Metro article, Thursday May 27, Page 6
Let’s put aside for a second that an article was written based entirely off a Facebook group with a few thousand members (actually I found four of them, the largest with more than 145,000 members), what’s interesting here is the photo that accompanies it (spotted by a commenter in the previous post). It’s not a photo of Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka, but rather one of actors Misha Collins and Laura Prepon portraying Bernardo and Homolka in the 2006 film Karla:
Misha Collins and Laura Prepon try their best to be creepy in Karla
From this I can draw only two conclusions:
1. These actors resemble their subjects much more than I think they do;
2. Editors at Metro are so young they have no idea what Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo look like
The real Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka (right?)
Enough Karla. She was one bad dudette. But we should condemn the prosecution for falling for her story. I wish Paul a long happy life with Bubba. Karla beat the system; that’s the bad part.We paid fpr her education? In the end she was smartest. Why do we keep reminding her to apply for a pardon? Anyone want her back in Canada?
This “newspaper” and the other piece of trash that is given out in the subways are just garbage. The cars are filled with these pieces of shit, the stairs have pages flying around from the wind, and people who pick them up to read are just general assholes for dropping them on the floor. So they have a target market of assholes, and they are filling the void with vapid, moronic sentences. How do you expect them to fill up pages of crap, but with more crap. I won’t be surprised if they write a story about your blog writing about the story they wrote. There is value in paying for stuff. Professionalism.
I’m sorry man, but why would a newspaper be trash BECAUSE people leave it everywhere instead of putting them in a recycle bin (or even a trash can?)
The only reason it is like that is because people get them for free, and since they don’t have a particular bound with it, they don’t care carrying it around once they finished reading it. When people buy the newspaper (Gazette, JdM, La Presse, Devoir), they will keep it and bring it because they had to give money for it, even if it is only a mere 1$.
If I remember correctly, before Metro arrived, cars were still filled with other paid newspapers. Things ares way better now than they used to be, considering the metro disposable bins are often filled with used newspapers.
If you want to discuss the content, discuss the content, not the fact that some people don’t dispose of them properly.
Oh, and by the way, have you ever written a “moronic sentence” that was read by a couple of hundred thousands persons? Have you ever written something more complete than reusing words like “assholes, trash, garbage” in a single flaming four lines paragraph?
I have to correct myself. I was a subscriber to newspapers and I did keep them to read later on during the day, and no it wasn’t because of the buck it cost me. It was because of the interesting articles and the thought provoking editorials. Which, in my humble opinion, or no longer relevant, since The Gazette, for example is part of a terrible corporation, which is thankfully a sinking ship, and hopefully will be saved by others who care about readers. Anyway back to paying for papers. There is definitely a value for paying for the professionalism, but I must admit relevance is also important. I pick up the Mirror every week, a free paper, and also bring it home to take my time to read it, because it is interesting. The two subway rags are made for short attention spans, and their purpose in life is to be thrown out immediately. I bet if the STM system had a better in car news-bite service riders would glue their eyes to that screen for the duration of the ride and get as much relevant information as the paper edition. But at least there would not be any trash to walk over. Copy and paste journalism has created this expendable medium. Sure the printing presses are kept humming but for how long? And no in the past I did not see that many papers carelessly thrown out in the subways.
very odd photo to choose in general. a simple google image search reveals much less flattering and innocuous photos of the two scumbags. could it be that they didn’t have the rights to any other photo and had to rely on a publicity photo they previously had in their archives?
[quote]Life imitates art[/quote]
In more ways then one. I find this story is a consequence of shows like Law & Order and CSI. People are so used to the fact that there’s always some legal or forensic magic trick to put criminals away on those shows they can’t accept that sometimes, some actually beat the system… And I’ve always been against the constant tracking of that woman by the media as if they were her parole officer. Yes, to put it mildly, she’s a bad person but seriously, other then keeping interest in this story to sell copies, I never understood the point to that.
While it may be off the subject slightly, I’d like to disagree with Karine. On of the strengths of the Law and Order series is that the bad guys do end up winning on a fairly regular basis. Certainly enough to give the shows some degree of credibility. And if I never hear about the Bernardos again it will be too soon!
I don’t understand! If they are too young to recognize Karla Homolka, they should be at least old enough to recognize Laura Prepon…
You would think that if the editors at Metro are too young to know what Paul and Karla look like, they might at least be old enough to know what the actress from That 70s Show, Laura Prepon, looks like.
Maybe they’re too young to understand how old-fashioned archives work. Or the paper’s too young to have old-fashioned archives.
It is quite disturbing to see those kind of petitions.
Those show a marked misunderstanding at how the Justice system works.
Karla have had to carry out a criminal sentence doled-out by the justice system, and she did carry it out.
She has paid her debt to Society and that’s it and that’s all.
That people would sign petitions is a blatant interference into the judicial process, and violates the principle of a lawful state (? — I mean État de Droit).
They didn’t even need archives. A simple Google/Yahoo search would have yielded piles of real pictures. By the way, I wouldn’t jump on the prosecution at the time for “falling for her story”. Giving her the deal they did in exchange for her testimony was ludicrous (thank you Marion Boyd/Bob Rae/NDP). It was police investigators and their half-ass job whereby they did not locate the infamous videotapes (which were merely hidden above a ceiling panel) that caused any kind of deal in the first place.