Haven't people heard of the telephone or sending a note via pen and paper these days?? Surely they could find the means to pass on their best wishes privately.
To see these 'messages of condolence' sandwiched amongst the usual trite and trivial offerings of minor celebrities plugging their latest TV show is tasteless indeed.
Twitter isn't the place for hand-wringing and faux grief over such a private matter.
Does narcistic, offensive and trite apply to Bel Mooney's writings in the Daily Mail yesterday? They devoted more space to her article wittering on about her still birth 35 years ago and how she could relate to it than Amanda's tragedy, so I'd say jan Moir reeks of hypocrsiy.
What a pity that Amanda is a normal, heterosexual woman with no bad habits that we know about then maybe Ms Moir could impy that she deserved it much the same way she has in the past. She's a vile specimen of journalism and why anybody reads her crap never mind gives credence to it is beyond me.
Does narcistic, offensive and trite apply to Bel Mooney's writings in the Daily Mail yesterday? They devoted more space to her article wittering on about her still birth 35 years ago and how she could relate to it than Amanda's tragedy, so I'd say jan Moir reeks of hypocrsiy.
That depends on whatever personal angle you choose to take. People can read what they want to read.
Newspapers are there to invite opinion and discussion, otherwise journalists wouldn't be doing their job in the manner expected of them by their employers.
That depends on whatever personal angle you choose to take. People can read what they want to read.
Newspapers are there to invite opinion and discussion, otherwise journalists wouldn't be doing their job in the manner expected of them by their employers.
Being controversial for the sake of being controversial is just ridiculous. Jan and the DM just want to cause outrage, not provoke thought. Yes, she is only doing her job, but that does not relieve her of responsibility. Much of what she writes is just downright nasty, and that can't be defended.
I think Jan Moir has a point. Some celebs may want all their followers and fans to read that they're thinking of celebs who have lost loved ones. I don't know whether some post their sympathy because they think that's what's expected of them or they're trying to improve their image, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did.
Journalists seem to monitor Twitter, so if a celeb posts reaction to another celeb losing her baby, that in itself can become a news story. I hope though, that doesn't lead to celebs who don't post reaction to other celebs suffering tragidies being condemned for not doing so.
It's up to people whether they choose to offer sympathy publically or privately. If for example Amanda Holden had tweeted that she lost her baby on Twitter, it would be quick and convenient to reply offfering sympathy. Leaving comments on Facebook can also be much quicker than picking up the phone or visiting the person, so if people are busy, they may find expressing sympathy on social media more quick and convenient. Others may prefer to use the phone or pay a visit to who ever has received the bad news.
We should also consider that online reaction is documented. We don't know that none of the celebs have reacted in other ways. We don't have access to Amanda Holden's phone, so we don't know if celebs have called or texted her. I don't know whether any celebs have visited her. This lack of knowledge can lead people to conclude that celebs have only reacted online, but that may not be true in all cases. The only ways around this for celebs are to either not offer any online reaction, be spotted visiting a celeb who has received bad news, or to publicise their offline reactions for example: phoned Amanda Holden to offer my condolences. I'm not saying celebs should use these sollutions, but they are options celebs may wish to consider.
I agree with her, I find it very irritating too. Of course it's not good timing but come on, it's a daily newspaper. You have to be topical, it's just the way it is.
I think Jan Moir has a point. Some celebs may want all their followers and fans to read that they're thinking of celebs who have lost loved ones. I don't know whether some post their sympathy because they think that's what's expected of them or they're trying to improve their image, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did.
Journalists seem to monitor Twitter, so if a celeb posts reaction to another celeb losing her baby, that in itself can become a news story. I hope though, that doesn't lead to celebs who don't post reaction to other celebs suffering tragidies being condemned for not doing so.
It's up to people whether they choose to offer sympathy publically or privately. If for example Amanda Holden had tweeted that she lost her baby on Twitter, it would be quick and convenient to reply offfering sympathy. Leaving comments on Facebook can also be much quicker than picking up the phone or visiting the person, so if people are busy, they may find expressing sympathy on social media more quick and convenient. Others may prefer to use the phone or pay a visit to who ever has received the bad news.
We should also consider that online reaction is documented. We don't know that none of the celebs have reacted in other ways. We don't have access to Amanda Holden's phone, so we don't know if celebs have called or texted her. I don't know whether any celebs have visited her. This lack of knowledge can lead people to conclude that celebs have only reacted online, but that may not be true in all cases. The only ways around this for celebs are to either not offer any online reaction, be spotted visiting a celeb who has received bad news, or to publicise their offline reactions for example: phoned Amanda Holden to offer my condolences. I'm not saying celebs should use these sollutions, but they are options celebs may wish to consider.
Indeed, but as one of the comments on the DM website said - if they did send something privately, just do it privately and don't make a show of being so "caring" in public.
I think its a cynical world we live in now, I know how shocked I was when I heard the news about Amanda Holden, and I noticed that there were tweets from pregnant ladies and also Lily Allen who knows exactly how she will be feeling. Whether or not you feel its the right medium to express condolence there is no doubt that when Amanda eventually does look at her twitter she will gain comfort from the fact that so many people took time to think of her and her family. People are sad for her loss and they are expressing it in the most modern way.
I have walked in Amanda's shoes and I found comfort in peoples condolences however they were expressed. The Daily Mail will make a story out of anything, and Jan Moir has got form, if only she could pick her time better. I thought Bel Mooney's piece yesterday was very touching and she made her points very well, she certainly wasnt 'wittering.The loss of a child never leaves you, not even after 35 years. its a long road ahead for Amanada she will never be the same again. But with the support of her family and friends she will learn to live with her loss but she will never ever get over it
Indeed, but as one of the comments on the DM website said - if they did send something privately, just do it privately and don't make a show of being so "caring" in public.
But is that not just the nature of things today. When news of the tragedy broke the thread on here ran to 9 pages of people saying how sorry they were. People who dont even know Amanda Holden. I dont see the difference that a celeb says it on twitter. Given Sarah Parrish and Kym Marsh's experiences I would hazard a guess that their comments were only ever meant with compassion and understanding not publicity seeking.
But is that not just the nature of things today. When news of the tragedy broke the thread on here ran to 9 pages of people saying how sorry they were. People who dont even know Amanda Holden. I dont see the difference that a celeb says it on twitter. Given Sarah Parrish and Kym Marsh's experiences I would hazard a guess that their comments were only ever meant with compassion and understanding not publicity seeking.
I think it depends how well they know them. Someone like sarah parrish knows her well - she should, perhaps, do it privately. But people online don't know Amanda Holden so this is their outlet to show sympathy. I think this point or something like it was in the article, I can't remember.
I think it depends how well they know them. Someone like sarah parrish knows her well - she should, perhaps, do it privately. But people online don't know Amanda Holden so this is their outlet to show sympathy. I think this point or something like it was in the article, I can't remember.
But celebs cant win.
When Gerry Rafferty died there was a thread on here slating Billy Connolly because at that point he hadn't made a comment and considered it private. Since Princess Diana's very media friendly mourning it's considered odd if people dont comment.
I think it depends how well they know them. Someone like sarah parrish knows her well - she should, perhaps, do it privately. But people online don't know Amanda Holden so this is their outlet to show sympathy. I think this point or something like it was in the article, I can't remember.
Yes, but maybe she wanted to show Amanda she was thinking of her without disturbing her at the minute. It's easy to be cynical about these things, but people aren't all bad!
When Gerry Rafferty died there was a thread on here slating Billy Connolly because at that point he hadn't made a comment and considered it private. Since Princess Diana's very media friendly mourning it's considered odd if people dont comment.
I understand this, although I think this is an entirely different situation and would not require a tribute comment, which is fair enough after a death.
In no way can she take moral highground of looking down on those using people's tragedy to promote themselves, in fact I would question her motives far more than theirs, she actually makes money off a miscarriage here.
Once again turning a horrible tragedy into a vile attack and expressing her outrage by doing exactly that thing she’s outraged about.
Surely tweeting is only acceptable for fans and people who don't know the person but want to express their condolences. True friends write, phone or visit (or all three) and don't make an issue of someone elses grief thier own?
In no way can she take moral highground of looking down on those using people's tragedy to promote themselves, in fact I would question her motives far more than theirs, she actually makes money off a miscarriage here.
Once again turning a horrible tragedy into a vile attack and expressing her outrage by doing exactly that thing she’s outraged about.
In no way can she take moral highground of looking down on those using people's tragedy to promote themselves, in fact I would question her motives far more than theirs, she actually makes money off a miscarriage here.
Once again turning a horrible tragedy into a vile attack and expressing her outrage by doing exactly that thing she’s outraged about.
Surely tweeting is only acceptable for fans and people who don't know the person but want to express their condolences. True friends write, phone or visit (or all three) and don't make an issue of someone elses grief thier own?
Not all celebs know Amanda well. And even if they do - Twitter is a fast way to express their thoughts. And maybe they would feel weird if they had went on to start talking about their coffee or their launch on twitter without mentioning Amanda? And who's to say they didn't write condolence letters to Amanda after that?
Amanda herself is a twitter user and although I'm not sure, I think she even made a condolence tweet towards Lily Allen after Lily lost her baby.
If Amanda wasn't a twitter user, I would understand the outrage. But she is and maybe in a better moment she opens her iPhone and finde some comfort in some tweets? What's wrong with that?
People are so cynical, even celebs are human beings and not every tweet or every sign of compassion is a courting of publicity.
Jan Moir is just a misogynic, vile woman and on top of that a nasty piece of work. She's earning money by writing about Amanda's stillbirth and ranting about people who show their compassion by tweets. Is it only me who sees the irony here?
Over 30 years ago I lost a baby at 3 days old. We had to have a funeral. Between the time of giving birth up to the time of the funeral I hardly seen anyone apart from close family. Nobody visited and people in the street would suddenly dive into a side street if they seen me coming.
The reason; friends and neighbours did not know what to say to me. They felt that it was better to see me later when I had recovered?
The end result of all this was I thought nobody cared. Of course they cared, they just couldent face me, but I was fragile, hormonal and grieving. I personally feel that any form of condolence is helpful for the healing process. I dont care if its twitter, text, phone call or banner. Of course a letter or card is nice to keep but the world has moved on.
As for Jan Moir, I'm surprised she did not say "perfectly healthy babies just do not die for no reason" she has said that in the past about a death. To twitter a message of condolence may not be to everyones taste, but to me, to specifically write to condemn and belittle peoples words of condolence is worse than any word she has used to describe them
Over 30 years ago I lost a baby at 3 days old. We had to have a funeral. Between the time of giving birth up to the time of the funeral I hardly seen anyone apart from close family. Nobody visited and people in the street would suddenly dive into a side street if they seen me coming.
The reason; friends and neighbours did not know what to say to me. They felt that it was better to see me later when I had recovered?
The end result of all this was I thought nobody cared. Of course they cared, they just couldent face me, but I was fragile, hormonal and grieving. I personally feel that any form of condolence is helpful for the healing process. I dont care if its twitter, text, phone call or banner. Of course a letter or card is nice to keep but the world has moved on.
As for Jan Moir, I'm surprised she did not say "perfectly healthy babies just do not die for no reason" she has said that in the past about a death. To twitter a message of condolence may not be to everyones taste, but to me, to specifically write to condemn and belittle peoples words of condolence is worse than any word she has used to describe them
As you have been through this horrendous experience, I would say your views are extremely relevant. Bereaved people find they are being avoided anyway but when it is a still birth or death of a very young baby, that seems to make it even harder for people to approach and they decide it is better to say nothing than say the wrong thing - and this is at a time when you need support most of all.
We used to have ways of dealing with this which involved family and friends gathering together but this has diminished in recent times due to families often being fragmented and not living in the same area and apart from very close friends, others feel they would be in the way rather than being helpful. Some religions have specific ways to deal with it as well but we are a less religious society these days.
I am not saying this is something that should never be debated for fear of offending someone, I am just questioning the timing of the article. It is more to do with common human decency and manners than anything else - which in my personal view is far more important than the somewhat more trivial debate as to whether Tweeting is or isn't a preferable way of expressing condolences than a card.
How does she know they haven't phoned Amanda etc? Writing it on Twitter is better than just ignoring it. If someone I was friends with lost a baby, I would probably write a message for them, that's what twitter is - to express opinions and thoughts.
Comments
Does narcistic, offensive and trite apply to Bel Mooney's writings in the Daily Mail yesterday? They devoted more space to her article wittering on about her still birth 35 years ago and how she could relate to it than Amanda's tragedy, so I'd say jan Moir reeks of hypocrsiy.
What a pity that Amanda is a normal, heterosexual woman with no bad habits that we know about then maybe Ms Moir could impy that she deserved it much the same way she has in the past. She's a vile specimen of journalism and why anybody reads her crap never mind gives credence to it is beyond me.
That depends on whatever personal angle you choose to take. People can read what they want to read.
Newspapers are there to invite opinion and discussion, otherwise journalists wouldn't be doing their job in the manner expected of them by their employers.
Being controversial for the sake of being controversial is just ridiculous. Jan and the DM just want to cause outrage, not provoke thought. Yes, she is only doing her job, but that does not relieve her of responsibility. Much of what she writes is just downright nasty, and that can't be defended.
You cannot forever stifle discussion just because somebody, somewhere might get offended.
There will always be people who take offence no matter what the subject.
All newspapers are guilty of controversy for controversy's sake. The tabloids traditionally leave their morals in the gutter.
Journalists seem to monitor Twitter, so if a celeb posts reaction to another celeb losing her baby, that in itself can become a news story. I hope though, that doesn't lead to celebs who don't post reaction to other celebs suffering tragidies being condemned for not doing so.
It's up to people whether they choose to offer sympathy publically or privately. If for example Amanda Holden had tweeted that she lost her baby on Twitter, it would be quick and convenient to reply offfering sympathy. Leaving comments on Facebook can also be much quicker than picking up the phone or visiting the person, so if people are busy, they may find expressing sympathy on social media more quick and convenient. Others may prefer to use the phone or pay a visit to who ever has received the bad news.
We should also consider that online reaction is documented. We don't know that none of the celebs have reacted in other ways. We don't have access to Amanda Holden's phone, so we don't know if celebs have called or texted her. I don't know whether any celebs have visited her. This lack of knowledge can lead people to conclude that celebs have only reacted online, but that may not be true in all cases. The only ways around this for celebs are to either not offer any online reaction, be spotted visiting a celeb who has received bad news, or to publicise their offline reactions for example: phoned Amanda Holden to offer my condolences. I'm not saying celebs should use these sollutions, but they are options celebs may wish to consider.
Indeed, but as one of the comments on the DM website said - if they did send something privately, just do it privately and don't make a show of being so "caring" in public.
I have walked in Amanda's shoes and I found comfort in peoples condolences however they were expressed. The Daily Mail will make a story out of anything, and Jan Moir has got form, if only she could pick her time better. I thought Bel Mooney's piece yesterday was very touching and she made her points very well, she certainly wasnt 'wittering.The loss of a child never leaves you, not even after 35 years. its a long road ahead for Amanada she will never be the same again. But with the support of her family and friends she will learn to live with her loss but she will never ever get over it
But is that not just the nature of things today. When news of the tragedy broke the thread on here ran to 9 pages of people saying how sorry they were. People who dont even know Amanda Holden. I dont see the difference that a celeb says it on twitter. Given Sarah Parrish and Kym Marsh's experiences I would hazard a guess that their comments were only ever meant with compassion and understanding not publicity seeking.
I also feel that the media should drop it. There's no need to keep going on about it. Amanda and her family should be left in peace to grieve.
I think it depends how well they know them. Someone like sarah parrish knows her well - she should, perhaps, do it privately. But people online don't know Amanda Holden so this is their outlet to show sympathy. I think this point or something like it was in the article, I can't remember.
But celebs cant win.
When Gerry Rafferty died there was a thread on here slating Billy Connolly because at that point he hadn't made a comment and considered it private.
Yes, but maybe she wanted to show Amanda she was thinking of her without disturbing her at the minute. It's easy to be cynical about these things, but people aren't all bad!
I understand this, although I think this is an entirely different situation and would not require a tribute comment, which is fair enough after a death.
In no way can she take moral highground of looking down on those using people's tragedy to promote themselves, in fact I would question her motives far more than theirs, she actually makes money off a miscarriage here.
Once again turning a horrible tragedy into a vile attack and expressing her outrage by doing exactly that thing she’s outraged about.
Ghastly and made me nauseous.
I agree.
THIS.
Not all celebs know Amanda well. And even if they do - Twitter is a fast way to express their thoughts. And maybe they would feel weird if they had went on to start talking about their coffee or their launch on twitter without mentioning Amanda? And who's to say they didn't write condolence letters to Amanda after that?
Amanda herself is a twitter user and although I'm not sure, I think she even made a condolence tweet towards Lily Allen after Lily lost her baby.
If Amanda wasn't a twitter user, I would understand the outrage. But she is and maybe in a better moment she opens her iPhone and finde some comfort in some tweets? What's wrong with that?
People are so cynical, even celebs are human beings and not every tweet or every sign of compassion is a courting of publicity.
Jan Moir is just a misogynic, vile woman and on top of that a nasty piece of work. She's earning money by writing about Amanda's stillbirth and ranting about people who show their compassion by tweets. Is it only me who sees the irony here?
I don't see why it's so shocking that celebs should do the same. Obviously some of them will know her well enough to be in touch. Many won't.
http://shooterblog.dailymail.co.uk/2011/02/amanda-holden-cant-your-friends-send-personal-messages.html
The reason; friends and neighbours did not know what to say to me. They felt that it was better to see me later when I had recovered?
The end result of all this was I thought nobody cared. Of course they cared, they just couldent face me, but I was fragile, hormonal and grieving. I personally feel that any form of condolence is helpful for the healing process. I dont care if its twitter, text, phone call or banner. Of course a letter or card is nice to keep but the world has moved on.
As for Jan Moir, I'm surprised she did not say "perfectly healthy babies just do not die for no reason" she has said that in the past about a death. To twitter a message of condolence may not be to everyones taste, but to me, to specifically write to condemn and belittle peoples words of condolence is worse than any word she has used to describe them
As you have been through this horrendous experience, I would say your views are extremely relevant. Bereaved people find they are being avoided anyway but when it is a still birth or death of a very young baby, that seems to make it even harder for people to approach and they decide it is better to say nothing than say the wrong thing - and this is at a time when you need support most of all.
We used to have ways of dealing with this which involved family and friends gathering together but this has diminished in recent times due to families often being fragmented and not living in the same area and apart from very close friends, others feel they would be in the way rather than being helpful. Some religions have specific ways to deal with it as well but we are a less religious society these days.
I am not saying this is something that should never be debated for fear of offending someone, I am just questioning the timing of the article. It is more to do with common human decency and manners than anything else - which in my personal view is far more important than the somewhat more trivial debate as to whether Tweeting is or isn't a preferable way of expressing condolences than a card.