4 ms·

> Shock horror: name of famous person who became one of most notorious criminals in history receives more Google searches than any specific search string relate

> Shock horror: name of famous person who became one of most notorious criminals in history receives more Google searches than any specific search string related to the city a group of not-independently-famous people committed similar crimes in. 'became one of most notorious criminals in history' - ignoring that notoriety is the result of media attention, given his number of victims, I suppose it was deserved. Lets look at Stuart Hall then - he also became one of the most notorious criminals in history: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=GB&q=stuart%20hall,%2Fm%2F0q3y8tf,rotherham%20abuse,rotherham%20rape,rotherham%20sexual https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=GB&q=s... (yes, the spike in interest coincides with his arrest) And it 'only' took him ~21 victims, 60 times fewer than just one of the organized rape gangs! > equivalent search strings like "rotherham abuse" and "jimmy savile abuse" Are they equivalent? Put in 'Rotherham', and you get mostly constant noise, indicating general news about the city overshadows news about the scandal itself. Put in 'jimmy savile' or 'stuart hall', and you get obvious peaks when the scandals hit the news, and mostly no activity otherwise. Peaks higher than the difference between the average interest in Rotherham, and the increase around the time of the scandal. > There's only one entity that's wilfully distorting reality here in order to pursue a racial agenda, and that's you. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploitation_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploit... : "Because most of the perpetrators were of Pakistani heritage, several council staff described themselves as being nervous about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others, the report noted, "remembered clear direction from their managers" not to make such identification."

notahacker 9y ago
Put "Rotherham" into Google News around the time of the Panorama programmes or the trials or the investigation and you got wall-to-wall coverage of the Rotherham sex abuse scandal, via the British mainstream media. So no, people searching for it didn't need to append additional terms. Put Rotherham into Google Trends and you get an enormous spike around the time the report into the Rotherham abuse was released. The claim that it's "constant noise" is a lie, period as is your ridiculous earlier attempt to suggest the news coverage was more to do with the lower tier football team. Rotherham might have been spread out over a longer period and thus less easily isolated from other news coverage but it made a lot more front pages than Stuart Hall and saw a a lot more articles over a much longer period. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham I mean, do you honestly believe you're going to convince people that news editors "suppressed" this story (or indeed, downplayed the ethnicity of the perpetrators)... https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=rotherham+abuse+scandal+newspapers&safe=off&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj0up7n_b3TAhUNOsAKHSXgAmoQ_AUIBygC&biw=1057&bih=537 https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=rotherham+abuse+scandal+ne... Of all the intellectually dishonest arguments I've seen in favour of people's racial prejudices, I've yet to come across anything dumber than your continued insistence that news media you evidently don't read of a country you've probably never visited "suppressed" stuff that was splashed all over its front pages and the subject of multiple television specials, despite all the British people correcting you on this.
- DarkKomunalec 9y ago
  They didn't suppress it, they just didn't make as big of a media circus out of it as of other stories. > https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham Good job omitting comparison from that link. Why don't we add it back in, shall we? https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham,jimmy%20savile,stuart%20hall https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham,... https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=rotherham,jimmy%20savile,stuart%20hall https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=rotherham,jimmy%2... The spikes for Savile and Hall are both bigger (above the background noise) than for Rotherham. I also applaud you for ignoring the bit of my post on how council staff literally suppressed information to not be racist. Of course media manipulation doesn't end there - lets compare the Holocaust to the Holodomor: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=holocaust,holodomor https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=holocaus... Both deliberate genocides of a majority upon an ethnic minority, both murdering a comparable amount of people, yet the Holodomor is practically ignored. But I'm sure you'll find some reason Ukrainian lives are less worth remembering than Jewish lives.
  - notahacker 9y ago
    > They didn't suppress it, they just didn't make as big of a media circus out of it as of other stories. Except for it being on the front pages for days, unlike the vast majority of paedophiles who weren't celebrities in their own right (and Stuart Hall, for that matter). I know there were a number of failings related to council staff being overly conscious of accusations of racism (not to mention the actual far-right groups targeting the town), I read it in the wall to wall media coverage you deny exists. But yeah, you keep trying to tell me how stuff's reported on channels I watch and in media I read from deliberate misinterpretation of Google fucking trends. Obviously that wasn't a stupid enough position for you to argue so you're now pretending that media narratives around the Holocaust versus the Holodomor[1] are driven by Jewish conspiracies rather than because a World War against a glamorous symbol-of-evil leader that ended in the liberation of death camps understandably would get more attention than poorly-understood atrocities committed within the Soviet Union even without the former's geopolitical consequences, a large diaspora and dedicated remembrance organizations based in English-speaking Western countries. Of course, the genocide of the Congoese by the Belgians gets even less attention, but that won't fit your media manipulation highlights oppression of selected minorities by Caucasians and suppresses the reverse bullshit narrative Fuck off to back to Stormfront you pathetic little troll. [1]a word which, incidentally, wasn't even used to refer to the events until decades later and didn't make Ukranian dictionaries until this century

notahacker 9y ago

Put "Rotherham" into Google News around the time of the Panorama programmes or the trials or the investigation and you got wall-to-wall coverage of the Rotherham sex abuse scandal, via the British mainstream media. So no, people searching for it didn't need to append additional terms. Put Rotherham into Google Trends and you get an enormous spike around the time the report into the Rotherham abuse was released. The claim that it's "constant noise" is a lie, period as is your ridiculous earlier attempt to suggest the news coverage was more to do with the lower tier football team. Rotherham might have been spread out over a longer period and thus less easily isolated from other news coverage but it made a lot more front pages than Stuart Hall and saw a a lot more articles over a much longer period. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham I mean, do you honestly believe you're going to convince people that news editors "suppressed" this story (or indeed, downplayed the ethnicity of the perpetrators)... https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=rotherham+abuse+scandal+newspapers&safe=off&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj0up7n_b3TAhUNOsAKHSXgAmoQ_AUIBygC&biw=1057&bih=537 https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=rotherham+abuse+scandal+ne... Of all the intellectually dishonest arguments I've seen in favour of people's racial prejudices, I've yet to come across anything dumber than your continued insistence that news media you evidently don't read of a country you've probably never visited "suppressed" stuff that was splashed all over its front pages and the subject of multiple television specials, despite all the British people correcting you on this.

DarkKomunalec 9y ago
They didn't suppress it, they just didn't make as big of a media circus out of it as of other stories. > https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham Good job omitting comparison from that link. Why don't we add it back in, shall we? https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham,jimmy%20savile,stuart%20hall https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=rotherham,... https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=rotherham,jimmy%20savile,stuart%20hall https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=rotherham,jimmy%2... The spikes for Savile and Hall are both bigger (above the background noise) than for Rotherham. I also applaud you for ignoring the bit of my post on how council staff literally suppressed information to not be racist. Of course media manipulation doesn't end there - lets compare the Holocaust to the Holodomor: https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=holocaust,holodomor https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=holocaus... Both deliberate genocides of a majority upon an ethnic minority, both murdering a comparable amount of people, yet the Holodomor is practically ignored. But I'm sure you'll find some reason Ukrainian lives are less worth remembering than Jewish lives.
- notahacker 9y ago
  > They didn't suppress it, they just didn't make as big of a media circus out of it as of other stories. Except for it being on the front pages for days, unlike the vast majority of paedophiles who weren't celebrities in their own right (and Stuart Hall, for that matter). I know there were a number of failings related to council staff being overly conscious of accusations of racism (not to mention the actual far-right groups targeting the town), I read it in the wall to wall media coverage you deny exists. But yeah, you keep trying to tell me how stuff's reported on channels I watch and in media I read from deliberate misinterpretation of Google fucking trends. Obviously that wasn't a stupid enough position for you to argue so you're now pretending that media narratives around the Holocaust versus the Holodomor[1] are driven by Jewish conspiracies rather than because a World War against a glamorous symbol-of-evil leader that ended in the liberation of death camps understandably would get more attention than poorly-understood atrocities committed within the Soviet Union even without the former's geopolitical consequences, a large diaspora and dedicated remembrance organizations based in English-speaking Western countries. Of course, the genocide of the Congoese by the Belgians gets even less attention, but that won't fit your media manipulation highlights oppression of selected minorities by Caucasians and suppresses the reverse bullshit narrative Fuck off to back to Stormfront you pathetic little troll. [1]a word which, incidentally, wasn't even used to refer to the events until decades later and didn't make Ukranian dictionaries until this century