On the State Radio this morning, we were treated to the illogical utterances of Matthew Price again. Apparently a Mr Beckham had been reported elsewhere in the media as having given his point of view about the Scottish independence referendum. Price questioned why anyone should care what Beckham thinks on the matter. Beckham's opinion is neither here nor there, according to Price.
Yet, strangely, we are forever being given the benefit of Price's views on so many things. We are constantly reminded that he likes show tunes, grammatical pedantry, but not chocolate or curry - something of an own goal (excuse the football reference in the circumstances) because, by constantly reaffirming how proud he is to be so very different to most of us, he is reinforcing our beliefs that he really is a very odd bloke.
So it's OK for Price to weigh in on just about anything that's up for discussion during his show, yet it's not OK for Beckham? Beckham being the rich, good looking (apparently) and successful man with whom many of us would be quite happy to trade places (I can't tell you how much my teeth were on edge typing "with whom" - no-one talks like that except human oddities) and Price is the guy for who many of us would say "err, no thanks" for the offer of a life swap, I suspect. Very strongly suspect..... but maybe I'm wrong? :)
Having seen the fascinating documentary of Beckham's travels through a jungle with his friends, and liking the revelation of what the man is really like (away from the distortions purveyed by the 'accredited' media of the world) ...... I know who I'd rather spend an evening with, over several pints in a comfortable bar.
The Price isn't right!
Tuesday, 16 September 2014
Friday, 7 March 2014
Leah McGrath Goodman loses cred
I saw this on Clever Trevor's blog comments, after having read about it already on my usual daily news sites.
"It would appear that Leah McGrath Goodman has either just broken one of the biggest stories on the planet, or seriously overplayed her hand.
http://mag.newsweek.com/2014/03/14/bitcoin-satoshi-nakamoto.html
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/mar/07/satoshi-nakamoto-denies-inventing-bitcoin
On the sites where people get to comment, there has been a strong backlash against Leah, saying this was a very low thing to do. On one site I even found a predictable reference to HDLG :
"The journalist was sniffing around the island of Jersey because of alleged financial malfeasance and, more bizarrely, supposedly murdered children at the now infamous Haut la Garenne childrens home. I know from my reading on this matter that this is abject bollocks, and made me question her wisdom."
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2014/03/06/bitcoin_inventor_satoshi_nakamoto_revealed/
( a second story on The Register is about Nakamono's denial : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/07/nakamono_man_denies_inventing_bitcoin/ )
The evidence for him being the inventor seems to be a matter of opinion, hardly anything concrete. Even if he was behind BTC, what right does Leah have to expose him? From being a champion of truth and justice, it seems she has immediately sunken to gutter press levels of self interest. So that's a big "Whoops!" and a blow for the cause of the abuse victims. How sad.
"It would appear that Leah McGrath Goodman has either just broken one of the biggest stories on the planet, or seriously overplayed her hand.
http://mag.newsweek.com/2014/03/14/bitcoin-satoshi-nakamoto.html
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/mar/07/satoshi-nakamoto-denies-inventing-bitcoin
On the sites where people get to comment, there has been a strong backlash against Leah, saying this was a very low thing to do. On one site I even found a predictable reference to HDLG :
"The journalist was sniffing around the island of Jersey because of alleged financial malfeasance and, more bizarrely, supposedly murdered children at the now infamous Haut la Garenne childrens home. I know from my reading on this matter that this is abject bollocks, and made me question her wisdom."
http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/1/2014/03/06/bitcoin_inventor_satoshi_nakamoto_revealed/
( a second story on The Register is about Nakamono's denial : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/03/07/nakamono_man_denies_inventing_bitcoin/ )
The evidence for him being the inventor seems to be a matter of opinion, hardly anything concrete. Even if he was behind BTC, what right does Leah have to expose him? From being a champion of truth and justice, it seems she has immediately sunken to gutter press levels of self interest. So that's a big "Whoops!" and a blow for the cause of the abuse victims. How sad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)