Murdoch may stop Page 3

Not that I care about the Sun, but he shouldn't just pull it because of some campaigners who can't understand the concept of empowerment. But judging from the timing I think he might be wanting to move it in a different direction, not because of political pressure.

Not that I care about the Sun, but he shouldn't just pull it because of some campaigners who can't understand the concept of empowerment. But judging from the timing I think he might be wanting to move it in a different direction, not because of political pressure.

You loved John Prescott's response? You really ought to go and see someone about that...

"Empowerment" and Page 3? You live on which planet exactly?

It might be some other things too, but it definitely is an extra way for people to choose to earn money just because they're women.

A corrupt industry offers money to young women with few alternatives to pose naked in a so-called "family newspaper" and you regard their desperation being sufficient to want to do that as "empowerment". Yeah, right.

Without it they'd be desperate and poor. With it they've at least got some money, should they choose to.

This is some kind of free market thing for you is it? I'm not convinced that a free market that means young women have to debase themselves to earn some cash is a good thing. Especially when they are mainly working-class young women being consumed as commodities by News Corp, which makes millions a year out of the pittance it pays them.

It's completely optional for them, if they don't want to then they don't have to do it. The option not being there helps no one but hurts those who would have gone for it.

It looks optional to you. It doesn't to many of them.

It looks optional to you. It doesn't to many of them.

Why do you think they are desperate? I've read interviews and many have degrees and had previous jobs which they gave up to go into modelling. Far from being something they are forced into because they are desperate, it seems many young women are actually choosing to go into it over the many other options they have available.

Do you think the money might have anything to do with it?

Apart from the brainwashing effect of the blizzard of pornification directed at teenage girls, no self-respecting woman would freely choose to do this. It is the result of profit-seeking in News Corp that serves a certain group of men.

There's nothing wrong with page 3.

It's wrong because it gives millions of people an incorrect view of what is normal, decent and acceptable in society. Placing it in the most popular newspaper (the two are connected - the Sun has a heavy preponderance of male readers) legitimises porn. Page Three is like the softening-up bombardment before the heavy duty porn corps goes into battle.

At the Leveson enquiry, when the campaign group Object tried to raise it as evidence, Lord Leveson could not permit it to be displayed on screen, as the legal advisers decided it constituted pornography and could infringe the license for the parliament channel and other broadcasters who were covering the event.