a champion of human rights of course

So was this story justified?

A lot of people think not. I think it was? But do you? There was a certain amount of muckraking involved.

 

Oh definitely. That's my kind of story. I love to see hypocritical pricks like that dragged out into the daylight.

 

I don't have any problems with what you do and I don't blame you for making a nice little niche for yourself. But you are bound to make some people angry and you have to accept the dangers that go along with it. I guess you have a thick skin. Also I think there must be a temptation to exagerrate the sleaze factor to titillate readers.

 

One thing I have noticed over the years is that all the 'exposing' of Thailand's sex industry hasn't stopped er...certain kinds of people from coming. On the contrary.

 

[buffalo_bill]

Mr Grouse ,

 

surely you will receive a lot of sympathy for outing Reebok managers as whoremongers , in particular as you make it look as a suitable revenge for exploiting asian shoemakers , targeting on trash individuals interested in reading exactly that .

 

What it does show nicely is the concept of primitivity that sells the papers you seem to be writing for . What is the value of letting the world know that Reebok managers fuck prostitutes , just lowest level of " journalism " it is to me .

 

BuBi

[stanlaurel]

You are right to question this. It really is a very thin line.

(...)

The factories were fine. State of the art in fact.

 

Right :smirk:

 

They laughed and then told me about Reebokâ??s impending party.

(...)

Some of the girls earned a lot more in a night than the factory girls did in a month.

 

You're a champion of putting things into perspective, huh? Do you really think the fashionable "win-win" conclusion of your "example" shows any red line?

 

Andrew...it seems you need a position. Or are you really just a reporter?

If so, beware of the adjective.

 

[Famous Grouse]

Well I think there is a line here. I am definitely on one side of it. But as you can see from the writer above, there are strong views on either side.

If all of these Reebok executives went to, say, that £1 million dinner in Bangkok a few months ago it would still make copy.

Also if they did not do this as Reebok, but individually, and did not dress the girls in Reebok sashes there would not have been a story

 

[shygye]

...

I rang Reebok. Can I visit your factories? No!

I rang the factories. Can I visit? Yes.

The factories were fine. State of the art in fact. I wrote my piece. The strongest line was the usual one. i.e. factory girls earn less than £100 a month, production costs are about £3 a shoe. Most of Reebokâ??s costs were on its US salaries and marketing etc.

...

 

This is why you are a hack and not a journalist! You throw out the £100 salary WITHOUT context. The context being that lunch costs 30 pence AND this salary is DOUBLE what most laborers earn. But then you would have NO story if you told the whole truth.

 

As for a bunch of escorts/models making more in one day than low level factory workers do in a month, I'm sure that would never happen in the UK.

 

How is this for a story line,

 

Infamous Reporter Parties in Thailand BJ Bar while children beg in the street.

[bibblies]

There are very few places in Thailand where foreigners go that I have not been and that includes bars like this.

I followed a guy called Storey, who was wanted for murder in Scotland into one of these bars.

I have already denied the suggestion. However I am sure you can see the impracticality of trying to follow somebody while a bargirl is attached to your private parts.

Indeed sir, I do. But the problem arises - what does one do if one wants to fit in? One does not want to "stick out like a sore thumb". (Well, actually, in a way one does. That's the point. )

 

I suggest the best solution in such situations is to choose the midget. With a midget, one can stand up and move around, even zip up and follow one's quarry out of the bar quickly with midget still concealed under one's trousers if need be. And therefore continue one's honourable undercover mission. (While she continues hers.)

 

[Famous Grouse]

Actually I have just checked the original copy.

The salary was 4,500 baht a month inc O/T.

The article was commissioned as a feature not as a news story. Pretty much the same as a labourer.

If there was an interesting fact there it was the size of mark up from factory floor to shop.

journalist? hack? I have no problem with that.

 

[cavanami]

Famous Grouse,

 

Please make it by Gulliver's (in Bangkok) this Friday at 6:30 PM for a bit of a chat.

 

I think you would enjoy the folks that show up there and they would get a different take on you!

[bibblies]

He does a lot of pieces for the BBC and The Times. The BBC especially, as noted by others in this thread, is only interested in pieces that go along with its cosy liberal prejudices. Anti-globalisation, anti-business, anti-capitalist, etc. It's pretty much The Guardian of the airwaves.

 

"Exploitation" of Asian workers, despite the fact that workers are better treated than if the international companies weren't there and that's the way people work themselves up in the real poor world, is taken as red. BBC libs lap that up. No other interpretation is seriously entertained or attempted. (Sadly hardly any of them know or care anything about economics. Business/Economics on the BBC? A joke. )

 

Possibly Grousie does these pieces because he feels the same way or maybe he doesn't but knows that it would be a lot more difficult to sell any other angle to a BBC buyer.

 

The only good thing about him doing such a piece is that it means rich expats will be less likely to empty out whole bars before I get there.

 

(Mind you, I don't care if it's just a Patpong bar. They're mostly a bunch of hooonds! )

[chuckwoww]

Eagerly awaiting a response to bibblies anti-BBC points.

 

Are you still there Carew? I think I might have one of those digestives if the offer still stands.