I probably shouldn’t be telling you this. But in a secret deal, sealed only yesterday, James Delingpole, from next month, will be job-swapping with Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott. I will be looking forward to reading Tony’s Telegraph blog, commenting on all sorts of things, while I carry out my own duties as James’ newly-appointed Minister for Liberty, Axes and Beer. The office of Governor-General will henceforth be abolished, a regal deity answering to no higher power, British or otherwise. I’ve lined up Jimmy’s surfboard, sunnies and stubbies, which will be waiting for him on the front porch of The Lodge when he arrives.
So would you all join with me in wishing James well in his new endeavours, (not merely the fictional ones), and may the Liberty to write whatever he damn well pleases follow in his train wherever he may go.
The Chief Editor of a large UK newspaper comments on JD leaving….
There has been a fast paced change of events at the DT since they appointed Jason Seiken, formerly employed at PBS and the Washington Post, so that gives an idea of what he has been exposed to in terms of ideology. The sacking of Tony Gallagher as editor, an individual who was relatively highly regarded and had actually seen some decent top-line figures compared to other media outlets during his tenure was pretty devastating to morale within the DT. Even though Benedict Brogan is still posting articles, he has been stripped of his role as Deputy Editor (http://order-order.com/2014/01/23/is-brogan-in-office-without-power/).
It has been amusing over the last couple of months how when any information related to these events was posted on JD’s blogs the comments vanished faster than any abusive troll comments ever would. lol.
Seiken was brought in on a record of “digital” enhancements for PBS, but as even acknowledged in a Graun article by Roy Greenslade, the problem is thus:
“We know, of course, that the future is digital. But it does not mean that the future is devoid of journalism. What will count, what does count, is journalistic input and output.”
(should be noted recently Greenslade has been trying to do some damage limitation on behalf of Seiken, obviously the Graun is pretty enamoured with the guy)
Seiken has also brought along with him his colleague (or “crony”, take your pick) from PBS, Jon Brendsel.
So basically there has been a big shake-up going on at the DT which has had a very large impact on staff morale as a whole, as reported in Private Eye (print version, I cannot quote in full, only fair use / fair dealing):
“”I have definite views about the direction we need to head” Seiken tells staff in an email, but omits to to say which direction that is. All he has vouchsafed so far is that the Telegraph
is already an iconic global media brand” and he is “working to make the Telegraph a fully integrated multimedia news organisation””
There has been reference to Damian Thompson in a comment noticed on JD’s blog. All I can say is that it has been known that he can be manipulated in any direction as long as carrots are dangled in front of him, so probably nothing that anyone doesn’t know already. That being said, I do not associate anything particularly sinister with Damian from what I know.
Should add that that this provides background to some of the upheaval that has been going on at the DT, but should no way be taken as explaining JD’s decision as I do not know his personal circumstances or calculus 😉
Hopefully we will hear where JD will be ending up in due course. Good to get this out here as the DT mods were very careful to ensure none of these events related to their shake up could be posted in their comment sections over the last few months.
So MRP we are talking this…..
I believe someone has espoused the theory on the DT that they need to silence the effective opposition in the UK and USA for upcoming elections this year and the next, the DT has been a very effective thorn in the Dems and the coalitions side for quite some time. Having a very left of center chief editor in chief and crony silencing the blogs accomplishes that while they take a Grauniadesque turn in the main paper.
Good choice Kitler, cookie monster would have only been half of the equation. lol.
MRP it’s why I got banned for the fourth or was it the fifth time apparently bringing up Sesame Street , which is now verboten although it might have been the words “muppet pimp” that did it, I knew the writing was on the wall when they turned on the keyword filter and left it on San Francisco “don’t say anything about gay people” mode instead of tweaking it for real English, when you can not say the word “fag” and mean cigarette and it’s a UK newspaper you know something is seriously wrong.
JD was so right about Sherlock Holmes and other programming on the BBC, as well as U.S. “networks” and Hollywood. Don’t consider myself anti-gay, just a firm believer of don’t ask don’t tell as opposed to overt kissing and other stuff that has to be thrust in front of us. Same with the phoney issue of gay marriage when “civil partnerships” worked just fine. Feels so free here on Oz’s blog, posted similar over on the DT and was rapidly removed just as with your stuff. lol.
MRP when you ask gay people what they really wanted and they were quite happy with civil partnerships as all they wanted were the legal rights that allowed them to inherit or have a say so over a sick partner etc. Very few wanted “marriage”. This is being pushed as a deeper darker more sinister agenda by our “betters”.
Yes, funny how it was pushed across several countries at the same time. It was largely a power play of international human rights courts over and above national sovereignty.
James asked me to keep it quiet until the weekend, but it appears the cat’s well and truly out of the bag now, so yes – he’s going to Breitbart.
Whoops, sorry Oz, posted before hitting refresh, didn’t notice your comment first.
Congrats to JD, and wishing him all the best in his new venture.
I reckon we can marshal all the Knights to welcome him to his new abode – Oz
In the U.S. we have Breitbart / Big Government, The Blaze, Hot Air, Daily Caller, CNSNews, Newsbusters, etc., etc. all doing exceedingly well. This should be seen as some ways as a follow up to the Huffington Post opening a UK site, even though the HuffPo is left wing and Breitbart is limited government orientated. A potential huge untapped market space, a great opportunity for JD, and richly deserved.
I have to see the Bert and Ernie video….
I love the fact that Bert has a unibrow.
Interesting, MRP’s comments about the DT and all.
And a very happy Valentine’s Day to all my readers ♥
Hope you all gave/received flowers and chocolates!
This is excellent news. Thanks for posting it Oz.
BTW – how well are the flowers and vegetation recovering after the wildfires?
You’d hardly know there’d been a fire, unless you knew where to look. Clues include the epicormal growth (that is, leaves sprouting directly from trunks and major limbs) on gum trees, plus a fair bit of still-blackened bark. Otherwise, the Peninsula’s exploding with green – Oz
I’d pretty much had it with the DT anyway as it was clear what was happening.
JD moving on just confirms it.
Yeah, it’s all over red rover at the Tele. I handed in my own resignation there yesterday. When they see what happens to their clickstream revenue in a week or so, they’ll be back on the blower to James for sure.
Odd response to me there from Bravo though about radios. I’ve been using two-ways as part of my job on and off for 30 years. Pretty much everyone says “over and out” to end a conversation, even the ex-army blokes I’ve worked with. The confusion surrounds the word “over”, which technically means “over to you”, but in my experience universally is taken to mean “what I have to say is over (finished)”. “Over and out” is known to add clarity to the end of a conversation, particularly when signal strength is poor or there is a lot of static, and even more so as many English sentences end, ambiguously, with the words “out” or “over” – now I think of it, the only people I recall who always said just “out” were Americans used to nothing less than five-by-five reception. Oh well, nit-pickers to their own.
That aside, I’m looking forward to reading James in his new home at Breitbart. Most articles there allow reader comments, plus they use Disqus as their software platform, so no need to re-register an identity – Oz
Andrew Breitbart also helped found the Huffpo.
Nice obit here from Tim Stanley, who knew Breitbart and, intriguingly, compares him to Hunter S. Thompson – Oz
As long as JD doesn’t eat any meals with lefties before trying to break a really big story he should be fine.
Kitler, I’ve noted that JD always at heart has had a desire to do the difficult in trying to get some lefties to see the light and also target the youth demographic, but it can indeed work both ways. lol. A good match with Breitbart’s vision. More need to be enlightened that it is not left/right anymore, but the masses against big government coupled with crony capitalism.
BTW as soon as James is established at Breitbart, all of us with our own blogs should update our blogrolls – Oz
MRP you obviously are not aware of the rumour he was poisoned at a very big lefties house, the coroner also mysteriously died a few weeks later.
Kitler, you are talking about Breitbart? Am aware of that stuff.
Yes it’s why JD should avoid contact with the scumbags while he is about to break a big embarrassing story, although Nick and Dave don’t strike me as that particular ruthless kind but they might scratch his eyes out, just as well TB isn’t in power then or JD doesn’t have a middle name like Jelly.
Speaking of former PM’s it is rumoured that one of them in the last say 50 years was convicted of cottaging and fined 50 pounds in his youth although he shall remain nameless. Came as surprise to me he leaned that way when he was younger. I say he because cottaging is a mans sport apparently whatever it involves.
Ah, got it;-)
btw, Michael Hastings dies in strange circumstances, he was working on something breaking at the time, even though he was a lefty working for Rolling Stone. Could well have been NSA related.
Yes a lot of people stop breathing these days under unusual circumstances, try 4 maybe 5 big banking/finance people the most unusual being suicide by nail gun took 8 attempts, now ask yourself if you are rich would you use a nail gun because after the first try you might think twice about your method.
i also believe Hastings car performed some remarkable acrobatics before he died.
Hello Oz (and everyone). Valentine’s Day: I always get roses and chocolates and a card. (Generally from the same man, heh heh.) This year I got beautiful red roses but no chocs because I’m slimming which means cutting back on everything delightful except for things such as eggs and watercress. (If you want to know my way of doing eggs, have a look at my website — the section called ‘Swanky kitchen’.) However, hubby brought home a Hershey’s Kiss (tiny pyramid-shaped choc in silver foil) because he’s Teach and he’s always getting presents. (Evidently, no one is concerned about bribery/conflicts of interest.) I ate the Kiss. It was on the whole pretty ghastly. Solid milk with mild choccy flavour thrown in, I’d say. And enough sugar to make an elephant hyperactive. It could be that I have exquisite good taste in the matter of confections. It could also be that even after one measly week of protein-veg-and-nearly-no-carbs, the contrast is particularly striking. Having said that, we also had pizza tonight. I loved it!
Off-topic: I think our society has a very serious problem. It’s a relationship and mind problem that is fed by the Internet like a drug. I steer clear of it, the way a Victorian stayed away from London in the summer before the sewers were built, but now and then my Internet travels bring me up against it. I’ve had my own heartache, but it’s not a meaningless heartache in the sense that the men I’ve loved have been worthy of it in one way or another. The failure of love, as well, makes sense to me: we are virtuous actors doing what we can within the constraints of our lives. No one — but no one — has cause for shame. This is absolutely crucial and young people now are at sea (I think: my husband teaches and talks to them every day so I have some connection there, though I’m not a mother). They have longings but there is no support for those longings because everything is reduced to ‘consent’. Consent, as I tried to say to this commenter, is only the very beginning. He treats it as the end. He may be shallow, in which case it won’t hurt him much. But deeper souls than his will be very hurt, indeed.
He said to me (I was elsewhere: I hate the subject):
“The vast majority of men watch porn. You do know this right? I’ve never met a woman who didn’t know this and I’ve never heard of a single woman saying “Oh god I thought that guy was so attractive but then I found out he watched porn.” .
On being gentlemanly, since the vast majority of men watch porn I guess very few of us are gentlemanly.
You’re question begging. You say “unvirtuous.” Why are they unvirtuous? Is it your view that the mere act of having sex on camera renders one unvirtuous? And if so why? Why does one suddenly become unvirtuous by doing that? I’m genuinely interested in your conservative point of view.
Why do you call this a ‘conservative’ point of view?
I don’t care that a great number of men do this or do anything. I seek the man that is fit to be the man for me. If I do not find him — if he does not exist — so be it. I do not accept substitutes.
Assuming that you are still reading, I’ll continue (you may not be). Sex is the intimate sharing of two people. Do you recall what ‘intimate’ means? Yes, it’s privately shared. It’s not for others. It cares not for others, and in fact is dimmed and curtailed or prevented by the gaze of others. This is common sense. Anyone in our civilization of the past one thousand years at least would understand this. It takes a barbarian of the impersonal Internet age to find this a strange new territory.
You watch other people, I guess, because you make them a fantasy. They’re not real for you. But women need to be real to their men. They can’t survive or thrive as mere fantasies of the men they love. People like you prefer fantasy to reality and that makes you a poor lover and an even worse partner in life.
He won’t care. But I know I speak for the gentle souls of this life.
Oh, and I forgot to mention the most important idea of all, and I had intended to say it because it’s the jewel in the crown: HONOUR. Love itself is a kind of honouring. This is what the one man got so wrong when he said it couldn’t be — he was married and I was married, too — when he said ‘I don’t know what your honour has got to do with it’. But honour has everything to do with it — and in this, never mind climate change or American politics — I was right and he was wrong. To love is to honour. Love is the highest honouring, the apotheosis of honouring. And I knew that in turning me aside (for this third wife, admittedly, and he was older than my dad, but all the same), I was honouring him more than he honoured me. Shame and honour can be perverted, and usually are, by extremist and irrational religious cults. No question about that, and against those cults I stand with Patrick Henry saying ‘give me liberty or give me death’. But shame and honour have also an important place within our Enlightenment, that once-in-the-world development that we are in great danger of losing. Like fear, shame can make us assess ourselves to our benefit. Like proper pride, honour can raise our sights higher and make us aim beyond putting bread in our bellies. Honour makes love to love, makes love come into being. I can’t help but feel that I am one of the last people of present generations to know this.
Well Amanda you asked for it…..
OK, a Valentine’s Day item from down here in Tasmania. Posted in the classified section of yesterday’s Launceston Examiner.
By a man with a death wish.
Love it!! The ad I mean, not Kitler’s video – although that WAS quite funny.
meltemian the song is from a musical called Avenue Q which is a sort of adult parody of Sesame Street.
Well just been over to
(edited by a moderator)
JD’s launch article
NYT article on Breitbart expansion (yes, NYT so a few lefty digs)
Breitbart overview on Breibart London launch:
I’m onto it. Thanks mate – Oz
Well Breitbart has the same keyword filter turned on that the DT had and everyone got really really ticked off about that as it killed free discussion in real English not Americanese. The list blocked all comments about gay people or rather cigarettes which was the topic I noticed they started blocking. This is going to pith a lot of people off very quickly. I suggest it gets altered for the UK site and quickly. Or they should publish the forbidden words and admit they censor from day one. I think the word “kenyan” is also blocked. Although weirdly the word “felch” isn’t blocked and you don’t wish to know what that is.
Yes my own first comment still hasn’t appeared, though really it’s my own fault for referencing James’ dog-@#$% yoghurt analogy that he mentioned in the article. Call it teething problems… I’ll try again soon – Oz
Well Ozboy I hate censorship although I did email you asking for the other comment to be deleted so that wasn’t censorship folks and thank you for removing it. Currently it’s all down to laziness at Breitbart and cost but I expect it will all get resolved eventually and certain words shall be unbanned, when you can’t use homo sapiens in a sentence then you know an idiot at Disqus was hyper sensitive.
Yes Kitler, Disqus has obviously provided sites with functionality to compensate for when they initially do not have in-house moderation resources to fully cope with potential traffic. Am seeing if we can get a list of words on the pre-mod list.
MRP none of us expect a blanket revoke of the whole list just the removal of certain words that in British English are used all the time and do not carry the same weight or offense as they do in the USA. You know it kills discussion dead and irritates people no end and they can just say bugg’rit and leave never to come back. The list after all was designed by lefties for lefties to enforce PC discussion standards on people.
Hmmm. A thorny issue mate. My gut is on your side – banned lists are simply a restriction of free speech, and an antithesis of what Breitbart is supposed to stand for. It’s pretty easy for an inebriated poster to be disgusting and obnoxious without using a single word on the standard banned list – man, don’t I know it! Social opprobrium and an online doorman are the answers here.
But… at the same time, I’m trying to put myself in James’ shoes (pretty painful, as I’m size 13). Is Breitbart UK a British site or an American one? James has only just set up shop for a new enterprise, and he’s responsible for the editorial content, not to mention (most probably) execution of the business plan. He’s got a million things to attend to. Much as moderation can be a pain in the arse (ass?) to us, we have to understand that, for him right now, it’s a fourth-order issue. I reckon we need to be patient, mind our Ps and Qs for the moment, and maybe in a few weeks we’ll chat to him about it.
Sound reasonable? Oz
I associate something sinister with Thompson. Do you remember his blogs during the last U.S. Presidential election? They were truly shameful. He first did an article on Mormonism being a cult religion. He then did several articles smearing Romney. For example, Romney spoke up about Benghazi a day or two after, after Obama had said it was a spontaneous demonstration that got out of hand, Romney said b.s., it was a terrorist attack, why wasn’t something done about security prior and why wasn’t help sent during the attack. The same things I was writing that day. (except I haven’t written about the better security part). The U.S. media, except Fox, slammed Romney for “politicizing a tragedy” and did not ask any questions of the Administration. Thompson was even worse in his attacks on Romney. His article about that and about anything else Romney did not resemble journalism, even bad, leftist journalism. They were literally hysterical screeds, always invoking Romney’s cult religion.
I don’t even think Thompson’s attacks were politically based. He probably agrees mostly with Romney politically. The religion thing made him literally crazy and his articles read crazy. I repeat; I don’t mean like the left trying to smear someone, but like someone possessed and frantic that the devil was coming.
Also, I don’t know whether he’s gay. I assume he is, but I’ve read things such as he’s gay but doesn’t practice. Also, he is a recovered alcoholic and/or druggie. That should give him insight into the issues of addiction and rehabilitation.But whatever he is and whatever his insights, his articles whenever he wrote about gay issues or any kind of addiction became very strange. There is something unspoken that is also driving his analysis on any of these subjects. Whether it’s sin and damnation and/or redemption or something else, I can’t tell. But there is something besides whatever he put on paper and all of these articles had a strangeness to them.
Why would someone buy the DT to take it to the left? The leftist media in neither Britain or the U.S. are doing well. If someone is going to read leftist in Britain, they already have the Guardian. The Guardian apparently can’t keep enough of a readership to be profitable. So why would anyone decide to make another Guardian? The audience not served in Britain, as far as I can tell, is up market right. Same in the U.S. There is no up market national print newspaper on the right. The Wall Street Journal doesn’t serve that purpose as it is focused mainly on financial reporting and much of its content is not of interest to the general public.
The last time I had any information about this, the online WSJ was the only U.S. profitable subscription newspaper. The New York Times was doing abysmally. I see 2013 articles from leftist sources saying the NYT is again profitable helped by “surges in its online subscriptions” but I can’t dig out whether the actual news operation is profitable or only whether it is losing less money and other parts of the NYT empire have been sold off to create profit.
Re your post on porn and sex being intimate. I think sex should be an intimate thing between two people, but
1) if it is only a hedonistic experience, given we are in an age where dignity doesn’t matter much to people, then it probably makes no difference if it is filmed or not or a group experience or not. Yes, this represents a huge decay in our moral fabric, but there is a huge decay in our moral fabric. Feminists are urging women to be free and have one-night stands and young women buy into this. Sex and the City, although gorgeously produced, was a disaster for young women. I don’t know how much of the population at this point ascribes to anything remotely resembling traditional values about relationships.
2) We are in an age of unparalleled narcissism. Putting one’s sex on film is such another aspect of everything else narcissistic. If Dave and Barry and the Danish p.m. babe didn’t feel ridiculous taking that “selfie” at Mandela’s funeral, well, then anything goes. (Michelle did not think that was so cool. For the only time since I have known of her existence, I thought she was absolutely right.)
How can young people not be at sea. Every tradition and institution which used to garner respect has been trashed by the left. Religion, whatever else it may be, good or bad, provided a moral structure. That’s been trashed. Society is no non-judgmental. Any behavior goes. Without anything to respect and nothing to give a moral structure or any kind of standards, how can young people not be at sea?
Something’s cropped up and I may be away for a day or two. Do talk among yourselves till I get back.
Hi Msher: Agree. What can I add? Yes indeedly doodly, as the geeky Simpsons character once said : )
I understand Ozboy’s take-it-easy attitude to the fledgling Breitbart situation, and it makes sense to me. On the other hand, I know exactly what Crown means when he says that he wants to use British English — a version of the language that 1) was first, like the eldest child; and 2) is a version that relies very heavily on idiom. Americans use idioms too, but nothing like the way Brits do. What they use instead is American variations or substitutions for British words. Not the same thing. I am intimately acquainted with this subject because I wrote a book on it (called Langopology, which will probably never be published and more’s the pity, since I spent years on it and there’s nothing quite like it on the planet). Brits use idiom to convey subtle colour and meaning that a straightforward ‘translation’ — like turning English into Esperanto — could never do. And speaking as we normally speak, ‘in idiom’, is a huge part of free speech, to my mind.
I understand Ozboy’s take-it-easy attitude to the fledgling Breitbart situation, and it makes sense to me. On the other hand, I know exactly what Crown means when he says that he wants to use British English — a version of the language that 1) was first, like the eldest child; and 2) relies very heavily on idiom. Americans use idioms too, but nothing like the way Brits do. What they use instead is American variations or substitutions for British words. Not the same thing. I am intimately acquainted with this subject because I wrote a book on it (called Langopology, which will probably never be published and more’s the pity, since I spent years on it and there’s nothing quite like it on the planet). Brits use idiom to convey subtle colour and meaning that a straightforward ‘translation’ — like turning English into Esperanto — could never do. And speaking as we normally speak, ‘in idiom’, is a huge part of free speech, to my mind.
Responded to Crown and Oz about moderation at Breitbart but can’t get around the tripwires of Ozboy’s moderation! So who knows, if Oz is away, when it will appear. I’ll post this on Breitbart in the meantime.
GBS said that whenever an englishman opens his mouth he offends another. Mainly because the various idioms that are in use are social or class signifiers. So the working class can tell if someone is posh and the industrial worker can tell if the other worker is agricultural or blue/white collar….
But even when the words are simple and the same in the US and UK the meaning can be very different. This is a nice list/summary of some of those differences.-
As for the JD emigrating to Breibart….
One day I’ll tell you all about South African academics trained in America… Russians trained in France… or Indians trained in Canada. Urggggghhhh – Oz 😡
Sorry about the doubling up: maybe Oz’ll remove one/both. It’s probably a non-issue, anyway.
Izen: Yes I know about the differences: I wrote a book, remember?! But I found a lot of similarities, too — in fact a survey that only speaks of differences is missing half the picture. The weird thing is that even similar-but-not-the-same idioms seem never to cross the pond but stay isolated. More interesting to me than the ‘they say/we say’ (which by itself is pretty boring) is the cultural clues embedded in our choice of language. That’s why my work is called ‘Langopology’ (yes, I invented the word). I’m the only person, to my knowledge, to systematically investigate that. I really ought to dig it out, read it over, slim it down, and send it out.
Just out of idle curiosity, I looked at James’ last DT thread. Still several hundred comments posted over the past 24 hours.
The good don’t die young, Oz… they die hard 🙂
And then there is the love of my life. Some Speccie writer wrote about a cocker spaniel. I mean, I ask you. They’re all right as far as it goes — along with basset hounds and bichon frisees (my mum had one: all sensibility and no brains: but then it had mum as Chief Person so I ought to pass judgement). But the Boxer is the zenith of dogdom, in my experience. I’m not alone in this: anyone that knows Boxers well prefers them to all other dogs. They convert people. My mother-in-law had a German shorthaired pointer and after that, a Vizsla (or Hungarian pointer, back in the days when they weren’t bred to be scrawny). But now she watches dog shows in the hope of seeing the Boxers. She watches the Working Group, hoping for the Boxer to win (even though, unfortunately, American showboaters still deform the dogs’ ears by cutting them). She doesn’t ask how *I* am; she asks after the other female in the household. I have complete strangers come up to me all the time wanting to befriend my dog, telling me how lovely she is — and wanting to show me pictures of their own Boxer on their phone.
Boxers will never be Most Popular Dog, don’t worry. You have to be reasonably bright to appreciate one, and to give it a good home. Labradors by contrast have been bred to death because they’re Joe Dumb Vanilla’s idea of a general dog.
So then, before I retreat to the world of dreams and a soft furry face near mine, my answer to M. Kite on the Speccie:
You should have got a Boxer, they are the best dogs. (Yes, run-on sentence there: we don’t care.) Firstly, mornings in bed with me however long are almost her favourite part of the day. Silk, pillows, Florida breezes, and we answer only to ourselves: that is bliss. And then, my girl’s job in life is to be the best challenge possible to Man that Man is best. And to search for tortoises in the Florida scrub. She is an expert. But when she finds one, she just looks. Even though she has a gorgeous bark which, in all its subtle variations, makes my heart sing. I shall be inconsolable when she is no longer with us.
OT but too funny not to post (H/T Andrew Bolt).
Gillard’s former Communications Minister, Senator Stephen Conroy, appeared at a Senate Estimates hearing the other day to rail against border patrols Chief Lieutenant-General Angus Campbell, apparently for his success in “stopping the boats” of Indonesian people smugglers. Comparing Campbell with Jack Nicholsen’s Colonel Jessup from A Few Good Men, Conroy suggested that Campbell’s silence on his operational methods was because he felt the Australian public “couldn’t handle the truth”.
Bad move. Really bad. After being flayed by several of Campbell’s colleagues in the military, as well as by Duntroon classmate Andrew Wilkie (who you may recall I profiled back here), yesterday it was the turn of Conroy’s replacement as Communications Minister, silver-tongued barrister Malcolm Turnbull, who suggested Conroy’s outburst bore a much closer comparison to Marlon Brando’s Colonel Kurtz in Apocolypse Now. Had the whole House in stitches.
Well as I expect to get moderated yet again before this is seen, however in answer to your question ” Is Breitbart UK a British site or an American one?” Either way I should be allowed to use the word “fag” in it’s correct English English context. In the USA I am protected by the First Amendment and in the UK it’s not an offensive word as it means cigarette. After much testing by various people it has been shown that Disqus itself not Breitbart who are merely lazy gatekeepers allows much offensive language except against one specific group, This is an issue which disturbs me because if you protect one special interest group then it slowly creeps out to include them all and 1984 becomes a reality, which to quote South Park is “really gay”.
As for JD I am not blaming him for anything and the new site has been great so far but I hate having to self censor as it just wants to make me swear,
Just seen your comment about Damian Thompson above. Your observation about his blogs on Romney is one that I can concur with, and furthermore I had an observation that early in the campaign when Romney was far behind*, prior to the first debate, that’s when Damian mocked him, and then as the election came closer and closer Damian suddenly switched to being more favourable to Romney as the polls closed. As mentioned above, I don’t necessarily see Damian as directly sinister, but he appears to be a bit of a chameleon, a reflection of Cameron in some ways, he just twists in the wind with latest events, going with the flow rather than having consistent views of his own. Indeed, at times he can just be a propaganda mouthpiece for Cameron directly, see this article where there is borderline distasteful use of Cameron’s son’s death possibly to try to gain sympathy for political traction, not least as the death was back in 2009.
Regarding the DT as a whole, again it all has to be framed within the construct of the *Tory*graph. One may see the DT as moving to the left, but then again that is just a reflection of the Tory party under Cameron. As with Damian, it is essentially a servant of the Tory party establishment. One thing to factor into the larger picture is that the Daily Mail is also a Tory party sympathetic paper and is doing pretty well in terms of overall influence in the U.K. right now, perhaps making things uncomfortable for the DT in terms of relevance and market space, hence looping back to why the DT may have felt the recent changes were required, although the changes they chose may end up very wrong and counterproductive.
* Why was Romney far behind? Largely bad campaign organisation where the Obama campaign engaged in an unanswered ad blitz to define Romney before Romney could define Romney to the nation. Yes, there were timeline restrictions on when funds raised during his Primary could be put forwards to the main campaign because of the timing of when his nomination would be official, but this was largely due to a lack of imagination, the campaign found out too late that they could work around this issue through a loan that was easily collateralised with all the money sitting in a warchest.