Woss’s Weturn

OK, time for another cheap shot at the Daily Mail…I haven’t slagged them off properly for a while.

New row for BBC as Jonathan Ross returns to plum role of  Baftas host two weeks after suspension ends

The BBC was last night embroiled in a fresh row over Jonathan Ross after it emerged he will host the prestigious Orange British Academy Film Awards (Baftas) on BBC1 – just two weeks after returning to work from suspension.

The controversial presenter has been handed back the plum role presenting Britain’s answer to the Oscars despite public and political outrage over his lewd phone calls to actor Andrew Sachs.

This story is so typical of the kneejerk reaction that passes for news and comment in this piece of tabloid shit.

The floppy-haired scamp’s suspension was for 12 weeks, so keep him off the air for any longer and it’s not a 12 week suspension, it’s more than 12 weeks.

So, now we have to explain simple maths to the fuckwitted rag…

What’s the BBC supposed to do?

Suspend him for 12 weeks but just ignore him for a further month on the off chance he won’t notice?

And it’s not as if he’s been given a new job – Ross has done the BAFTAs gig before.

So, what would the Mail like to happen to Ross?

Maybe come back to work and find a picture of a penis scrawled on his office door?

A drawing pin left on his chair?

How about allowing him back on our screens but only every other week at 2am on BBC 4 presenting a program about llama rearing?

Of course, like the moralising heap of excrement that it is, the Mail would like Ross to vanish from the airwaves altogether – but he’s too popular.

Thank fuck…

Oh, and Dacre hasn’t got a gong – but Ross has…har-de-har…

More bad taste from the Mail

In the normal run of things most parents die before their children – which is sad enough but as it should be – but it must be truly heartbreaking when the reverse happens.

It’s just wrong and against the natural order of things.

When children do die, it invokes feelings of sadness, sympathy and pity in those not directly involved – and rightly so.

It often becomes news and, whilst it’s usually chiefly of concern to the child’s parents, relatives and friends, it’s often worthy of it for all sorts of reasons.

So, when the Mail first reported about this story fair enough.

But why was it necessary to run this story today?

First picture of twin boy of five who drowned on his birthday holiday to Disneyland Paris

First picture?

Why does there need to be some sort of ‘scoop’ involved?

Most of us can imagine what a 5 year old boy looks like and his death isn’t made any better or worse because we can be the first to see him when he was alive.

Who does this help apart from one or two ghoulish people who want to see what someone who died so young looked like when they were alive?

I mean, it’s not like he’s been abducted and so a photo might help find him – it’s just totally unnecessary.

Sure, print his photo so we know what he looks like, but don’t turn it into some sort of exercise in oneupmanship.

Sometimes I just don’t understand what goes on in Dacre’s shabby little empire…