The Sun: News or Tits?

Posted on August 4, 2011

0


The Sun

The best for News, Sport, Showbiz, Celebrities“, is Britain’s best-selling newspaper.

The question is: Why?

The red-top is the crown jewel of Rupert Murdoch’s empire. In 2011, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations,  The Sun sold 3,001,822 copies. The closest competitors were the Daily Mail, 2,136,568 and the Daily Mirror, 1,194,097. The Sun outsold other papers “by a country mile”.

Is it the news content or the soft-core pornography on page 3 that won the nations heart?

Since 1970, page 3 has been ruthlessly harassing the libido of blue-collar workers. Why learn about the world and its wonders when you could “scratch that itch”. The latest scoop was replaced by the largest boob (doesn’t even rhyme, I know), and (mostly) the nation couldn’t be happier.

Things were bound to change when the paper employed its first female editor in 2003. Problem is, Rebekah Brooks is the female in question. She was married to Ross Kemp, that was before she was arrested for assaulting HIM. it comes as little surprise that Ross preferred infiltrating and interviewing dangerous gangs, it was safer than staying at home with his wife.

I find it odd almost surreal, what type of self-respecting editor (never mind first female editor) would want to cover their “quality” newspaper in tits.

Hands up, I like tits, no scratch that. I love them. For me they personify perfection, I could write an Iliad declaring my love of bosoms but I won’t, that would be both crude and predictable. I also like good news. In fact I love good news, just as much as breasts.

Dear Rupert Murdoch,  could you please ensure my love of tits and news remains… separate?

I can compartmentalise my news-gathering needs and my primal desires, they do not need to be sated simultaneously.

With breasts readily available on the front portion of 50% of the world’s population, with breasts boldly swinging from every crevice of the web, with bosoms bombarding my eyes, brain, and crotch all day, every day, does the Sun really need to be smother my mind with perfect (no doubt air-brushed) bosoms every time I open their paper?

I do not need boobs and news at the same time!

Now the Neanderthal’s opinion enters the fray:

“John my good man, news in brief gives womankind a platform to express their views on high-profile stories, would you deny them that liberty you monster?”

The Neanderthal whilst verbose, suffers from crippling ignorance.

Take a little gander at Chloe’s opinion on government growth and more importantly. STICK WITH ME, this is going somewhere.

Obviously Chloe is quite the intellect, I reckon she has a passion for taking her top off for seedy papers however she could be a lawyer if she truly wanted to be. Naturally she is more enlightened than other news in briefs models… or is she?

Then again, Peta also seems to be seriously well-informed. Perhaps I was wrong to think that glamour models were dim. Just victims of a terrible stereotype. They can’t all be ingenious though… Or can they?

Danni is quoting Karl Marx here.

She also appears to be a brain box, are their any stupid page 3 models?

Upon further investigation I stumbled upon a dark truth. Page 3 girls are all…
Super-beings.

The models are the most beautiful, intelligent, sentient beings to have ever graced the earth, the next generation of Gods. Athene and Artemis have returned.

This may be due to Murdoch’s gene experimentation in his evil fortress laboratory, as he intends to genetically engineer the greatest models with the most intense views and largest bosoms. Or Jordan (Katie Price) may have encouraged spirited, intellectual females into the glamour model industry with her flair and charm and entrepreneurial skills.

OR

And I stress, this is highly unlikely… The Sun simply pretends the models have deeply philosophical musings. The editor’s view is inserted into the news in briefs bubble.

Chloe, Peta and Danni may are only mouth pieces. Beautiful mouth pieces. I wouldn’t be surprised if several Sun readers were under the impression page 3 girls were columnists for the Guardian.

These birds ir pure smart, ken like.”

The juxtaposition of the degraded female and the ever insightful analysis of current affairs often coaxed a chuckle from me. But it is unethical for the third page of Britain’s best-selling newspaper to openly exploit females (and arguably mock her with the captions).

Children read the paper (it has the average reading age of a child anyway). They see these images. They think it is normal. They say to themselves, if a well-known publication like the Sun can exploit women. We can too?

As I have said, I love breasts but I am a relatively competent human being. Rupert Murdoch I can find breasts on my own accord, as can most people. Get rid of page 3, remove it from your paper.

YOU BETTER OBLIGE MURDOCH, THIS IS YOUR BIGGEST PROBLEM

[The next day, upon opening the Sun I realised the paper is now numbered. Page 1, page 2, page 5, page 6.
So public beware, if you remove page 3:

YOU ALSO LOSE PAGE 4

Advertisements
Posted in: Murdoch, Opinion, Satire