This entry was posted on
Tuesday, February 24th, 2009 at
10:55 am and is filed
under Old Media.
You may see a smug grimace after each correct answer, but I see a person who is peripherally aware of herself appearing in close-up on studio monitors after each correct answer and – consciously or unconsciously – trying to hide her teeth.
You want to see smug? *This* is smug:
The Sun – Universally challenged: But she came a cropper with questions on subjects like football, movies and the Brit Awards, getting NONE of our five correct.
Shame on Gail Trimble for not knowing about showbiz, sport and The Sun’s sensational scoops. It is right that we should hate her… unless she gets some horrible disease, of course.
OK, now it’s my turn to be smug. Join me in mocking any foolish and ignorant Americans who are surprised to see ‘House’ in the following clip:
/mock mock mock
Speaking of sticky buns covered with human beings the size of amoebas, take a peek at Teh Mail having a go at their own comment contributors (who they describe as “internet bloggers”):
Angry Mob – The Mail vs its own readers: At the bottom of this article the negative comments started arriving from Mail Online readers, nothing unusual here. However, Monday’s print edition of the Daily Mail run this story on the second page and included quotations from the ‘internet’ of people hating this girl… Now, where would the Mail possibly find some ‘internet bloggers’? From the Mail Online comments posted underneath the original Mail article of course! Although these people are not bloggers, and the comments are not even posted on a blog; but the Mail do not normally let facts get in the way of things (and always seem keen to attack bloggers).
Guardian – University Challenge star Gail Trimble adapts to public eye: University Challenge winner Gail Trimble was today getting used to being in the public eye, revealing that she had been approached by a lads’ mag to take part in a “tasteful photoshoot”.
Is that for the lads who think smart=sexy, or the lads who ‘hate’ her? If the latter, who wants to be first to submit ‘grudge-wank’ to Roger’s Profanisaurus?
UPDATE – Melanie Phillips is now having a go at the ‘bloggers’ that she claims are behind any/all vitriol. Meanwhile, the comments posted under the original article that might be used to prove that some of her examples of vitriol were in fact published by the Mail (after being cleared for publication by Mail staff)… have been deleted. Not just the ‘bad’ ones, but all of them. Every single one.
Let that sink in; everybody had their comments deleted, because the Mail doesn’t like to be wrong. Nobody can easily prove where Melanie Phillips might be having us on a bit, because the good people at the Mail have rewritten history (just like Jag Singh, Alex Hilton and their thin-skinned hypocrite mate Paul Staines did did a few days ago).
UPDATE – Ahahahahahaha! 20 minutes after I submitted the following comment to the Melanie Phillips article, comments were restored under the original article:
“For this she has been vilified across the blogs”
Which blogs specifically? I ask because you include as examples of the “bitter onslaught”, text that was published on the Daily Mail website as comments (i.e. not on a blog) after being cleared by your own moderators.
You have since removed *every* comment from under the relevant article but this, if anything, makes things worse, as you now appear to be erasing evidence without admission of error, while claiming that others are guilty of the same act your publication won’t admit to.
(Moderators, I have had unhappy experiences on this website involving some mods who abuse their position and the trust of readers by censoring comments that are – ahem – ‘inconvenient’. Lets not make this one of those times.)
I’m sure it was just a glitch.