Brighton tanning salon uses fingerprint scanners (From The Argus)

• "

  Brightonian in Germany wrote:
  

  Ashles wrote: Wow, so it appears the Argus have taken an OPTIONAL scheme that seems (within the bounds of the tanning industry) quite a responsible and sensible idea (place some limits around tanning) and attempted to put a quite negative spin on the story by not reporting the full facts. That's not just poor journalism, that could actually be damaging to the business concerned (regardless of whether one agrees with tanning shops or not).

  I have to say I see things far differently as you do. For one thing Newspapers are there to inform. It is personal judgement as to whether it is negative or not. Even if as you state (& the Shop before hand as well), it is optional; it is still killing a gnat with an Atom Bomb. One that could well blow up in their faces. If you are so well informed, (do you work there?) then you would know that when someone thinks they need to go underneath these Tanning machines more than is good for them, then they will find a way. England is the most observed society in Europe! To see something like fingerprinting being used to control the amount of tanning you do is in my opinion (even if optional) way over the top. Just one other thing that has to be repeated here. The sun studio firm bringing in this technology, has stated that the programm they use is completely safe. That is just plain stupidity to say something like that in this day & age of cyber crime. I would give the program they are using at the most 6 months & it will rendered useless because it has been hacked!! Incidently, what are the full facts? You seem to be in the know, then tell us. Put things right just do not write such things without writing something to back up your statement! Thank-you.

  "I have to say I see things far differently as you do. For one thing Newspapers are there to inform."
  Unfrotunately you have fallen at the first hurdle. It would be lovely if they were, but they are not. They are there to make money, to sell themselves and advertising space. They do this by taking stories and then writing it in a way to increase the emotional impact - usually (if it is the Daily Mail) to increase outrage in some way.
  
  "It is personal judgement as to whether it is negative or not."
  Well it's certainly the aim of an editor for the story to have as much emotional impact as possible. If a Daily Mail headline does not elicit anger, frustration, resentment or outrage from middle England then it really hasn't done it's job.
  Are you actually familiar with the Daily Mail?
  
  "Even if as you state (& the Shop before hand as well), it is optional; it is still killing a gnat with an Atom Bomb. One that could well blow up in their faces."
  I didn't at any point say it was a good idea, I was saying the story could have been presented in a more fair way: all the facts could have been explained (the fact it was an optional scheme).
  In the current light of how tanning shops are viewed it could even have been presented as a positive story - a tanning shop trying to be responsible (albeit in an over the top way). Normally local papers are more pro-loca business than national papers. But in this instance the Rgus simply rehashed the original Daily Mail story, including Daily Mail style.
  
  "If you are so well informed, (do you work there?)"
  Not sure what the relevence of this comment is. I have only been commenting on the facts as presented here and on the Tanning Shop's website."
• * Your name This field is mandatory
• * Your email This field is mandatory
• Reason

  Please note we will not accept reports with HTML tags or URLs in them.

• 
  Enter the above word in the box below
  
  

Please be fair, courteous and respectful to the views of others so we can build a vibrant community in a safe online environment. You are personal liable for your comments and action will be taken against anyone who offends, ridicules or posts malicious and damaging views. If you wish to complain, please contact us.