While I expect certain red-top ‘newspapers’ to pander to the seemingly unquenchable thirst for all things ‘celeb’, I do become irked (rather rapidly) when it permeates into the (supposedly) more refined media outlets.
That a former cabinet minister had breached Parliamentary Standards and Security Legislation allegedly, by leaving protectively marked papers in view of a person/persons not entitled to consume the contents, is now news (perhaps). That the ‘civilian’ in question, a former topless model, is most definitely not.
What on earth does the BBC (et al) believe is added to the story, by the clarification of the former occupation, of a former partner, for crying out loud?! Are we to believe the fact that she used to show off her top assets for cash is pertinent?
Would the story be magnified in any way, shape, or form, had his plumber seen them? I’m talking about the papers, by the way, not the breasts. I have no reason to believe he had seen her breasts…or perhaps he might have, if he acquired the right newspaper. Anyway, I digress…
Why, oh why, in the name of all things holy, does anyone consider for a millisecond that we should care about a story, that might be a story, even though we cannot tell you….? I am of course, referring to the recent news of the ‘super injunction’. By the time this rant is scheduled for publication, we may already know who the celebrity is but, for the meantime, we do not and we should instead be considering the merits and legal validity of super injunctions per se.
A man (or woman…yes, thank you, Reg) has allegedly been unfaithful to his (or her…okay, Reg) spouse by engaging in a threesome with a couple, whom we cannot identify, IS NOT NEWS! It is reminiscent of the farcical gathering of the Peoples’ Front of Judea (or was it The Judean Peoples’ Front?) of Monty Python infamy. It is about as attention-getting as ‘Boy gets paper round in Skegness’, or ‘Teenager falls out with best friend’. ‘Mr Anonymous engaging in unspecified sex acts with unidentified couple’ is the wet dream of spotty virgins and, surely-to-God, should not be discussed by the Radio 4 newsreader ahead of the impeachment hearings of a Head of State!
I dearly hope that we are not becoming as vacuous, as the media considers us to be, and I for one look forward to returning to a natural state of having ‘news’ where we expect it, and ‘lads, mags and fags’ repositioned on the correct height of shelving.