the guardian wears it cosseted, london-centric, middle-class prejudice on its cover at last

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

"The king of chavs gets an ASBO"
For fuck's sake.
Proudly no longer penning a word for that rag...

― stelf)xxx, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:27 (twenty years ago)

OK, let's declare a moratorium on the word "Chav" and start using the policically correct, MARXIST term "lumpenproletariat" instead. OK?

― MIS Information (kate), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:29 (twenty years ago)

Whaddaya mean "at last"?

― Dadaismus (Dada), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:30 (twenty years ago)

I thought "chav" had nothing to do with class - so its users are constantly telling us?

― Dadaismus (Dada), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:31 (twenty years ago)

Don't you mean the telegraph? And he *is* the king of chavs: third hit on google.

― stet (stet), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:32 (twenty years ago)

Yawn... the narcissism of small differences, classic or dud?

So what cool newspaper do you write for now? The Telegraph? The Daily Mail?

― the voice of reason, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:32 (twenty years ago)

the empahasis is on "on its cover".
i've never seen anything like this on it splash or masthead before, that's what i mean!

― stelf)xxx, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:32 (twenty years ago)

As much as I hate the word, indicting them for using the title that the guy uses to describe himself seems a bit harsh.

― RickyT (RickyT), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:32 (twenty years ago)

oh sorry, aye, it's in the puffs. What's London-centric about it though?

― stet (stet), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:33 (twenty years ago)

the empahasis is on "on its cover".
i've never seen anything like this on it splash or masthead before, that's what i mean!
and no i mean the guardian:
it actually say the "millionaire king of"

― stelf)xxx, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:33 (twenty years ago)

and who/why is he?

― mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:34 (twenty years ago)

Yes, Kings Lynn is hardly London now, is it?

― MIS Information (kate), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:35 (twenty years ago)

Not yet

― Dadaismus (Dada), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:36 (twenty years ago)

i don't like it - i think it's pretty ropey for a nominally left newspaper to use terms like that as liberally as it does. the attitude of the newspaper is governed by middle-class london dwellers who seem to find anything outside their very limited personal world risible. i'm not saying this story is based in kings lynn. i can read.

― stelf)xxx, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:38 (twenty years ago)

i can't type tho, meant to say "i'm not saying this story is based in london."

― stelf)xxx, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:39 (twenty years ago)

governed by middle-class london dwellers who seem to find anything outside their very limited personal world risible

Welcome to Britain, 2005

― Dadaismus (Dada), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:40 (twenty years ago)

This is the article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lottery/story/0,7369,1517055,00.html

I really fail to see what exactly about it has so offended Stelfox, except for the fact that he reacts with bitter bile out of all proportion whenever anything to do with the Guardian is mentioned.

x-post if the person himself refers to himself as "King of the Chavs" what is wrong with the Guardian repeating his own claim?

I'd like it if the Guardian called me Kate St.Claire, self styled Queen of Coo.

― MIS Information (kate), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:40 (twenty years ago)

Michael Carroll is my hero.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:40 (twenty years ago)

bitter bile - i just don't like the paper and its attitudes, where's the bitterness in that. i don't give a fuck what he calls himself.

― stelf)xxx, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:44 (twenty years ago)

There's lots of things I don't like, and lots of things that irritate me. But I don't go starting threads about them! You do have a bee in your bonnet about the Guardian.

― MIS Information (kate), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:46 (twenty years ago)

this seems rather 'tabloidy' of Teh Graun

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:47 (twenty years ago)

dunno dave - i don't really bother with daily papers anymore, least of all the guardian, and mostly for these kinds of reasons. even on the bus it seems a waste of time reading them.

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:47 (twenty years ago)

If people stopped starting threads about things that irritated then, I wonder how different this place would be?

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:47 (twenty years ago)

Cosseted, london-centric, middle-class people are always accusing someone else of being cosseted, london-centric and middle-class.

― Dave T., Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:48 (twenty years ago)

kate with all the things you have "bees in your bonnet abou" and all the threads you start about them, i'd leave that one pretty well alone! precisely steve: very tabloidy, very crap.

― stelf)xxx, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:48 (twenty years ago)

Right, I've just done a search for uses of chav over the last two weeks Guardians. Over that time the word was used a mere seven times and only once in a direct and derisive way. This hardly constiutes liberal use.

― RickyT (RickyT), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:48 (twenty years ago)

hahaha - must i produce my credentials for the board!?

― stelf)xxx, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:49 (twenty years ago)

I think if you care at all about how right-wing and reactionary the media is in the UK these, it's perfectly understandable to feel angry at the Guardian with every little betrayal, even though there have been so many of them by now. Using a denigrating class-based term like 'chav' in a headline without even inverted commas is a disgrace.

― Flyboy (Flyboy), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:50 (twenty years ago)

-People Who Cut In The Bus Queue - Destroy and Destroy
-The Horrible Mayonaise On EAT Sandwiches
-Programmers Who Don't Leave Notes In Their Programming Code - KILL THEM ALL!!!
-Crystal Info Desktop - Why Oh Why Won't It Work?

etc. etc. etc.

I've started none of these in the past week. Maybe I should.

― MIS Information (kate), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:50 (twenty years ago)

I AM MIDDLE CLASS!!! I LIVE IN LONDON!!!! I DON'T KNOW IF I'M COSSETED OR NOT, BUT I HAVE BEEN KNOWN TO READ THE GUARDIAN!!!!!

Now, am I more offended by the assumptions made in the title of this thread than any and all uses of the word Chav for "lumpenproletariat".

― MIS Information (kate), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:52 (twenty years ago)

the guardian is scarcely sold in central scotland.

about a year ago i went into a newsagents in hamilton and asked for one. the proprietor scowled at me and said: "no chance. the guardian is an ENGLISH paper!"

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:52 (twenty years ago)

What about the 'realtionships' one - doesn't that count? It was evidently a thread to whinge on.

I envisaged Students Unions doing 'Chav Nights'.

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:52 (twenty years ago)

WHAT'S WRONG WITH BEING MIDDLE CLASS?!?!?!? I CAN'T HELP WHERE I WAS BORN AND SENT TO SCHOOL!!!!!!

WHAT'S WRONG WITH LIVING IN LONDON?!?!?!?

AND HOW IS THE GUARDIAN MORE OR LESS OBJECTIONABLE THAN ANY OTHER PAPER IN ENGLAND?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?

― MIS Information (kate), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:53 (twenty years ago)

i think your keyboard is broken.

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:54 (twenty years ago)

-Programmers Who Don't Leave Notes In Their Programming Code - KILL THEM ALL!!!

Oh God. Kill them all (except me, I'm too cute to die).

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:55 (twenty years ago)

What about the 'realtionships' one - doesn't that count? It was evidently a thread to whinge on.

In Kate's defence, that was a parody thread.

I envisaged Students Unions doing 'Chav Nights'.

Urgh. I'm getting really upset at the asssimilation of 'Chav' culture into mainstream culture (but I'm making no judgement on the social/class connotations of the word).

― tissp! (the impossible shortest specia), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:55 (twenty years ago)

What's wrong with not being middle class?
What's wrong with not living in London?

― Dadaismus (Dada), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:55 (twenty years ago)

I CAN'T HELP WHERE I WAS BORN AND SENT TO SCHOOL!!!!!!

neither can Michael Carroll, so why are they using the 'chav' label in this way if not as an insult?

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:56 (twenty years ago)

It's not more objectionable, per se. However, there is the feeling that with The Mail, Express, Sun etc, you know what kind of hateful crap to expect. This still isn't really true* of the Guardian, and so its readers often feel aggrieved when they encounter something like this.

*Apart from Alex Petridis articles, obviously.

― Flyboy (Flyboy), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:56 (twenty years ago)

What's wrong with not being middle class?
What's wrong with not living in London?

Nothing. But you guys have your own newspapers, don't you?

― guardian reader, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:57 (twenty years ago)

(Dadaismus xpost)

Big Brother?

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:58 (twenty years ago)

even 'lumpenproletariat' instead of chav seems deconstructive and judgemental. why is an adjective needed at all, particularly on a BROADSHEET HEADLINE?

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:59 (twenty years ago)

(xxxxxpost)

heheh. we englishmen in the scottish press need more hamilton newsagents like that.

as for the puff/headline in question: as flyboy says, the simple addition of inverted commas would have done a lot here. as other posters have pointed out, he is the self-styled king of chavs. so the puff should have put that in quotes, eg:

"the king of chavs" gets an asbo.

at the moment, i agree: it looks shockingly ugly and vindictive, and made me do a double-take.

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:59 (twenty years ago)

the guardian is merely the daily mail for the feel good about themselves set

― charltonlido (gareth), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:59 (twenty years ago)

Anyway, the comment is directed at the people who produce the Guardian, not middle-class people per se or even middle-class people who live in London per se.......... fairly obviously

― Dadaismus (Dada), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 12:59 (twenty years ago)

If if was difficult to write, it should be difficult to understand!

( ;-) )

― mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 13:00 (twenty years ago)

"Middle class people in being middle class and having middle class attitudes shockah!!!"

OK, clearly Carroll can't help where he was born or how he was educated, but anyone who actually believes that it's perfectly legal going around shooting ball bearings at random people's windows because he hadn't been caught NEEDS to be dealt with by the legal system. I don't know if "Chav" is automatically a synonym for criminal in his own self-description, but he certainly *is* a criminal.

even 'lumpenproletariat' instead of chav seems deconstructive and judgemental.,/i>

That's the Marxist term. From Marx. If the shoe fits, etc...

― MIS Information (kate), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 13:00 (twenty years ago)

why is an adjective needed at all

er, where's the adjective?

[/pedant]

― grimly fiendish (grimlord), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 13:01 (twenty years ago)

and flyboy is right, i just feel real disappointment when the paper i *should* and used to be a natural reader of betrays itself so consistently. i confess i do have a bee in my bonnet about this word and that's because it's an acceptable prejudice that's just as vilke as racism. every time a word like chav is used it's people laughing at and denigrating a whole section of society - some of whom happen to be members of my family - perfectly decent folks who just don't happen to possess the right qualifications/accents/sense ofmetropolitan style and that sucks.

― stelf)xxx, Wednesday, 29 June 2005 13:01 (twenty years ago)

I'm pretty sure Daily Mail readers feel good about themselves too.

― Flyboy (Flyboy), Wednesday, 29 June 2005 13:01 (twenty years ago)

Skipping 286 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

chavvery's likeliest victims who seriously consider the word 'chav' to represent 'hatespeech'

Yes, yes, 'likeliest victims', very good... "wait until your daughter is raped by an Albanian immigrant, then we'll see how much you like them!"

― Flyboy (Flyboy), Thursday, 30 June 2005 07:25 (twenty years ago)

I think there's a degree of sophistry in arguments like that.

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 30 June 2005 07:28 (twenty years ago)

the manchester guardian has been unreadably bad for as long as i can remember: my life has been immeasurbly better since i stopped reading newspapers - i am less prone to needless depression and rage, and i know more about what's going on in the world

See, when we first moved to America, my parents used to have the Guardian airmailed over as some kind of cultural link - and eventually as more reliable newsource than most American papers. It's part of my cultural baggage and heritage. So I will continue to buy it at the weekend for an enjoyable Saturday afternoon read.

However, I do see your point. Since I've been riding the bus, I've been reading a lot of newspapers over people's shoulders. And it's odd how *aware* of become of the specific bias of each paper - to the point where I can tell what a person is reading from the headlines, even if I can't see the small print at the top of the page saying what it is.

Last night in the pub, I finally put my finger on exactly what about this thread and its title bothered me - but the insight has worn off with the hangover.

I think it was somehow along the lines of... what the Guardian is guilty of is using the word Chav. How dare the Guardian be so Tabloidy! So insensitive! So scare-mongering, so quick to jump on the latest buzzwords! ("Chav" and "ASBO" are current attention grabbers getting overused.)

Of all those things, the Guardian may be guilty of, depending on the potential offensiveness of the word "Chav".

But WHAT ON EARTH does using an offensive word (even in its original and "proper" use as a thuggish person) have to do with Being Middle Class, Being London-based and Being "Cosseted"?

If you want to declare a "use other words" moratorium on "Chav" then please also follow a "use other words" moratorium on the use of "Middle Class" as an insult.

Anyway, I don't know what The Guardian did to Stelfox to justify all this bile. Maybe it's just envy because he'd secretly *like* to be a crack left-wing, liberal reporter for the Guardian and they won't let him. ;-)

― MIS Information (kate), Thursday, 30 June 2005 07:52 (twenty years ago)

I've always loved the assumption that you have to be middle class to read a broadsheet, as if this is the only additional skill they teach in better schools(1): ie how to fold back weildy pieces of paper. If so(2) moving to tabloid is a progressive thing.

(1) Along with feeling smug about being middle class, exploiting the working classes and voting Tory, all on the middle class nation curiculum it would seem.

(2)Is not so, the best origami-ist I know was much more working class that even me.

― Pete (Pete), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:06 (twenty years ago)

Question being: in that case, why are all the broadsheets gradually being turned into tabloids? (grauniad & torygraph only a matter of time i would have thought?)

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:10 (twenty years ago)

It's a conspicuous consumption thing - i.e. "look at how big this paper I have is, I have the leisure to read it at the breakfast table in my mansion in the home counties, not have to struggle to read that little bitty tabloid on the bus with all the proles!"

― MIS Information (kate), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:12 (twenty years ago)

'Strue, letter in the Guardian on Monday did bemoan the size change meaning they would not have enough paper to light their aga*, line the stables with paper and make jaunty hats to sell for the under-priviliged kiddies in King Geldof's Africa.

*Actually only this one, but I am sensing a more satircial bent to this thread this morning.

― Pete (Pete), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:14 (twenty years ago)

Kate, do you remember Gloves For The Times? These were white gloves obtained by posh commuters so their morning New York Times would not turn their hands all mucky and inky. People also folded the broad sheet in half lengthways so as not to invade the space of the person in the adjoining seat.

― suzy (suzy), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:18 (twenty years ago)

xp- 'Chavvery's likeliest victims' = students. Have you never seen Paul Calf?

― snotty moore, Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:20 (twenty years ago)

(The Guardian is actually much better for making "smoke funnels" on an Aga.)

― MIS Information (kate), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:32 (twenty years ago)

i don't like the guardian as a paper. that's why there's bile here. i've written a couple of things for it and was simply saying i'm glad i don't have to pitch stuff to it any more if it's going to do shit like this. i have not resigned from it as this would be impossible. stop being so bloody stupid, please.

― stelf)xxx, Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:36 (twenty years ago)

dave, what is your take on the independent?

― charltonlido (gareth), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:37 (twenty years ago)

it's slightly better, not as snotty and up itself, much nicer to work for, certainly, but suffers from a low disposable budget, low advertising spend and low circulation (all part of the same thing). if it had more resources it would be a better paper and as it stands=, it's certainly a friendlier read.

― stelf)xxx, Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:39 (twenty years ago)

The Independent's Grime coverage is rubbish.

― Taste the Blood of Scrovula (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:43 (twenty years ago)

that's not something i really give a shit about

― stelf)xxx, Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:44 (twenty years ago)

unfortunately even the arts section in the independent on sunday has been dumbed down - david thomson's column has been cut in half, as have several others, all to make room for a stupid "celebrity" Q&A in VERY LARGE WRITING on page three, and sundry other similar nonsense.

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:44 (twenty years ago)

I honestly can't see anything wrong with the headline.

― Dr. C (Dr. C), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:47 (twenty years ago)

The last thing I ever bothered reading the Guardian for was the Book Reviews on a Saturday. Reading newspapers nowadays is literally a waste of time - too many words about nothing. Private Eye is the only print media I read now.

― Taste the Blood of Scrovula (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:48 (twenty years ago)

Oh blimey - the Guardian's Saturday Jewish Literary Review. What an immensely pleasurable read that is(n't).

(and before anyone starts, I'm half-Jewish, OK?)

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:52 (twenty years ago)

Marcello, you've spent too long watching Maxwell on BB.

― Taste the Blood of Scrovula (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:56 (twenty years ago)

yes, i need to be careful about that...i'm supposed to be the Derek of ILx, not the Maxwell!

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 30 June 2005 08:57 (twenty years ago)

Students seem increasingly MOR in their views, and many from more affluent backgrounds just don't have to mix with others who are not - unless they choose to. There are prosperous middle/upper-middle class families from any race or ethnicity of person ever born in Britain, and their kids don't have to mix with the have-nots either. They all use the word chav like sugar on their cornflakes. They consider themselves 'independent' in political matters but that's mostly because it doesn't really matter to them who is in charge of the government, and the police are just the people you go to for a crime number if you get burgled, for the insurance. By the time they are polarised enough from others their age who have not been provided for, and conflict arises, they can look from the security of their little fiefdoms and good jobs and completely refuse to give a shit about the needs of society as a whole unless they feel they have some sort of pest control problem. To some extent, they already do.

― suzy (suzy), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:00 (twenty years ago)

I'm worried that a Derek-led Tory Party could win the next election, although most of the core vote will have had heart attacks/strokes/committed suicide when he gains the leadership.

― Taste the Blood of Scrovula (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:02 (twenty years ago)

i hope this isn't a subtle way of marcello both coming out and revealing his secret monday club membership

― stelf)xxx, Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:05 (twenty years ago)

and friendship with chris eubank...

― stelf)xxx, Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:07 (twenty years ago)

"Chav" is a pejorative term for a particular anti-social working-class subculture. I have never heard anyone use it to apply to working-class people in general. I have also heard plenty of working-class people use the term. I don't think by any stretch of the imagination you can call it a middle-class term to designate working-class people. I don't particularly like the word myself, but I see absolutely no moral problems in using it.

― alison t., Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:07 (twenty years ago)

So you don't mind newspapers using perjorative terms in headlines?

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:14 (twenty years ago)

Can somebody embed a wav of the Magic Roundabout theme in this thread, please?

― Taste the Blood of Scrovula (noodle vague), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:15 (twenty years ago)

**Students seem increasingly MOR in their views, and many from more affluent backgrounds just don't have to mix with others who are not - unless they choose to. There are prosperous middle/upper-middle class families from any race or ethnicity of person ever born in Britain, and their kids don't have to mix with the have-nots either. They all use the word chav like sugar on their cornflakes. They consider themselves 'independent' in political matters but that's mostly because it doesn't really matter to them who is in charge of the government, and the police are just the people you go to for a crime number if you get burgled, for the insurance. By the time they are polarised enough from others their age who have not been provided for, and conflict arises, they can look from the security of their little fiefdoms and good jobs and completely refuse to give a shit about the needs of society as a whole unless they feel they have some sort of pest control problem. To some extent, they already do.**

Is this NEW?

― Dr. C (Dr. C), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:18 (twenty years ago)

Nope. In my student days ('81-4) it was all Thatcherkid career career career as far as I could see.

I can confirm that I have certainly never been a member of the Monday Club.

However, I confess that in my youth I was a member of the Glasgow Rhythm Club.

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:20 (twenty years ago)

probably not dr c, but the stereotype of the politically activisty lefty student is all but dead? the student demographic has changed enormously over the last 15 years with the expansion of higher education.

so i do think its new to an extent, it may be argued that students in the past became increasingly MOR in views, post-graduation, or that there was mere pretense to non-MOR views in the past. but even if these are true, that doesnt seem to be the case today, where even the pretence is absent.

the student stereotype today is surely as perhaps the most apolitical sector of society

― charltonlido (gareth), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:21 (twenty years ago)

the stereotype of the politically activisty student is not dead. or the pretence, no way. at least not in my experience. I do think it's a pretence though, but mainly because what are you supposed to do as politically aware activist when you leave college? there are alot more opportunities elsewhere.

as for the thread topic, isn't this just the Guardian's usual clumsy attempt to not be a stuffy broadsheet? like they feel they have to fight fire with fire or something.

― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:28 (twenty years ago)

it's funny, I could never, ever, ever imagine the Irish Times using headlines like the Guardian does.

― Ronan (Ronan), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:29 (twenty years ago)

Charlton correct. I don't think they start out on the left or the right, they're just somewhere in the middle but what it's really about is a lack of interest in questioning the status quo because people who complain about their own disadvantages are just boring haters who don't work AT ALL.

Alison, it's increasingly been 'okay' to tar women with the chav brush according to their dress sense, the behaviour of their children, or their perceived sexual habits; 'anti-social' is becoming a snidey term itself for people who would be ashamed to use the word 'chav'.

― suzy (suzy), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:30 (twenty years ago)

In my student days 80-83 and 85-8, there was a small minority of upper middle-class students who were exactly as Suzy described. Many conformed to the worst kind of braying public school buffoonery in the herd. Individually most of those that I met were alright.

There was a large majority of people who fitted somewhere on a continuum of backgrounds from v.poor through to very comfortable. Most people I met couldn't give a shit about yr 'background'. I think that's the case now.

Has the demographic changed? From what to what? More people go to Univ now - are these proportionally more I know that in my day students had more time for activism etc, because you didn't need a bloody job as well.

― Dr. C (Dr. C), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:41 (twenty years ago)

the thing is, dr c, i also recall from my student days the prominent presence of the young conservatives on campus (oxford at any rate) with their hang nelson mandela/shoot the miners badges and t-shirts. covertly in my day there were a lot of students who agreed with that.

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:45 (twenty years ago)

Today it's more basic and more shallow: oh, we hate complainers harshing our buzz, why bother?

― suzy (suzy), Thursday, 30 June 2005 09:49 (twenty years ago)

Ah, that's more like it. It's the fault of BLOODY STUDENT VERMIN and not The Press at all. Glad we sorted that out.

― MIS Information (kate), Thursday, 30 June 2005 10:02 (twenty years ago)

Syndicalists, Anarchists, Trotskyists, Maoists, Revolutionary Communist Leaguers, etc etc

― charltonlido (gareth), Thursday, 30 June 2005 10:04 (twenty years ago)

Personally I blame hstencil.

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 30 June 2005 10:07 (twenty years ago)

as for good ol' spirit of '68 student "rebels," well their ringleader sat on MY FUCKING MANUSCRIPT for 18 FUCKING MONTHS and didn't LIFT A FUCKING FINGER to GET IT PUBLISHED because he was obviously too busy wanking over HIS OWN SPEEDILY-REMAINDERED MEMOIRS

― Marcello Carlin (nostudium), Thursday, 30 June 2005 10:09 (twenty years ago)

My experience of students is somewhat different but my glib

a) hey and I work with them
is somewhat temptered by they
b) I work at SOAS which has always been atypically political.

― Pete (Pete), Thursday, 30 June 2005 10:22 (twenty years ago)

And why shouldn't he care more about his own speedily remaindered memoirs rather than your speedily remaindered memoirs? It's perfectly understandable. He had a personal stake in those speedily remaindered memoirs. They reminded him of his rebellious past, I shouldn't wonder.

― snotty moore, Thursday, 30 June 2005 14:23 (twenty years ago)

twat

― stelf)xxxx, Thursday, 30 June 2005 14:28 (twenty years ago)

basic editorial professionalism: read straight away and make decisions quickly, or HAND IT OVER TO SOMEONE ABLE SO TO DO

there are no excuses on this: if you're takin the pay of a commissioning editor, do yr fuckin job --- the way marcello wz treated wz a disgrace (of course as i'm sorta partly responsible for the fuck-up, i feel doubly furious abt it)

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 June 2005 14:32 (twenty years ago)

i hadn't seen one of these threads in about six months and i was getting a bit worried. you are all quite pathetic

― harhar, Thursday, 30 June 2005 15:08 (twenty years ago)

even me? :(

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 June 2005 15:18 (twenty years ago)

Leave it Mark 'ee ain't wurth it...

― Sociah T Azzahole (blueski), Thursday, 30 June 2005 15:21 (twenty years ago)

Jebus Fucking Christ- do you dimwits think I'm actually defending some lazy commissioning editor? Winding up some of you is easier than baiting Australians.

xp- Stelfox- I can't imagine how horrible the Guardian must be if it's worse to work for than the Independent. The Indie's problems have less to do with finance and more to do with manners, or lack of.

― snotty moore, Thursday, 30 June 2005 21:25 (twenty years ago)

don't worry snotty i was just agreeing w.marcello - i rarely bother readin yr posts

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 June 2005 21:36 (twenty years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.