Couldn't log on here past couple of days while the platform was switched and now slightly past the latest regurgitation of how hard her life is. Compared to virtually nobody else. She seems particularly obsessed this week with her sheep eating, stress weeing, furniture destroying mutts not being welcomed with open arms every place she goes. The owners of the 'bloody marvellous' dog welcoming restaurant must be doing their best impression of The Scream after her ringing endorsement.
As the owner of two loud pulis, I'm usually touched to the point of tearfulness whenever we are welcomed into anywhere!
(Thank you again, cafe in Lappeenranta Castle - perfectly lovely place and water for the two goat-suckers)
As you say, another load of recirculated bilge dressed up and dumped on us as fresh copy. Sadly I think the moggies are no more also.
WHAT? The pusscats are gone? She did mention, few weeks back, that she'd let 'the cats' out at her new place, but I assumed just a couple of cats, not the seventeen ferals she has bragged about for years. Did she leave them behind? Or ... did they even exist? At least, with 'Sam the dog formerly known as Michael' now deceased (RIP) I'd hope the two 'puppies' (oh please - puppies?) are not cat-gnawing hounds.
Yep, two farticles this week: one about people not accepting her untrained, incontinent "puppies" with arms wide open, the other about celebrities favouring a brand of oversized tote bag that Liz thinks is tacky - "IT'S AS BIG AS A HIPPO!!!!"
Standard why-oh-why stuff this week as per usual. Getting seriously boring now.
Her "Diaries" show that she is such a shoddy writer that she never knows from one piece to the next whether she.....
- is bankrupt or in an IVA
- a 24 hour dynamo or someone who starts "work" (i.e. reading personal emails) at 10am (on the dot , mind you!)
- hates David's guts or basks in the warm glow of his attentions (please, Liz, no detailed descriptions of your waxing/ cleaning arrangements for when he does visit next)
- needs advice on how to get out of the mess she is in - or someone who aggressively attacks those that do.
- craves privacy or is happy to keep on publishing intimate details of her (and others') lives in print
- "incredibly fit" enough to lug around hundreds of barrowloads of horse poo, or someone who cannot walk up a flight of stairs..
-
I could go on but I have a life to get on with !!
As a long-time reader of Liz Jones's Diary, I'm not unaccustomed to her slightly skewed view of the world. On Sunday 19 February 2017 I feel she went rather further than usual. She likes to offend certain groups of people (these groups seem to change, depending on her mood) but what she wrote was so horribly offensive I would question whether she is fit even to continue as a columnist.
In a reported text conversation with her ex-partner, in which they are discussing a character in Coronation Street having lost a baby, she says:
'I don’t get why Michelle is so upset. I had Sam for ten years and no one cares about my loss.
'That is going to get me into trouble, isn’t it? Saying a miscarriage (even fictional) isn’t as devastating as losing a much-loved, 18-year-old border collie.'
Many women have lost babies, or given birth to stillborn children, having carried that child and its future life inside them for months. To compare this to putting down an old, sick pet is monstrous.
She has no conception that it's monstrous, and seems to think that she's just being a bit mischievous and will 'get into trouble'. This woman should not be paid to write in the popular press. She is so removed from what is decent and empathic in a human being that I would suggest she be pensioned off.
All those hippo-bags are for is showing off how rich you are, and yet a fool for parting with thousands for a plastic shopping bag that WILL date regardless of how "beautifully" it ages. I also can't understand how a canvas and leather bag is animal friendly. Or why LJ thinks it's chic to use bags whose sole purpose is to suggest wealth. Anybody with actual style carries what they like, not some it-bag. Cool people carry reusable bags that are cheap and charitable. Or second hand.
All those hippo-bags are for is showing off how rich you are, and yet a fool for parting with thousands for a plastic shopping bag that WILL date regardless of how "beautifully" it ages. I also can't understand how a canvas and leather bag is animal friendly. Or why LJ thinks it's chic to use bags whose sole purpose is to suggest wealth. Anybody with actual style carries what they like, not some it-bag. Cool people carry reusable bags that are cheap and charitable. Or second hand.
Nearly saw one of those bags today - just about identical - and one of 3 different shopping bags carried by a woman on the bus!! Must look on my local market!
All those hippo-bags are for is showing off how rich you are, and yet a fool for parting with thousands for a plastic shopping bag that WILL date regardless of how "beautifully" it ages. I also can't understand how a canvas and leather bag is animal friendly. Or why LJ thinks it's chic to use bags whose sole purpose is to suggest wealth. Anybody with actual style carries what they like, not some it-bag. Cool people carry reusable bags that are cheap and charitable. Or second hand.
Ooh, now I'm feeling like I may have actual style & might even be considered edgy, as I don't use an actual bag at all - rather I carry my most essential items around in my "random crap I can't live without" pencil case.
Thanks Suzy_Cat
Regarding another poster's complaint to IPSO, I wanted to share my complaints, which I contributed, against her and the DM. IPSO has subsequently contacted me, several times this week. They appear to be investigating this seriously.
To summarize my complaints, I began with my belief that the DM, is using her for the click-bait nature of this high paid gig, oblivious to her own well being, let alone millions of readers. She has increasingly pandered to vicious misanthropic themes. Her loathing of females, she believes is justified, and freely exploitable, because, she identifies as a ''feminist.'' Her hatred of men is equally as offensive, grossly generalizing them, as well. There are other polarizing journalists, but, they are lucid in their point of view, and fair, whether you agree or disagree. She is merely bonkers, almost incoherent.
Her exploitation of personal relationships, breaches their confidentiality. Most disturbing is the hyperbolic mockery of her ex-es, their friends, family and their ex-es. She has exploited her family, in withering and pathetic episodes. Where are their rebuttals? They have no access to the media, by calling her ''menopausal'' like Rihanna did in response to her attack on her as a ''poor role model..''
She has the hubris to use her own specious hearing loss, as a way to justify the criticism of truly disabled individuals. Included in this category was the neighbor, well known to readers. He may have crossed some lines, but, he is a man, who is clearly disabled, and has difficulties. She mocks those who need special parking, questioning their validity, while claiming to be far more worthy of ''perks'' of being disabled.
She portrays herself as a martyr and the barometer of moral superiority. She lies about being obsessively compulsively honest. Only pathological liars claim they never lie. That's the gold standard for the diagnosis of a sociopath, for many psychologists.
She may be mentally ill, have a personality disorder, alcoholism and sociopathic tendencies. For this, I have some sympathy for her. But, the DM uses this to their benefit, overlooking all ethical standards in place for journalism. With journalism lowering the bar where the public has no faith in ''fake'' stories, and ''news,'' isn't it time to begin to weed out the worst offenders, and hold large websites accountable, if not legally, then morally?
She is a poser with elitist views, claiming to be bankrupt, but, still putting herself far above the masses. The DM provides a huge income, and there are FAR BETTER writers, and real journalists, I've read, on this thread!!! This gives Liz, a sense of celebrity credibility, and entitlement. This is cruel and unjust. This isn't journalism, but, some kind of social demagoguery, that the DM is exploiting. It may not be illegal, but, it could be grossly unethical, since they are a leading website for daily world News and opinion.
Analyzing what drew me to her, was what I felt was the most serious concern. As a recovering anorectic, I was attracted to her PRO-ANA point of view. For those with eating disorders, it is a deadly trigger.
I had ambivalence about doing this, concerned for her wellbeing, as well, but, added my complaints. Anyway, I don't know what the outcome will be, but, I don't think It is not being ignored.
DEAR MS. S.
Thank you for contacting the Independent Press Standards Organisation.
Your complaint is currently being assessed by IPSO’s staff, and we will be in touch with you again shortly. In the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any questions.
Should we decide that your complaint does not raise a possible breach of the Code, we will write to you to explain why and send a copy of your complaint, including your name and any contact details you have provided, and our letter to the publication.
Alternatively, if we decide that the concerns you have raised fall within our remit and raise a possible breach of the Code, and you have not previously exhausted the publication’s internal complaints procedures, a copy of your complaint and any other correspondence you have sent to us, including contact information, will be sent to the publication to provide it with the opportunity to resolve the matter directly with you.
A copy of the Editors’ Code of Practice, which is administered by IPSO
Interesting! Excellent points raised too. The pro-ana stuff in particular could be the magic point, since it's a clear example of her potentially causing harm to a wide number of readers.
On to today's dramatic Dreary. "In which I finally crack"!!! Will Liz fall in a sobbing heap on the floor? Call an ambulance begging for help? Be carried prostrate to a mental health facility, having now had a complete breakdown? Find herself broken open at last and ready to rebuild from the ground up, ready to do the hard work of becoming psychologically well, and full of regrets for her awful behaviours and the ways she has hurt those in her life, as people who have total breakdowns are wont to have?
No, no, alas, no. By "bonkers" she means "has worse tinnitus". Also "continues to email the Baker, as she has done without pause for the past few months". I'd say it's an insult to people who actually experience mental illness, but I'd probably just be called "too PC".
Despite destitution and a total mental breakdown, Liz will soldier on and go to the opening of 50 Shades Duller, far, far from where she lives. But it will not be glamorous, oh no.
The reality is I will teeter in my one remaining pair of Louboutin heels and a thin Gucci dress from taxi to red carpet
WAIT. Liz has previously claimed that she only has one dress, a VB special she had dyed black for more serviceability. Where did this "thin Gucci dress" come from? WHERE?
Someone has to direct her to the nearest Oxfam, where she could certainly pick up a coat or a nice warm cardi. And I am sure she could get a bus to the theatre, or the tube.
"The newspaper will find me somewhere."
OHO. What happened to "I must drive a million hours through the snow and hail in the darkness with a migraine having not eaten for four days because I am so poor"? COULD it be that Liz NEVER had to stay with the Baker, or pay for hotels, if she didn't CHOOSE to? Could it be that she's been spinning LIES about her circumstances all this time? SURELY NOT.
In today's dreary, she tells David "in no uncertain terms I only have one ticket" for the latest Fifty Shades movie.
Yet, in her review for the film, published on 12/02/2017, she states that she was there with a companion (apparently I've not been on DS long enough to post a link to that farticle, sorry).
She really can't remember what she says from one day to the next, can she?
In today's dreary, she tells David "in no uncertain terms I only have one ticket" for the latest Fifty Shades movie.
Yet, in her review for the film, published on 12/02/2017, she states that she was there with a companion (apparently I've not been on DS long enough to post a link to that farticle, sorry).
She really can't remember what she says from one day to the next, can she?
I'm not sure what the owners of the Pub of the Year will make of her 'review' alongside the farticle. She's just told her readers that they're quite happy for 2 untrained and undisciplined dogs to run free on their premises and attack a dog belonging to another customer. If the pub allows children in, I can't see parents wanting to go there under those circumstances. To be honest, I doubt very much if I'd go and risk it!
Once again her unpleasant approach to people that she would call 'minions' is much to the fore again in today's Farticle. I certainly am no champion of BT, but if the reported conversation is even halfway true, then I am not surprised they try everything to avoid actual contact with her. 'I hope one of his close relatives has died' - really? She thinks this is an approach likely to catapult her to the top of their 'must see' list?
She seems to have only recently been alerted to the fact that rural broadband service is somewhat patchy. A story that has been running for years, and is an actual scandal. But, as a so-called 'journalist', if good Wi-Fi service is a pre-requisite, it was up to her to check the provision before moving to her current location. Just like she would find all the 'travelling for work' sooo much easier if she chose to live closer to London, or as a minimum in a place with close access to the rail network. But no. As per, she expects to live exactly where she chooses and then for every corporation in the land to run around and somehow magically fix everything for her. Just her, mind - the rest can go to hell in a handcart.
Oh, and during one of her allegedly rare periods of connectivity, she should try googling 'phones for the deaf'. Where she will find a selection of inexpensive landline handset with boosted volume capability.
As for the Dreary, she says David is 'unputoffable'. Perhaps she would find him less so if she a) stopped texting him and b) didn't offer to put him up in the first place.
Comments
(Thank you again, cafe in Lappeenranta Castle - perfectly lovely place and water for the two goat-suckers)
WHAT? The pusscats are gone? She did mention, few weeks back, that she'd let 'the cats' out at her new place, but I assumed just a couple of cats, not the seventeen ferals she has bragged about for years. Did she leave them behind? Or ... did they even exist? At least, with 'Sam the dog formerly known as Michael' now deceased (RIP) I'd hope the two 'puppies' (oh please - puppies?) are not cat-gnawing hounds.
Looked at her place on Right Move today and it's sort of 'shaded', and a notice that it's either sold or temporarily removed from the website. As for all the comments on yesterday's Diary, Farticles, many have pointed out that despite her moaning about bankruptcy, it's more likely it's an IVA and indeed, she's on the IVA list - see https://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk/eiir/IIRCaseIndivDetail.asp?CaseId=701755725&IndivNo=703567625&Court=VOL&OfficeID=600000127&CaseType=I
Of course, maybe the IVA has morphed into bankruptcy - but I'm not sure that Liz even knows the difference.
Crap diary again. But she told us where she lived didn't she, and I thought she was going to keep it a secret ?
Her "Diaries" show that she is such a shoddy writer that she never knows from one piece to the next whether she.....
- is bankrupt or in an IVA
- a 24 hour dynamo or someone who starts "work" (i.e. reading personal emails) at 10am (on the dot , mind you!)
- hates David's guts or basks in the warm glow of his attentions (please, Liz, no detailed descriptions of your waxing/ cleaning arrangements for when he does visit next)
- needs advice on how to get out of the mess she is in - or someone who aggressively attacks those that do.
- craves privacy or is happy to keep on publishing intimate details of her (and others') lives in print
- "incredibly fit" enough to lug around hundreds of barrowloads of horse poo, or someone who cannot walk up a flight of stairs..
-
I could go on but I have a life to get on with !!
hi BellaFiga,
Great note. did anyone respond to you ?
The Dreary is dreary every week. In fact, it's the same column just re-hashed.
Nearly saw one of those bags today - just about identical - and one of 3 different shopping bags carried by a woman on the bus!! Must look on my local market!
Ooh, now I'm feeling like I may have actual style & might even be considered edgy, as I don't use an actual bag at all - rather I carry my most essential items around in my "random crap I can't live without" pencil case.
Thanks Suzy_Cat
To summarize my complaints, I began with my belief that the DM, is using her for the click-bait nature of this high paid gig, oblivious to her own well being, let alone millions of readers. She has increasingly pandered to vicious misanthropic themes. Her loathing of females, she believes is justified, and freely exploitable, because, she identifies as a ''feminist.'' Her hatred of men is equally as offensive, grossly generalizing them, as well. There are other polarizing journalists, but, they are lucid in their point of view, and fair, whether you agree or disagree. She is merely bonkers, almost incoherent.
Her exploitation of personal relationships, breaches their confidentiality. Most disturbing is the hyperbolic mockery of her ex-es, their friends, family and their ex-es. She has exploited her family, in withering and pathetic episodes. Where are their rebuttals? They have no access to the media, by calling her ''menopausal'' like Rihanna did in response to her attack on her as a ''poor role model..''
She has the hubris to use her own specious hearing loss, as a way to justify the criticism of truly disabled individuals. Included in this category was the neighbor, well known to readers. He may have crossed some lines, but, he is a man, who is clearly disabled, and has difficulties. She mocks those who need special parking, questioning their validity, while claiming to be far more worthy of ''perks'' of being disabled.
She portrays herself as a martyr and the barometer of moral superiority. She lies about being obsessively compulsively honest. Only pathological liars claim they never lie. That's the gold standard for the diagnosis of a sociopath, for many psychologists.
She may be mentally ill, have a personality disorder, alcoholism and sociopathic tendencies. For this, I have some sympathy for her. But, the DM uses this to their benefit, overlooking all ethical standards in place for journalism. With journalism lowering the bar where the public has no faith in ''fake'' stories, and ''news,'' isn't it time to begin to weed out the worst offenders, and hold large websites accountable, if not legally, then morally?
She is a poser with elitist views, claiming to be bankrupt, but, still putting herself far above the masses. The DM provides a huge income, and there are FAR BETTER writers, and real journalists, I've read, on this thread!!! This gives Liz, a sense of celebrity credibility, and entitlement. This is cruel and unjust. This isn't journalism, but, some kind of social demagoguery, that the DM is exploiting. It may not be illegal, but, it could be grossly unethical, since they are a leading website for daily world News and opinion.
Analyzing what drew me to her, was what I felt was the most serious concern. As a recovering anorectic, I was attracted to her PRO-ANA point of view. For those with eating disorders, it is a deadly trigger.
I had ambivalence about doing this, concerned for her wellbeing, as well, but, added my complaints. Anyway, I don't know what the outcome will be, but, I don't think It is not being ignored.
DEAR MS. S.
Thank you for contacting the Independent Press Standards Organisation.
Your complaint is currently being assessed by IPSO’s staff, and we will be in touch with you again shortly. In the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any questions.
Should we decide that your complaint does not raise a possible breach of the Code, we will write to you to explain why and send a copy of your complaint, including your name and any contact details you have provided, and our letter to the publication.
Alternatively, if we decide that the concerns you have raised fall within our remit and raise a possible breach of the Code, and you have not previously exhausted the publication’s internal complaints procedures, a copy of your complaint and any other correspondence you have sent to us, including contact information, will be sent to the publication to provide it with the opportunity to resolve the matter directly with you.
A copy of the Editors’ Code of Practice, which is administered by IPSO
No, no, alas, no. By "bonkers" she means "has worse tinnitus". Also "continues to email the Baker, as she has done without pause for the past few months". I'd say it's an insult to people who actually experience mental illness, but I'd probably just be called "too PC".
Despite destitution and a total mental breakdown, Liz will soldier on and go to the opening of 50 Shades Duller, far, far from where she lives. But it will not be glamorous, oh no.
The reality is I will teeter in my one remaining pair of Louboutin heels and a thin Gucci dress from taxi to red carpet
WAIT. Liz has previously claimed that she only has one dress, a VB special she had dyed black for more serviceability. Where did this "thin Gucci dress" come from? WHERE?
Someone has to direct her to the nearest Oxfam, where she could certainly pick up a coat or a nice warm cardi. And I am sure she could get a bus to the theatre, or the tube.
"The newspaper will find me somewhere."
OHO. What happened to "I must drive a million hours through the snow and hail in the darkness with a migraine having not eaten for four days because I am so poor"? COULD it be that Liz NEVER had to stay with the Baker, or pay for hotels, if she didn't CHOOSE to? Could it be that she's been spinning LIES about her circumstances all this time? SURELY NOT.
Yet, in her review for the film, published on 12/02/2017, she states that she was there with a companion (apparently I've not been on DS long enough to post a link to that farticle, sorry).
She really can't remember what she says from one day to the next, can she?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-4215960/50-Shades-seen-racier-episodes-Pingu.html
Here is the link (I was actually curious as to whether I would be allowed to post it. If this works, then obviously I am).
She seems to have only recently been alerted to the fact that rural broadband service is somewhat patchy. A story that has been running for years, and is an actual scandal. But, as a so-called 'journalist', if good Wi-Fi service is a pre-requisite, it was up to her to check the provision before moving to her current location. Just like she would find all the 'travelling for work' sooo much easier if she chose to live closer to London, or as a minimum in a place with close access to the rail network. But no. As per, she expects to live exactly where she chooses and then for every corporation in the land to run around and somehow magically fix everything for her. Just her, mind - the rest can go to hell in a handcart.
Oh, and during one of her allegedly rare periods of connectivity, she should try googling 'phones for the deaf'. Where she will find a selection of inexpensive landline handset with boosted volume capability.
As for the Dreary, she says David is 'unputoffable'. Perhaps she would find him less so if she a) stopped texting him and b) didn't offer to put him up in the first place.