« Home | Quote of the year and weekend links. » | Aren't we just great? » | 16 years from now... (warning: in very, very bad t... » | Scum-watch: Europe and Hamza, sitting in a tree.. » | The "smoking gun" Iraqi memo and Con Coughlin. » | Daily Star journalists in not making it up shocker... » | Book review: Snuff by Chuck Palahniuk. » | Right motives, wrong targets. » | Weekend links. » | Justice at last for Barry George, but still none f... » 

Monday, August 11, 2008 

Neverending Maddie-balls.

*No, of course it fucking isn't. Not even we're that stupid. The only reason we're printing this is that an otherwise completely ordinary little blonde girl, of which we all know there are only a handful out of 6 billion inhabitants of this planet, just happens to be walking along with a woman wearing a hijab, or a headscarf, meaning she must be a Muslim, meaning she can't possibly be white, meaning there just shouldn't be a little white blonde girl with her. It's the same reason why we printed those photographs of a little blonde girl in Morocco, because there just simply shouldn't be white blonde girls in Morocco, even though she didn't look anything like Madeleine when seen close up. We just never fucking learn, do we? Why are people still buying this crap? How did I end up working on the Scum when I wanted to follow in the footsteps of Bernstein and Woodward? Why don't I just shoot myself in the fucking head?

Away from the thoughts of the average Sun journalist, reaction to my rather poor satire on how tabloid coverage of Madeleine might look in 16 years' time has been predictably polarised:

You wrote the article because you fantasise about having sex with children, you need help quickly and lets hope it's not too late before you hurt some innocent little child

Labels: , , , , ,

Share |

What are the odds against this going the same way as the Standard's effort from September 26th last year, and just as fast?

Early edition: http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1591218.jpg

Late edition: http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1591376.jpg

I have just heard on the grapevine that NASA are to launch a moon landing after reports from aliens that Madeleine has been sighted on the moon...

I'v just had surf around that forum you linked to and what a very strange place it is. I wonder whether these people so obsessed with the case are a result of the media coverage or the media coverage is just in response to their existence? Either way the failure of many of them to grasp the basic concept of satire or to grasp what the point of the original peice was is quite chilling.

The Mirror forum at the time of the McCanns getting Arguido status was like a McCarthyite meeting. So many people with theories about where the body was.....what the police were saying.....then the polar opposites saying God will find her etc. They would spend hours on it at a time judging by the comments.
I think the original post hit the target judging by the comment referred to here!

What a ridiculous and pathetic over-reaction to your satirical article.

The double standard of the love/hate relationship reactionary types have with children always amazes me: on the one hand, cause moderate harm to a child and you're worse than a murderer and should be exterminated (that is, if the harm is of the type that allows for a sordid story); at the same time, the same people support boot camps, caning, and 'mosquito' devices (with the potential to cause extreme mental distress) for children only slightly older. The same people probably also support cutting off benefits to poor families even though it might be the only thing keeping the children from starvation and living on the street.

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link