She is changing her hair, finally. I think she looks better.
Much better - but will it last? She had her hair cut shorter some time ago, and it looked far better (even if still black) but she let it grow out despite positive comments.
Much better - but will it last? She had her hair cut shorter some time ago, and it looked far better (even if still black) but she let it grow out despite positive comments.
Agree it's a vast improvement but as you say about her hair cut a while back which she quickly grew out, she will soon return to crow black as despite all the advice and evidence, it's her 'look' and defines her. I don't believe she sees it like everyone else. Oh and who would have thought, of all the ex wives in all the world PATSY KENSIT just happens to be in the salon at the same time!!! I can imagine the conversation "So Liz, you're claiming to be seeing my ex husband - how are Big Audio Dynamite or is it Haysi Fantayzee, doing these days?" :rolleyes:
Much better - but will it last? She had her hair cut shorter some time ago, and it looked far better (even if still black) but she let it grow out despite positive comments.
Having it cut into a shoulder length bob got rid of the split ends and gave her hair more volume.It was much more flattering than the elderly rock chick look she usually sports and I can't imagine anyone not thinking it a vast improvement. Likewise these new highlights. What I don't understand is how Boots Bitter Chocolate comes out as raven black on her naturally brown hair.
I 'm assuming LJ means Boots 'chocolate brown' hair dye as they don't have a 'bitter chocolate'. And it certainly doesn't look like it'd come out black.
I've been looking at some of the comments, and a lot of them aren't funny; they're downright abusive.
I am amazed that they have been allowed.Are the DM trying to force her out without having to make a bug payout? I can't see the point of having moderators when such comments are allowed.
Yes, some of the comments are pretty unkind, but remember this is a woman who wrote that she was relieved when her mother started developing Altzheimers because then she wouldn't give away her true age... who outed her sister as an alcoholic and the groom at an easily identifiable wedding she attended as gay... who refers to all children as feral... who shouts at counter staff, receptionists and check-in clerks (to name but three)... who tried to come on to a married man in Brushford. It's called karma, I believe.
Granted, her new hair colour is an improvement but it would look even better if it were shorter.
She could be bringing Nirpal back into the equation, having run out of steam with the imaginary Rock Star saga. If I remember correctly, she only thought Nirpal might be married by now but wasn't sure.
My guess is she'll say he's back from India for a short while and is looking for somewhere to stay meantime. She'll probably take him back and then write a whole lot of nonsense about their constant rowing and his unsavoury habits to generate some interest in her flagging Dreary.:yawn:
I think she set the scene for the return of Nirps a few months back in the You column, something about one of her minions saying how he always speaks well of Liz. I reckon it was always a marriage of convenience to raise both their sorry profiles and Nirps would definately go along with a faux reunion to get his name out there again. As to the very harsh comments she's been getting, it's strange that a feature on hair dye got such a strong backlash, compared to her more offensive bile. I sent a comment, complimenting the hair but saying she would be Back to Black within weeks and questioning the convenient appearance of Patsy Kensit - it was't published.
. As to the very harsh comments she's been getting, it's strange that a feature on hair dye got such a strong backlash, compared to her more offensive bile. I sent a comment, complimenting the hair but saying she would be Back to Black within weeks and questioning the convenient appearance of Patsy Kensit - it was't published.
Maybe the moderators have their own reason for allowing the hair dye comments.:cool: I suspect in the past they allowed few negative comments through but now they seem to have unleashed the floodgates. The fact that it was about something so innocuous as hair dye simply indicates the huge pent-up frustration with her general attitude.
Edited to say: I went on way too long. It's hardly worth reading, much less writing. I need to get a life.
Granted the kind of behavior Bellagio mentions and specifically the fact that Liz likes to snap at and shriek at people she regards as "underlings," try to imagine how Liz is likely to treat sub-editors, people who are responsible for editing her work. She's terribly important, don't cha know. She makes lots of money. She used to be the editor of a splendid fashion mag; she edited other people's work, she doesn't need her work edited so yay boo sucks to sub-editors. She's a valued employee while sub-editors may come and go. Flunkies. Losers. I can only imagine that anyone who tries to edit her garbled, unbelievable work gets it with both barrels. Perhaps they've gotten the okay from the editor to exact some revenge by giving her what she demands and NOT changing a word--letting her self-centered, contradictory, obviously untrue work stand as is.
Imagine how unpleasant it would be to be her editor and thus her superior on the paper. SHE was an editor, after all; how well would she take editorial direction? If she's genuinely as obsessive-compulsive as she claims, she'd be bound to have endless emotional eruptions and have endless complaints about anyone who changes her work or dares to move her personal teacup.
I'm reading Piers Morgan's "The Insider" at the moment (yes, I'm insane enough to want to know how a tabloid is edited). There are times when long-term columnists get in a huff and say they're going to leave the Mirror, which he edited, and he's just thrilled to bits if they're difficult or their work is sub-standard. Liz's work doesn't even make sense, at times. Perhaps the editor has had enough of Her Haughty Highness, finds her work an embarrassment, and longs for her to quit--and thus the comments column has been opened up? I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the comments began appearing, un-moderated, when the rock star business was getting hopelessly silly and unbelievable. Since then she's been assigned to Somalia, which was inevitably going to enrage readers--the editor knew that from the beginning. Send her to review an exhibition and her work focuses on her: more enraged comments. She gets lots of hits, of course; but perhaps, just perhaps, the editor is sick of working with her and doesn't like having a column that's so absurd it's an embarrassment. I'm probably off, but perhaps they're opening up the comments in the hope that they will bother her so much that they will make her quit.
But what would we do for fun if she DID quit? Actually, I don't think I'd go into mourning. And frankly, it's hard for me to imagine that the editor of a different major paper would want her. Maybe they would have once, when her ups and downs with Nirpal interested people. Maybe her fashion advice was better, once. But now? I don't get the feeling that lots of people are writing in to say that they love her work anymore. She's reviled by too many people, and can't be easy to work with.
Totally irrelevant, but I keep thinking about all those pensioners who wanted to send her money and how they must have sprinted down to the Mail offices in order to drop their letters off by hand, granted that she couldn't have gotten mail as quickly as she claimed. Do we really have cause to believe that she didn't just make up imaginary sympathetic readers, just as she does imaginary friends and an imaginary boyfriend? What are the chances that she got 12 emails or letters saying "You're great and I want to send you money" and . . . nothing more? No flood of sympathetic letters? Bellagio's point about the implausible, magical mail service and Liz's tendency to cook up friends when she requires them make that very likely, to my mind. And the other thing--didn't she claim all this warmth and love came via letters? A lot of the mail was simply offers to help, not checks or paper money. Now, she might have gotten emails of that kind, but what she mentioned was letters, I think. Who writes letters now when you can offer to help via email? Imaginary sympathizers, I think. I don't think it was the love-fest Liz claimed it to be. And of course the love-fest then backfired in her face, since real life readers were outraged that pensioners were helping out Ms. Bat Sanctuary.
Maybe the editor was getting suspicious and said "Let's see all those letters, Liz"--and they didn't exist. I'm off on wild flights of fantasy here, I think. But something in the editor's attitude to Liz Jones has changed.
The Patsy Kensit moment reminded me of the taxi drivers/tulip-carrying Dutchmen/passer-by-offering-toll-bridge-money device. A character popping up at an opportune moment, reading Liz's mind and immediately chiming in with a handy quote. And in this case, grasping LJ's arm and confiding something personal. If I were PK, and I had bumped into LJ in a grey-roots-retouching situation, I wouldn't be entirely happy about our encounter being referred to in print!
The Patsy Kensit moment reminded me of the taxi drivers/tulip-carrying Dutchmen/passer-by-offering-toll-bridge-money device. A character popping up at an opportune moment, reading Liz's mind and immediately chiming in with a handy quote. And in this case, grasping LJ's arm and confiding something personal. If I were PK, and I had bumped into LJ in a grey-roots-retouching situation, I wouldn't be entirely happy about our encounter being referred to in print!
Patsy Kensit: "Welcome, Sister Wife..."
Seriously (re PK's grey roots): ..meow or what?!?
I wouldn't have been able to resist mentioning that big ol' piggy-eyed elephant in the room, to whit: "Is it true about you and my ex?" and/or, "how dare you write such crap about him!".
If they did actually meet, the most likely explanation for PK's civil behaviour is that she is a charitable soul who doesn't believe in tormenting the afflicted, and/or Jim Kerr's lawers have told her what the score is.
Once again she plays the militant vegan card, though we know she eats eggs and drools over 'butter-soft' leather clothes. Her sister breaks an ankle and even though she is not diagnosed with osteoporosis that doesn't stop Liz using it to bleat about her own sorry life. She ignores any doctor who warns her about her eating habits and yet strangely has no qualms about having her face sliced open. I predict a huge backlash in the comments section, but I doubt they will print mine (in full anyway).
Does anyone know of a public figure who's had leprosy, dengue fever, rabies, or athlete's foot etc? 'Cos whatever it is, LJ can throw together a few hundred words explaining how [insert disease] ruined her life (in between experiencing all the other stuff that's ruined her life).
Yup, mine too - in full - I don't think the 'moderators' care anymore.
Well, they may not care about who says what, but somebody at the DM pays attention to comments as the LJ photograph has changed! No further sighting of the hideous skirt and equally hideous (and too big) shoes - the latter having been remarked upon. Tho' in the haste to edit the photo something curious has happened to the caption: a word missing, I think: "Liz admits her desire for willowy limbs has left her with bones".
Hmm, hadn't noticed that, it may be an old photo (the clothes are so frumpy they could be from any decade) or she's actually done the ultimate narcissistic thing and married herself. Who says there's no such thing as true love.
Comments
Much better - but will it last? She had her hair cut shorter some time ago, and it looked far better (even if still black) but she let it grow out despite positive comments.
Agree it's a vast improvement but as you say about her hair cut a while back which she quickly grew out, she will soon return to crow black as despite all the advice and evidence, it's her 'look' and defines her. I don't believe she sees it like everyone else. Oh and who would have thought, of all the ex wives in all the world PATSY KENSIT just happens to be in the salon at the same time!!! I can imagine the conversation "So Liz, you're claiming to be seeing my ex husband - how are Big Audio Dynamite or is it Haysi Fantayzee, doing these days?" :rolleyes:
I've been looking at some of the comments, and a lot of them aren't funny; they're downright abusive.
She could be bringing Nirpal back into the equation, having run out of steam with the imaginary Rock Star saga. If I remember correctly, she only thought Nirpal might be married by now but wasn't sure.
My guess is she'll say he's back from India for a short while and is looking for somewhere to stay meantime. She'll probably take him back and then write a whole lot of nonsense about their constant rowing and his unsavoury habits to generate some interest in her flagging Dreary.:yawn:
Granted the kind of behavior Bellagio mentions and specifically the fact that Liz likes to snap at and shriek at people she regards as "underlings," try to imagine how Liz is likely to treat sub-editors, people who are responsible for editing her work. She's terribly important, don't cha know. She makes lots of money. She used to be the editor of a splendid fashion mag; she edited other people's work, she doesn't need her work edited so yay boo sucks to sub-editors. She's a valued employee while sub-editors may come and go. Flunkies. Losers. I can only imagine that anyone who tries to edit her garbled, unbelievable work gets it with both barrels. Perhaps they've gotten the okay from the editor to exact some revenge by giving her what she demands and NOT changing a word--letting her self-centered, contradictory, obviously untrue work stand as is.
Imagine how unpleasant it would be to be her editor and thus her superior on the paper. SHE was an editor, after all; how well would she take editorial direction? If she's genuinely as obsessive-compulsive as she claims, she'd be bound to have endless emotional eruptions and have endless complaints about anyone who changes her work or dares to move her personal teacup.
I'm reading Piers Morgan's "The Insider" at the moment (yes, I'm insane enough to want to know how a tabloid is edited). There are times when long-term columnists get in a huff and say they're going to leave the Mirror, which he edited, and he's just thrilled to bits if they're difficult or their work is sub-standard. Liz's work doesn't even make sense, at times. Perhaps the editor has had enough of Her Haughty Highness, finds her work an embarrassment, and longs for her to quit--and thus the comments column has been opened up? I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the comments began appearing, un-moderated, when the rock star business was getting hopelessly silly and unbelievable. Since then she's been assigned to Somalia, which was inevitably going to enrage readers--the editor knew that from the beginning. Send her to review an exhibition and her work focuses on her: more enraged comments. She gets lots of hits, of course; but perhaps, just perhaps, the editor is sick of working with her and doesn't like having a column that's so absurd it's an embarrassment. I'm probably off, but perhaps they're opening up the comments in the hope that they will bother her so much that they will make her quit.
But what would we do for fun if she DID quit? Actually, I don't think I'd go into mourning. And frankly, it's hard for me to imagine that the editor of a different major paper would want her. Maybe they would have once, when her ups and downs with Nirpal interested people. Maybe her fashion advice was better, once. But now? I don't get the feeling that lots of people are writing in to say that they love her work anymore. She's reviled by too many people, and can't be easy to work with.
Totally irrelevant, but I keep thinking about all those pensioners who wanted to send her money and how they must have sprinted down to the Mail offices in order to drop their letters off by hand, granted that she couldn't have gotten mail as quickly as she claimed. Do we really have cause to believe that she didn't just make up imaginary sympathetic readers, just as she does imaginary friends and an imaginary boyfriend? What are the chances that she got 12 emails or letters saying "You're great and I want to send you money" and . . . nothing more? No flood of sympathetic letters? Bellagio's point about the implausible, magical mail service and Liz's tendency to cook up friends when she requires them make that very likely, to my mind. And the other thing--didn't she claim all this warmth and love came via letters? A lot of the mail was simply offers to help, not checks or paper money. Now, she might have gotten emails of that kind, but what she mentioned was letters, I think. Who writes letters now when you can offer to help via email? Imaginary sympathizers, I think. I don't think it was the love-fest Liz claimed it to be. And of course the love-fest then backfired in her face, since real life readers were outraged that pensioners were helping out Ms. Bat Sanctuary.
Maybe the editor was getting suspicious and said "Let's see all those letters, Liz"--and they didn't exist. I'm off on wild flights of fantasy here, I think. But something in the editor's attitude to Liz Jones has changed.
ccmc lol at your post - I never thought for one moment that the pensioners' cheques might have been fictional as well, but yes very much a possibility
Had to laugh as well at another post on ds forums:
http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showpost.php?p=53914655&postcount=45
Patsy Kensit: "Welcome, Sister Wife..."
Seriously (re PK's grey roots): ..meow or what?!?
I wouldn't have been able to resist mentioning that big ol' piggy-eyed elephant in the room, to whit: "Is it true about you and my ex?" and/or, "how dare you write such crap about him!".
If they did actually meet, the most likely explanation for PK's civil behaviour is that she is a charitable soul who doesn't believe in tormenting the afflicted, and/or Jim Kerr's lawers have told her what the score is.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2053548/LIZ-JONES-The-price-Im-paying-hating-body.html
... and as many have noted, according to her maths, she's 61 !
Once again she plays the militant vegan card, though we know she eats eggs and drools over 'butter-soft' leather clothes. Her sister breaks an ankle and even though she is not diagnosed with osteoporosis that doesn't stop Liz using it to bleat about her own sorry life. She ignores any doctor who warns her about her eating habits and yet strangely has no qualms about having her face sliced open. I predict a huge backlash in the comments section, but I doubt they will print mine (in full anyway).
Yup, mine too - in full - I don't think the 'moderators' care anymore.
^
Does anyone know of a public figure who's had leprosy, dengue fever, rabies, or athlete's foot etc? 'Cos whatever it is, LJ can throw together a few hundred words explaining how [insert disease] ruined her life (in between experiencing all the other stuff that's ruined her life).
Well, they may not care about who says what, but somebody at the DM pays attention to comments as the LJ photograph has changed! No further sighting of the hideous skirt and equally hideous (and too big) shoes - the latter having been remarked upon. Tho' in the haste to edit the photo something curious has happened to the caption: a word missing, I think: "Liz admits her desire for willowy limbs has left her with bones".
Diary piece...
In Which I Become An Amoeba
Blobfish
Is that a wedding ring on her finger?
Hmm, hadn't noticed that, it may be an old photo (the clothes are so frumpy they could be from any decade) or she's actually done the ultimate narcissistic thing and married herself. Who says there's no such thing as true love.