Can Americans please stop referring to England. It is the United Kingdom of Great Britain, i.e. UK. Since 1707, so it is older than the USA.

Why is Europe so fascist?

An actual ASSAULT.

Earlier I saw a CSO stop a group of teenagers on bikes because some other teenagers on bikes had buggered off without paying from the Indian restaurant. He had a go at them for cycling on the pavement (Which they weren’t doing) and told them not to cycle in such a large group. What he didn’t do was give them any of the paperwork he should have given them when he stopped them.

These people become CSOs because they can’t be arsed or are unable to pass the tests required to become an actual copper but they like power. Imagine what the CSO’s response would have been if he had actually been asked for the “stop” paperwork from one of the teenagers. It would probably not have been a reasonable “Oh, right, mate. We are supposed to do that, aren’t we?” The story can be explained by a CSO loving his power too much.

Besides, nothing wrong with teenagers in hoodies. I am a teenager, and I wear a hoodie. They are comfortable, and when there is surprise rain (This is the UK) you can feel smugly superior.

Why? It doesn’t censor them, it merely doesn’t give them the attention they desire. BB doesn’t link neo-Nazi studies about Jewish world dominance, maybe it should give them some exposure too? Just to be fair.

Just because I’d defend to the death the Mail’s right to publish/say what it wants, doesn’t mean I actually have to read or look at its drivel.

However, if one of the kids called the police I suspect it was a little more than ‘taking photographs’

A more important question would by why did a CSO attend or why do they even exist instead of proper Police Constables.

We could avoid the whole issue by just calling it Airstrip One.

Seriously, though, the first thing I thought of was A Clockwork Orange – specifically, when Alex and his droogs beat the old man with absolutely no fear of legal repercussion.

Eng–I mean, the UK, has really crossed the line into becoming a total surveillance state. It is okay for the government to watch people, but not okay for individuals to protect themselves with photographs or video. And the police and courts seem far more concerned with protecting the rights of criminals than their victims.

It’s like a surreal mix of far right-wing and far left-wing paranoia made real.

It comes down to the two choices a society can make. Either “What is not expressly forbidden is permitted.” or “What is not expressly permitted is forbidden.”

That’s not the point. The point is Mark not censoring his info sources. If a neo-Nazi discovered something really interesting, I imagine that Mark would still report it, with a juicy gobbet of snark aimed at the source. Regular BB readers must accept that some amount of posts will turn out to be bogus. And even if they are, they still might be entertaining stories.

doesn’t mean I actually have to read or look at its drivel.

What’s sauce for The Mail is also sauce for BoingBoing.

yay! Got it in one!

The CSO clearly got it wrong. We don’t know what the situation was like – probably not very nice – perhaps the CSO was trying to calm in down, and in the heat of the moment said the wrong thing. It happens.

Over the last six years I have lived in deepest Hackney, Tower Hamlets (UK’s most deprived LA), and now in south London near to where the French students where burnt to death.

I have not had problems, and seen very few in six years.

Suppose I could move to the USA: my daughter could be married at 13 and my son arrested and beaten for simply being gay.

+1

I agree with your point regarding things that are genuinely interesting/factual, which is why I said ‘with the exception of things like celebrity/tech news’ in my original point.

However, this is the second post (that I can remember off the top of my head) linking a story that from the off, regardless of which paper it was published in, smacks of embellishment and poor journalism. The fact that it’s in the Mail makes this case even stronger.

The other story BB linked the Mail in was the secondary school ‘drunken orgy’, which turned out to be a few kids drinking in a park and some couples making out.

As someone else has pointed out, the PCSO did not say that photographing the kids was assault, the kids did. This is an example of the Mail stretching the story to fit its anti-’hoodies’ and ‘political correctness gone mad’ (which can apply to nearly anything apparently) agendas.

“The paper’s website, Mail Online, overtook Telegraph.co.uk and guardian.co.uk in May to become the UK’s most popular newspaper website with 18.7 million users. But it took Dacre a while to wake up to the wonders of the web, famously telling staff in 1999: “A lot of people say that the internet is the future for newspapers. Well, I say to that: bullshit.com.”"

I’m not suggesting this story isn’t worth linking to, just that it’s something to bear in mind. The Daily Mail’s success is built on a continual diet of hysteria, outrage and moral panic, much of it directed against young people and internet/gaming culture. It appeals to readers such as this person who commented on the DM’s own page about this story:

“Well done that LABOUR government, the law abiding in this country will be loving you. One wonders if there is anything one can do without having to feel the weight of the law.
What is badly needed here is an ultra right wing administration to reverse this Political Correct slide into decay, which has been imported by the ultra left wing faction in Brussels.”