James Robertson Justice biography

[john audley]

I was just about to refer to the article in today's paper - the usual 'dwell on the dark side' journalism that newspapers seem to like (totally mis-judging their readers in my view and the reason sales are falling?)
The DM is fast becoming The Sun - without the eledged humour

[Windthrop]

Sadly I came across the article when I was following a story. It only helps to convince me that sticking with the BBC for news items is the best idea. Facts are worth their weight in solid gold and comment is so very cheap indeed. A rather pathetic attempt at character assassination, trying to pass off comment as fact through journalistic slight-of-hand.

[Moor Larkin]

Originally Posted by Windthrop It only helps to convince me that sticking with the BBC for news items is the best idea. Facts are worth their weight in solid gold and comment is so very cheap indeed. A rather pathetic attempt at character assassination trying to pass off comment as fact through journalistic slight-of-hand.

Hmm. Maybe we should be equally relieved that Mr. JRJ seems to have escaped the BBC and their 'Curse of Comedy'. Newspapers are generally thrown away the same day, video-tapes lurk on the shelf forever.

[Steve Crook]

Originally Posted by hoggers Absolute complete and utter s***e. To say I'm furious would be a gargantuan understatement.

"When you sup with the devil, use a long spoon"

Another wise old saying is "Never trust the press. Not what they tell you they'll write, nor what they do write."

Steve

[stevie boy]

Originally Posted by hoggers Absolute complete and utter s***e. To say I'm furious would be a gargantuan understatement. The Mail approached us a while ago about running a serialization or précis from the book and we eventually got round to signing a contract. The literary editor there said that they would email the piece over prior to publication for me to check for inaccuracies etc. This obviously wasn't done and they've decided to publish. Tomahawk will be checking the contract over the weekend but we'll certainly be taking legal advice. I've also called as many of James friends as possible to apologise. The leading comments are absolutely disgraceful. Gutter journalism is too kinder description for this kind of muck. Anyone who has read the book will hopefully realise that I have tried to put down nothing more than a celebratory account of an extraordinary life. NOT some kind of tabloid "expose" about someone who isn't around the defend themselves. If you haven't bought a copy of todays Daily Mail then PLEASE don't on account of reading this. It honestly isn't worth it. Hoggers

Hoggers, a labour of love and a great deal of your time getting this book out, reading the comments on here, you can be proud of your efforts, it is such a shame that someone who may be interested in your book might decide not too purchase because of this bloody paper. All the negative comments about the Mail is justified. Do not lose heart mate, keep writing

[Wee Sonny MacGregor]

I take a slightly different view. I reckon it will put your sales up. How many of those collecting the daily DVD will buy? It may be a pile of tabloid rubbish and I'm sure James's friends will understand that, but it's great publicity for the book. It will have brought its existence to a much wider public. Had I not already been aware of it, I would certainly gone out and bought it.

[julian_craster]

I think that when authors and publishers get into bed with the DAILY MAIL they know exactly what they are doing. Scandal (whether exaggerated or not !) sells books.....

Theats of legal action against the paper, and telephone apologies to those interviewed for the book are somewhat hypocritical to say the least.....

Exactly the same scenario happened over John Colsdstream's excellent Dirk Bogarde biography, but nothing came of it......

[Steve Crook]

Originally Posted by julian_craster I think that when authors and publishers get into bed with the DAILY MAIL they know exactly what they are doing. Scandal (whether exaggerated or not !) sells books..... Theats of legal action against the paper, and telephone apologies to those interviewed for the book are somewhat hypocritical to say the least..... Exactly the same scenario happened over John Colsdstream's excellent Dirk Bogarde biography, but nothing came of it......

It's not always true that people know exactly what they are letting themselves in for. Many people, even people who read these pages, don't realise how shameless the Mail is, how much they are willing to distort things.

Because they so often distort the facts, all British newspapers expect to be sued regularly and they have an army of lawyers on staff ready to send all sorts of threatening letters back in response to the initial complaint. The newspapers just put this down as a justifiable expense!

It is possible to take British newspapers to court, and win. The McCann's did it recently. But it's hugely expensive

Steve

[hoggers]

Originally Posted by julian_craster I think that when authors and publishers get into bed with the DAILY MAIL they know exactly what they are doing. Scandal (whether exaggerated or not !) sells books..... Theats of legal action against the paper, and telephone apologies to those interviewed for the book are somewhat hypocritical to say the least..... Exactly the same scenario happened over John Colsdstream's excellent Dirk Bogarde biography, but nothing came of it......

How can it be hypocritical of me when the paper signed a contract promising a fair represention of the book? This article is NOT a fair representation of either the book or JRJ. Therefore i have every right to take legal action, and will.

[hoggers]

Originally Posted by stevie boy Hoggers, a labour of love and a great deal of your time getting this book out, reading the comments on here, you can be proud of your efforts, it is such a shame that someone who may be interested in your book might decide not too purchase because of this bloody paper. All the negative comments about the Mail is justified. Do not lose heart mate, keep writing

Cheers Stevie, very much appreciated!

[Davoo]

Anybody read the two page article in The Daily Mail this weekend about JRJ, it was all very negative, is there any truth in it?

[Moor Larkin]

Originally Posted by Davoo Anybody read the two page article in The Daily Mail this weekend about JRJ, it was all very negative, is there any truth in it?

I read it and it wasn't *all very negative* at all. The header was ludicrously so, but the article was fine. Yes there were things that some of us might prefer not to know, but that is the nature of personal, rather than career biography. I'm assuming the facts were factual because they came from a book that has been explained on this forum prior to publication.

[hoggers]

Originally Posted by Moor Larkin I read it and it wasn't *all very negative* at all. The header was ludicrously so, but the article was fine. Yes there were things that some of us might prefer not to know, but that is the nature of personal, rather than career biography. I'm assuming the facts were factual because they came from a book that has been explained on this forum prior to publication.

Not everything in the article came from the book. There are a few bits that are (as far as I know) total fabrication.

Unfortunately, certain people (present company excluded ML) assume that if you deal with the Daily Mail you're automatically of the same ilk: IE, you're in it PURELY for the money, have no standards and therefore fore-go any right complain about mistreatment. Fortunately though, these kind of bitter old cynics are few and far between.