Media 'slander' or 'support' for drugies

Carring on from the Maddy thread, I think we all have to take into account that the media is very fickle and will do what ever it deems necessary to sell more papers/air time etc. I would be surprise if the media turn on the McCanns in the near future.

But the thing that gets to me is the disparity between how drug users are treated in the media.
SUPOSIDLY drugies are the bain of the world (which I dont agree with but thats a different topic) so why does the media suport Amy Whinehouse and say that its sad and she needs to get treatment and all that. Even Lilly Allen lends her suport to the star.
Then we have Pete Docherty who is a great example of a long term user in the media spot light, and while he isnt suported by the media they certainly arnt jumping down his mouth!
So these two 'stars' are high on illegal drugs in public (which I do have a problem with) yet there are little or no repercussion for them. wtf????

On the other hand we have (I for get his name) that East 17 member who had his whole carrer destroyed by commenting that he thought 'E's were safe to use. (they are actually one of the safer class A drugs) Then got trapped by a reporter when we was appoligising for that statement! At least he tried to make right his mistake.
He wasnt rampaging through the streets high as a kite or stumbling out of his house with blood on his feet from injecting between his toes.
He wasnt pulling out of gigs coz he was too high and his body couldnt take it, swearing at fans who have paid to watch him perform.

While im not condoning claiming they are safe to use, the punishment should fit the crime, and in a country where we suposidly have freedom of speech he is surly entitled to his oppinion?

It is a sad and cynical world we live in these days, and for what ever reason Amy Whinehouse fits the bill for needing 'help' and that East 17 guy needed to be crusified!

This is just a rant really about the crapness of the media and the willingness of the 'blind' members of our society to adopt the medias views without making their own informed desissions.

*sorry about the spelling*

The goverment highlights two famous cases for the banning of weed.
1. 17yr old smoked it 'regularly', went out 'wanting to stab a black woman' and did.
2. 15 yr old had smoked it in his past, and knifed someone to death.

Both were attributed to marjuana, regardless of the alcohol in their system and psychosis.

The support for it causing schizophrenia was a study of 14 people in Russia, in a schizophrenic hospital where 8 of them had smoked it in their past. But of course this allowed the media to jump on and whinge. It's like saying it causes people to have legs as everyone who smoked it has them.

However I don't think it would do a lot of good if everything was available all of the time, but no worse than it is now - and allowing people to exercise some freedom. Alcohol is the biatch!

Were E17 on the decline when he got crusified? I can't remember, but I suspect so. It's alot easier to attack people when they're not popular, and since Amy Winehouse is popular at the moment, that's probably why she's not getting it in the neck from the press.

agreed, why should celebs get away with blatently taking the P out of the law. Both Winehouse and that waste of space Dockerty should be banged up. There is enough evidence for possesin of class A's

Originally Posted by neio79

Both Winehouse and that waste of space Dockerty should be banged up.

Winehouse is young, misguided and talented. Docherty is none of these.

He has had more chances to reform his ways than most people deserve and wasted them all.

There's still hope for Winehouse and I hope she sorts herself out rather than waste her life. It is too late for Docherty and I have no sympathy because he's taken other people down with him.

Just my view

Originally Posted by Jabba

Winehouse is young, misguided and talented. Docherty is none of these.

that maybe the case but she is still blatently breaking the law and making a mockery of it in the public eye, so she should be punnished like others. Why should she get away with it??

That's the media all over though isn't it... Build somebody up, support them, then when it suits them, they'll be the first ones trying to knock them down...

Sorry, I don't have any time for repeat drug offenders. Lot's of many differing people fall into drugs habits, but many see the error of their ways, seek help and are "cured". Repeat offending is just negligence, and should be treated as such

To err once is a mistake, to do it again is abuse.

It's illegal, don't do it.

.

Originally Posted by neio79

that maybe the case but she is still blatently breaking the law and making a mockery of it in the public eye, so she should be punnished like others. Why should she get away with it??

To be fair, she's not hurting anyone else but herself. It's not like she's funding her habit through crime.

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

To be fair, she's not hurting anyone else but herself. It's not like she's funding her habit through crime.

true yes but so do other normal drug users but they get banged up and they dont do it in full view of everyone. So again what makes her so special??

Originally Posted by Flamin_Squirrel

To be fair, she's not hurting anyone else but herself. It's not like she's funding her habit through crime.

Does that meen its ok for the wealthy to break the law?