Showing posts with label Independent. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Independent. Show all posts

Sunday, 14 February 2016

The Independent: Paper Free

Fagburn was saddened to hear of the imminent closure of The Independent and The Independent On Sunday's print editions.

My thoughts are with the journalists facing redundancy - though surely this can't affect many people. as much of the paper seemed to have been written by silly posh interns.

We feel sure that the Indy's flamboyant bachelor Russian zillionaire proprietor, Evgeny 'Two Beards' Lebedev, knows what is best.

Monday, 20 October 2014

Thursday, 12 December 2013

Chris Bryant: So Farewell Then...


Chris Bryant signs off from his Independent column.
Quite a decent chap I've always thought...

Update: I have been informed Chris Bryant is "a right-wing anti-immigration reactionary bastard - and that's just the view in the Labour Party."
I stand corrected!
Lest we forget, Chris is also an expenses-diddling war-supporting ex-Tory and ex-curate.
He was quite good to me once, though, all things considered.

Saturday, 19 January 2013

The Hollywood Closet: The Silence of La-La Land

Gay British actor Rupert Everett was recently on the BBC's Hard Talk warning that young male actors who were ambitious should not come out if they wanted to play leading roles.
When Rock Hudson died from an Aids-related illness in 1985, commentators bemoaned the intolerance of the old studio system that had compelled him to remain in the closet.
"Forty years ago, the world was a very different place and there were virtually no publicly available gay men or lesbians in any walk of public life," notes Brian Robinson, senior programmer at London Lesbian and Gay Film Festival, of the period in which Hudson was working. "Now, lots of things have changed. A whole generation has grown up with an idea of normalcy about gay identity."
Even so, Hollywood is still in the business of making "four quadrant movies" – that's to say ultra-mainstream films appealing to males and females, young and old. When a studio spends $100m on a mainstream movie and an equivalent amount in marketing it at home and abroad, anything that can jeopardise its box-office performance is frowned on. Agents put pressure on their clients not to "come out"...

Geoffrey MacNab in The Independent on the Hollywood closet - a subject that obsesses the straight press almost as much as the sports/football closet does.
It's a bit of a brisk gallop from Valentino to producer Iain Canning, often veering off-course by introducing barely relevant quotes and anecdotes from the likes of screaming Tarantino.
MacNab doesn't come to any real conclusion beyond; "It's pressure from the risk-averse, profit-driven studios, innit?"
And it's sprinkled with more than a little irony as two of the three people he speaks to for the piece - a "gay writer" and "an industry insider" -  are both unnamed and anonymous.
Fingers crossed, they exist.

This article was one of several "inspired" by Jodie Foster's apparent coming out on Sunday - there have been eleven on the Independent online alone!
Some were gushy old guff, but several gay commentators have been rather sniffy and sour, leading Fagburn to invent a new word "Out-righteous, to describe a privileged gay man who looks down on a celebrity who's just come out for not doing so sooner.
It's yet to catch on.
The most offensive comment piece about all this was Amanda Platell in the Daily Mail, Why Jodie's Silence Spoke Volumes.
Do lesbians and gay men really need to be told by straight people - especially Daily Mail columnists - where they went wrong and how we should live our lives?

PS Have to admit Rupert Everett was very good on HARDTalk.

PPS Sorry about the forced pun in the title, I'll try and think of something better.

Sunday, 23 September 2012

The Independent On Sunday: More Drivel About "Gays" (This Time With Added Drugs)

The Independent On Sunday have AN EXPOSE!
'Drug Use "Seven Times Higher" Amongst Gays'.
Unfortunately, like most of the stuff the Independent runs on "Gays" [sic], it's stupid and patronising rubbish.
The "seven times" figure is nebulous - here's the report - but it became a media canard.
And anyway, there is no way anyone can do a reliable survey on gay - or straight - drug use, so nothing can be extrapolated from this by any rational person.
If you do a self-selecting online survey, or ask people at Pride events, people who don't do drugs will probably ignore it, people who take them will happily fill it in.
How can you compare its findings to an official crime survey, across all age groups, where people might - just possibly - be tempted to play down their drug use?
Apples/oranges. 
Gay men certainly take more drugs than their straight peers, but this is rarely "problematic" or "drug abuse".
Though admittedly, some groups looking for more Lottery funding may want to make out it's a big problem. 
It's usually just fun - like sticking a cock in your gob - and it's insane and reprehensible to try and stigmatise it.
You're infinitely more likely to die in a car accident going to a gay club, than you are of dying of drugs inside one.
Should we start telling gay men not to get in cars? 
And the survey was published over a month ago, so why does The Independent think this is news?
My guess is this crapola was written by some silly posh intern whose knowledge of gay men, drugs and the gay scene could be summarised as "Fuck all."
As I keep saying, The Independent's gay news coverage is the most dreadful and erratic drivel.
But this was particularly shameful and stupid, stupid, stupid!

Wednesday, 13 June 2012

The i: Mea Culpa

Oh, who will save me from this madness?
Is there any issue on which Britain isn't "split"?
I can't believe we're still arguing about it.
Politically it's come down to a spat between the New Right and the Old Right.
I wish they'd both go hang.

NB More gay men without faces.

Thursday, 9 June 2011

Julie Burchill: Sandi Bitch

"Who would have thought, when we were tots in suburbia perving over stills of Andy Warhol films, that anyone could ever make being gay look like wearing Crimplene? Toksvig does – she's that deadly dull. On the other hand, thank goodness she is. Gayness is a wonderful thing, but of all the people the good Lord made gay, I thank Him for making Toksvig and Stephen Fry gay more than anybody else I can think of. IMAGINE IF THOSE TWO HAD GOT TOGETHER AND REPRODUCED! The smugness and self-obsession of any brats they banged out would surely send the I-Love-Me Meter into meltdown..."

The famously unsmug and non-self-obsessed Julie Burchill devotes most of this week's Independent column to Sandi Toksvig making a joke on Radio 4's News Quiz; "It's the Tories who have put the N into 'cuts'."
Fagburn suspects it may have been a helpful sub who has added the rejoinder in brackets that this was broadcast last October - despite it making the front page of the last Mail On Sunday - thus making La Burchill's "topical" column slightly redundant.
She pads the column out by quoting eight whole lines of a Flanders & Swann song and then - perhaps out of habit - apropos of sod-all starts going on about Muslims.
Great stuff Julie!

Friday, 29 October 2010

Johann Hari: "Protest Works" - Nonsense

Johann Hari in The Independent, doubtless inspired by Paul O'Grady's outburst last Friday, joins in the chorus of condemnation for the Con-Dem Coalition's cuts.
"There is a ripple of rage spreading across Britain. It is clearer every day that the people of this country have been colossally scammed. The bankers who crashed the economy are richer and fatter than ever, on our cash. The Prime Minister who promised us before the election “we’re not talking about swingeing cuts” just imposed the worst cuts since the 1920s, condemning another million people to the dole queue. Yet the rage is matched by a flailing sense of impotence. We are furious, but we feel there is nothing we can do. There’s a mood that we have been stitched up by forces more powerful and devious than us, and all we can do is sit back and be shafted."
I love it when she's angry.
Harri says it doesn't have to be this way!
Let's turn that ripple of rage into a tsunami of anger and fight back - and everyone can learn from The Gays.
"To understand how and why protest like this can work, you need some concrete and proven examples from the past. Let’s start with the most hopeless and wildly idealistic cause – and see how it won. The first ever attempt to hold a Gay Pride rally in Trafalgar Square was in 1965*. Two dozen people turned up – and they were mostly beaten by the police and arrested. Gay people were imprisoned for having sex, and even the most compassionate defense of gay people offered in public life was that they should be pitied for being mentally ill.
"Imagine if you had stood in Trafalgar Square that day and told those two dozen brave men and women: “Forty-five years from now, they will stop the traffic in Central London for a Gay Pride parade on this very spot, and it will be attended by hundreds of thousands of people. There will be married gay couples, and representatives of every political party, and openly gay soldiers and government ministers and huge numbers of straight supporters – and it will be the homophobes who are regarded as freaks.” It would have seemed like a preposterous statement of science fiction. But it happened. It happened in one lifetime. Why? Not because the people in power spontaneously realized that millennia of persecuting gay people had been wrong, but because determined ordinary citizens banded together and demanded justice.
"If that cause can be achieved, through persistent democratic pressure, anything can."

* Fagburn has no idea where Hari's got this date from. I've never heard of it before, and I've written far too many pieces on the history of Gay Pride in London.
What does he classify as an "attempt"? Two fellas holding hands?
Hari's grasp of gay history can be shaky, and picked freely from the internet - a web of deceit.
Surprisingly nobody has taken Hari up on writing this bollocks in 2004.
"A San Francisco-based group called the Lavender Crescent Society sent five members to Iran in 1979 after the Islamic revolution there to spur an Iranian gay movement. They were taken straight from the airport to a remote spot and shot dead."
This is hilarious - You'd think if five American citizens were shot dead in Iran in 1979 it might have made the newspapers at the time - and five murdered gay activists would have merited a mention in the gay press at least, or made it into a single book of gay history.
Actually it's not surprising, he was writing about Iran and you can get away with saying anything bad you like about our Officially Declared Enemy number one.
Ho hum...

Saturday, 18 September 2010

Lady Gaga: More Blah Blah Blah


It appears to be open season on attacking Lady Gaga.
Shame.
After Camille Paglia's drivelfest in The Sunday Times last weekend, yesterday's Guardian staged 'The Lady Gaga Debate'.
"Is Lady Gaga an important feminist, a force for good? Or is she simply a canny performance artist?"
Erm, how about both?
Today's Daily Mail calls her "Lady Contrick: To her fans Lady Gaga is a cutting edge style icon. But is she really just a shameless plagiarist?"
Again, she's both, love.
And in The Independent she gets the fantastically vacuous headline; 'Ghost In The Fame Machine'.
Sounds good, shame it doesn't mean anything.
"No pop star so vividly embodies the values of the internet age. But what lies behind the catchy tunes and outrageous outfits?"
You tell me.
Ironically, this article owes a debt to Camille Paglia in much the same way that Lady Gaga owes a debt to Madonna.
Oops.
So many words, so little insight.
One of Fagburn's favourite music writers, Simon Reynolds, gave probably the most insightful comment on Lady Gaga on his blog last year.

'Lada Gaga = Fischerspooner with tits

but also

Lady Gaga = Fischerspooner, with hits'

Simon Reynolds expanded on his brilliant thesis here.

Friday, 20 August 2010

Civil Partnerships: Cliché Fans Joy As 'Honeymoon Over' Headline Returns


Today the Office of National Statistics released the latest figures for Civil Partnerships.
There were two angles on this.
First the bad news; 'Honeymoon over for many same-sex couples as 'divorces' double' (Daily Telegraph).
And now the just as bad news; 'Civil partnerships in 12 per cent decline' (Independent).
Mind you it was great news for the Christian Institute, who billed it as a double whammy; 'Civil partnerships plummet as dissolutions double.'
Hurrah.
Fagburn would like to point out we have been here before.
'Honeymoon over for gay marriage as fewer tie the knot' Evening Standard, August 2009.
'Honeymoon over for 'gay marriages' as number of civil partnerships is halved in a year' Daily Mail, June 2008.
'Honeymoon is over for gay weddings' The Observer, February 2008.
'Honeymoon over for gay marriages as number of civil partnerships plummets by 50 per cent' Daily Mail, February 2008.
It's clearly been a long honeymoon.
Let's look at those civil partnership figures in full:

2006 - 16,106
2007 - 8,728
2008 - 7,169
2009 - 6,281

Fagburn has just calculated (on his fingers) that if the decline continues at this rate, NO-ONE will be registering a civil partnership by 2017.
And with dissolutions doubling from 180 in 2008, to 351 last year, that means... actually I can't work out a completely unscientific frightening factoid out of that one on my fingers.
Not that any of this matters as they'll legalise same-sex marriage long before then.
Won't they?

Sunday, 15 August 2010

No News: But Is It "Good" News?


In case you were wondering, there wasn't anything that I thought was worth commenting on in the papers today.
Nothing, nada, zilch!
And I'd be a hypocrite if I criticised the "Phil Space" school of journalism by myself filling a space when there is nothing that I think is worth reporting.
But as I'm a hypocrite I'll fill some space anyway with this French anti-smoking ad from earlier this year that I saw when I was looking through The Independent's Media section, for no other reason than that it sent my mind reeling.
What would Roland Barthes have said, eh?
Something in French, probably.