There are exceptions but...
Here's another reminder why people who end up in top jobs do so because they want these jobs far more than the people who would do them best. I could understand why David Cameron* would get annoyed by this, but to get so worked up about this is remarkable.
Relations between the Labour-supporting paper and the Tory leader have sunk to an all-time low following a fiery meeting between Cameron and its editor Richard Wallace last week... He used it to complain about the Mirror's coverage, comparing it to that endured by former Labour leader Neil Kinnock at the hands of the Sun, claiming: 'You're treating me worse than the Sun treated Kinnock in the 1980s.'
After reading the accounts both parties have given, to compare it with a row in a girls' boarding school would be an insult to a girls' boarding school.*
David is upset because a Labour supporting rag (with a core readership of working or, increasingly, lower middle class readers won't stop taking pot shots at him)
Richard is upset because Cameron didn't do enough pandering to his ego and, this article implies, was annoyed when the leader of the opposition went to vote in Parliament rather than waste more time snivelling and grovelling at him.
I suspect you'll already be asking what on earth possessed two grown-ups in important jobs to spin themselves into a position which makes them both look so utterly pathetic, if you care at all, so instead let me imagine a far more satisfying encounter between a newspaper editor and a senior politician. Given what we now know about Tony Blair's filthy mouth, and given that Paul Dacre's morning conferences are amusingly nick-named 'the vagina monologues', one likes to imagine a meeting between the two of them. It would, surely, touch the pure, dialectic heights of Derek and Clive.
* Note to non-British readers. David Cameron is the British equivalent of Daniel O'Donnell. Whilst his jumper-wearing, cake-eating persona is popular with elderly ladies, the younger, more edgy crowd treat him with scorn. Some experts claim he is quite harmless, whilst others believe that the vacuous amiability which is his main selling point helps remove the possibility of meaningful, serious matters becoming properly established within the nation's common cultural intercourse.
* Not that I know what goes on in such places. Some things are better left to the imagination.
Relations between the Labour-supporting paper and the Tory leader have sunk to an all-time low following a fiery meeting between Cameron and its editor Richard Wallace last week... He used it to complain about the Mirror's coverage, comparing it to that endured by former Labour leader Neil Kinnock at the hands of the Sun, claiming: 'You're treating me worse than the Sun treated Kinnock in the 1980s.'
After reading the accounts both parties have given, to compare it with a row in a girls' boarding school would be an insult to a girls' boarding school.*
David is upset because a Labour supporting rag (with a core readership of working or, increasingly, lower middle class readers won't stop taking pot shots at him)
Richard is upset because Cameron didn't do enough pandering to his ego and, this article implies, was annoyed when the leader of the opposition went to vote in Parliament rather than waste more time snivelling and grovelling at him.
I suspect you'll already be asking what on earth possessed two grown-ups in important jobs to spin themselves into a position which makes them both look so utterly pathetic, if you care at all, so instead let me imagine a far more satisfying encounter between a newspaper editor and a senior politician. Given what we now know about Tony Blair's filthy mouth, and given that Paul Dacre's morning conferences are amusingly nick-named 'the vagina monologues', one likes to imagine a meeting between the two of them. It would, surely, touch the pure, dialectic heights of Derek and Clive.
* Note to non-British readers. David Cameron is the British equivalent of Daniel O'Donnell. Whilst his jumper-wearing, cake-eating persona is popular with elderly ladies, the younger, more edgy crowd treat him with scorn. Some experts claim he is quite harmless, whilst others believe that the vacuous amiability which is his main selling point helps remove the possibility of meaningful, serious matters becoming properly established within the nation's common cultural intercourse.
* Not that I know what goes on in such places. Some things are better left to the imagination.
Labels: quality journalism, stuff
posted by buff and blue at 2:34 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home