skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The following appeared on Twitter this evening, supposedly from a 'bit of wood' - aka an MP:
"Nick de Bois MP @nickdebois Leaving Downing St this PM I was stopped by stranger and asked if I would get repair to a hole in road bu cenotaph-fair enough,give it a go!"
Setting to one side the self-promotional - dare one say illusion, intimated even - that de Bois had been summoned to No 10 on 'matters of state'; setting to one side that not all of us are competent typists; setting to one side the constraints of Twitter where characters are concerned; it is not unreasonable that those who consider they are elected to govern us because of their superior intellect would know - and ensure- that the word 'centopaph' should be capitalised.
Would it be impertinent, therefore, to consider that I have 'sawn off' a bit of wood?
Just asking.............
Caroline Flint virtually bares all (steady male readers, I write in the metaphorical sense) in the Standard, during an 'interview' in which she provides details of her past, details which if we wanted to know we could quite easily ascertain from the internet.
Leaving to one side the 'PR' and 'Spin' aspects of the article, it is important to pay attention to the contradictions contained in what amounts to a 'puff piece' by one who is supposed to be a 'journalist'. The fact she has turned 50 is neither here nor there - and it would have helped if some indication had been given as to what the figure '50' referred. Presumably it did not refer to any aspect of her physical appearance - like the size of her mouth?
She states that energy companies should do something to simplify energy tariffs, yet were not said tariffs just as complicated during her time in government? Also the reason people are paying so much must surely be due the government, of which she was a member, adhering to diktats 'de Bruxelles'? She complains of being used as 'window dressing', yet presumably there was no coercion suffered by her when she posed for pictures such as these? Was not Flint also 'tolerating sexism' when she posed for those pictures? It is not surprising, knowing the standard of journalism currently practiced, that there is not one word on the points I have raised.
In agreeing to this article Flint can be accused of being hypocritical, just as the newspaper - and the journalist writing for that newspaper - can be accused of engaging in 'propaganda' for the promotion of a politician. That is not what journalism is supposed to be about, unless of course said journalist worked for the likes of OK Magazine, or similar publications.
I am fairly certain that were anyone to praise prostitutes and the use thereof, both Flint and Mensch would promptly mount (now there's a thought) their high horse and complain about sexualisation of women - yet is that not what both have done, Flint in this article and Mensch by posing for GQ magazine?
Oh the power of the press - used so expertly by both our government and our politicians!
