Guess who was on This Morning today? That's right - Liz! (after I'd said she was banned too I knew she'd turn up once I said that ). Mind you, wasn't Phil and Holly, not even Ruth and Eamonn but stand-in presenters Jamie Theakston and Emma Bunton who, quite frankly, are terrible presenters (at least together.)
It was one of their 'debates' - should there be adult only planes? Guess which side of the debate Liz was on?! (I'm sure the lady in the debate with her is the one who was up against Katie Hopkins in the infamous 'chav' name debacle). Liz's up-her-own-backside comment of the day was that she should be rewarded for not having children :rolleyes: I have no idea what she meant because I was starting to glaze over as it was so boring. Oh and she also said that parents are afraid to tell their kids off - perhaps she means in public because other people tend to judge/look horrified? It was all a bit awkward and disjointed IMO, mainly because the presenters were so dire and weren't leading the discussion at all, just sitting giggling, fidgeting and making a right hash of it. I never thought anyone would annoy me more than Liz but these two numpties did!
Actually, I hate sitting near kids on aeroplanes so can sympathise with Liz's stance on this one a bit She did say that if not entirely child free they could have a special kids section, perhaps near the back of the plane.
I'm going to be fair and say that she came over OK, not a screaming harpy or as mad as usual. I didn't feel the urge to kick the TV like I did watching Lorraine Kelly simpering and Liz repeating the same old, same old :yawn:
And her book wasn't mentioned once :cool:
I watched her 'performance' with the usual teeth grinding. I agree the presenters were absolute rubbish at interviewing, but one thing stood out: whenever J or E said "it's the parents you have a problem with, isn't it", she always responded with "Mums" don't do this or "Mums" don't do that. Which is odd because, as we know, she is a great supporter of Women... oh, and the book is #1939 in the Kindle charts...
Just a quickie... The Dreary is up a day early online. She names a few names and it's worth a gander for those she doesn't name: the RS, Trever, Jeremy... Go and have a gander, it's almost worth it!
The new 'name and shame' diary has to be one of the most pathetic yet. How dare all these people move on with their miserable lives when Liz hasn't? Glad that most didn't respond to her. Liz is locked in a time-warp, still fantasing about her ex-boyfriends and holding grudges against her former BFFs. I'm sure seeing their names in print in a national newspaper will help them see the error of their treacherous ways.
Her ramblings are so poorly strung together these days I'm not even going to read the latest one. How can anyone enjoy what she writes, just based on the appalling penmanship alone? I find her literally unreadable and not because of the inane content of her scrawlings.
A true anorexic does think she (or he) is chunky, even when they are frighteningly, even life-threateningly underweight. But for all Liz's protestations about anorexia, plenty of photos exist showing her to be of a perfectly normal size, even in the teenage days when she claims to have been starving herself. And since she claims to have been anorexic for at least 40 years, one would expect her to have been skeletally thin at some time. Although she says she was admitted to hospital and there are no pictures to refute or deny her condition at the time, her account of what happened there, and what the doctors said and did, is odd to say the least. She can hardly be said to be in the early stages of anorexia.
I said that the example I gave were not relevant to proving or disproving Liz's claims - I never said she was in the early stages of anorexia.
BIB - not true at all. While it's true for some, many sufferers have come forward to denounce this as a myth. They're not blind. Anorexia is always portrayed as some kind of vanity disease, but most often it's about control. They feel their weight is the only thing that they can control in their lives and it gives them a sense of purpose. Other sufferers (especially female) are terrified of growing up, and try to avoid it by not allowing their body to grow.
It's a very complex mental health disease, and causes are even more complex, and little understood. I feel LJ does a lot of damage to the public's understanding of the disease (who's sufferers receive little sympathy) by living out the untrue stereotype of a shallow, vain, bitchy woman who looks in the mirror and thinks she's fat.
Indeed I have - I make it a point never to praise (or vilify) something I've not experienced, and having read her other books, I can safely say that even by their low standards, this is an appallingly bad piece of writing, as almost all the other reviews (pro and amateur) point out, something the dire sales would strongly seem to support.
I see you've once more sidestepped my point about her theft of the words and emotions of others, so I feel I can safely assume you're perfectly happy with your heroine doing this. As a former journalist, researcher and a published author who has a great love and respect for teh written word, I find it utterly despicable, and anyone who condones, as you do, such practises isn't much better.
I also find it fascinating that you berate us for 'bothering' with her, yet return here regularly to grace us with your condescending observations (whenever I read your posts, I hear the voice of Margaret Thatcher in my head: somehow it fits perfectly).
Margaret Thatcher's voice in your head when you read my posts?
Bizarre but funny all the same!
Not sure who comes to mind when I read yours - especially last years "slapper " post about Denise Welch (who by the way I can't stand!) which for some reason, still sticks in my mind.
I have to say your "great love and respect for the written word" didn't exactly fly off the page there!
Really strange farticle today. Clearly she is trying to wind up the royalists by saying Kate should have waited and adopted at 40, not had her own child.:rolleyes:
Then the usual all mothers are fat and smug carp.
Clearly angling for another spot on This Morning.:yawn:
Really strange farticle today. Clearly she is trying to wind up the royalists by saying Kate should have waited and adopted at 40, not had her own child.:rolleyes:
Then the usual all mothers are fat and smug carp.
Clearly angling for another spot on This Morning.:yawn:
very strange farticle, I had to read the 1st paragraph twice (my poor eyes!) before I understood what she was waffling on about. She really is an embittered little troll of a woman.
I think she is one of those people who hate seeing someone else happy, an emotional vampire type of person, who sucks all the joy out of another person so the only way people can get away from them is to cut off ties completely. And from her You mag column it seems to fit. Lizzie, if you ask people to reply on "why did you dump me" then they are not going to reply because you will print it in your column like you print every aspect of your ex friends lives.
oh! anyone want to meet Liz?! Only £15 AND you get the chance to buy both her books so she can sign them!!! *watches the tumbleweeds start to pile up*
Really strange farticle today. Clearly she is trying to wind up the royalists by saying Kate should have waited and adopted at 40, not had her own child.:rolleyes:
Then the usual all mothers are fat and smug carp.
Clearly angling for another spot on This Morning.:yawn:
Just read that and wondered if I was missing the point as there really didn't seem to be one.
And I would bet my mortgage that the scene on the plane never actually happened.
very strange farticle, I had to read the 1st paragraph twice (my poor eyes!) before I understood what she was waffling on about. She really is an embittered little troll of a woman.
I think she is one of those people who hate seeing someone else happy, an emotional vampire type of person, who sucks all the joy out of another person so the only way people can get away from them is to cut off ties completely. And from her You mag column it seems to fit. Lizzie, if you ask people to reply on "why did you dump me" then they are not going to reply because you will print it in your column like you print every aspect of your ex friends lives.
oh! anyone want to meet Liz?! Only £15 AND you get the chance to buy both her books so she can sign them!!! *watches the tumbleweeds start to pile up*
what a golden opportunity,missed the promo for that. Oh dear never mind.:p
Just read that and wondered if I was missing the point as there really didn't seem to be one.
And I would bet my mortgage that the scene on the plane never actually happened.
She doesn't have the bottle to speak to people like that in real life, see how quickly she caves in when being interviewed.
I have never watched it, but is SATC that riveting that anyone could want to see it as many times as LJ claims?
I'm sure there will be a DS coach booked to take us all to the exclusive book signing! If no one is shelling out to buy the actual book why would they pay more to go and see the old bat, oh, and book it through a premium rate phone line as well :rolleyes: We can ask her questions eh? Ok,
"Hello Liz, can you tell us who the rock star is and how, in this multi-media age you two love birds have managed to keep your golden love so private and sacred?"
"Pardon? I'm deaf? Next question, preferably about animals..."
"You've made him up haven't you Liz, he doesn't exist does he?"
"Sorry, I can't hear the question, I have borderline selective hearing, here is a slide show of my animals though..."
I thought last week's Diary had scraped the bottom of the barrel (a rehash of a whinge published in the MoS a couple of weeks earlier, taking the usual potshots at the usual person). But this week we sink even deeper.
In a nutshell: She wanted to write an article to promote her book. (The idea for the article was someone else's,already done by someone else in another publication). It involved contacting a load of people who no longer want anything to do with her, asking them WHY they no longer want anything to do with her, and then whingeing because they don't reply (er, I think the clues were all in place for that one Liz!) So the article she had planned to write didn't happen. But what the hell, she writes about them and names them anyway. Full names. Charming.
Shame on the DM for printing this. Imagine if you were one of those people, living your life and trying to forget whatever unfortunate experience led you to cut someone out of your life years ago. And then suddenly this. Shockingly bad journalism. And there's something inherently vicious about the attitude "You don't want to be a part of my self-indulgent article? Tough. I'll write about you anyway, and I'll name you too."
ETA: I think I vaguely remember the original feature, in fact I think we may have discussed it on this thread? Another female journalist sought out a load of ex-boyfriends, and tried to get them to chew over the relationship with her. They all ran a mile from the idea IIRC, and she took this to be a sign that she must have hurt them very badly (it didn't seem to cross her mind that she might have been an absolute nightmare to go out with and maybe they couldn't bear to think about her!) Can't remember who it was...one of the usual bunch I guess!
A simple question for astor: do you condone Jones' practise of altering her stories to fit, her blatant lies and her equally blatant plagiarism of the words of other, passing their experiences off as her own ? A straight yes or no please.
Some of the comments on the book signing really set me up for this morning
I loved: I am sorely tempted, as I have many questions that I should like to put to Liz. A bit worried about the photos though, wouldn't like to end up pictured in the Mail with a gurning Liz clad in plastic apron and gloves beside me. So, on balance, I think I'll pass and tweeze my knees instead.
The send-up on this was funny Habibti. In the comments section after it, plenty of people didn't know who she was and Googled her. I think the army of 'Liz loathers' will grow as a result as she does herself no favours whatsoever in everything she writes.
My bloke likes to buy the Sunday papers rather than read them online, so I always read the Dreary in YOU magazine. Directly beneath it is a cartoon entitled DEMENTED, the first word printed after Liz's last. Apt.
Well, well... the book-signing is sold out. But... The Mail reserves the right to cancel at no notice and tickets are non-refundable. Who'll offer odds on it going ahead??
If I were Liz I'd be very afraid. Those that have bought tickets are either there to have a laugh and try to ask her questions about the fictional rock star, etc, or her scary 'devoted fans' who just want to be her best friend. Either way, I don't think it's going to go the way Liz anticipates, I wouldn't be surprised if she pulls out at the last minute (and no one will be able to claim a refund)
It does sound a bit unbelievable that this is sold out. Are they just wind up comments on the article perhaps? ( I'm not ringing a premium line to find out.)
If it does go ahead, filled with her devotees, we will all see their pictures in a farticle. what with them giving up all moral/legal rights.
I can't see any detractors wasting that amount of money somehow.
Comments
I watched her 'performance' with the usual teeth grinding. I agree the presenters were absolute rubbish at interviewing, but one thing stood out: whenever J or E said "it's the parents you have a problem with, isn't it", she always responded with "Mums" don't do this or "Mums" don't do that. Which is odd because, as we know, she is a great supporter of Women... oh, and the book is #1939 in the Kindle charts...
I said that the example I gave were not relevant to proving or disproving Liz's claims - I never said she was in the early stages of anorexia.
BIB - not true at all. While it's true for some, many sufferers have come forward to denounce this as a myth. They're not blind. Anorexia is always portrayed as some kind of vanity disease, but most often it's about control. They feel their weight is the only thing that they can control in their lives and it gives them a sense of purpose. Other sufferers (especially female) are terrified of growing up, and try to avoid it by not allowing their body to grow.
It's a very complex mental health disease, and causes are even more complex, and little understood. I feel LJ does a lot of damage to the public's understanding of the disease (who's sufferers receive little sympathy) by living out the untrue stereotype of a shallow, vain, bitchy woman who looks in the mirror and thinks she's fat.
Margaret Thatcher's voice in your head when you read my posts?
Bizarre but funny all the same!
Not sure who comes to mind when I read yours - especially last years "slapper " post about Denise Welch (who by the way I can't stand!) which for some reason, still sticks in my mind.
I have to say your "great love and respect for the written word" didn't exactly fly off the page there!
Then the usual all mothers are fat and smug carp.
Clearly angling for another spot on This Morning.:yawn:
very strange farticle, I had to read the 1st paragraph twice (my poor eyes!) before I understood what she was waffling on about. She really is an embittered little troll of a woman.
I think she is one of those people who hate seeing someone else happy, an emotional vampire type of person, who sucks all the joy out of another person so the only way people can get away from them is to cut off ties completely. And from her You mag column it seems to fit. Lizzie, if you ask people to reply on "why did you dump me" then they are not going to reply because you will print it in your column like you print every aspect of your ex friends lives.
oh! anyone want to meet Liz?! Only £15 AND you get the chance to buy both her books so she can sign them!!! *watches the tumbleweeds start to pile up*
Just read that and wondered if I was missing the point as there really didn't seem to be one.
And I would bet my mortgage that the scene on the plane never actually happened.
what a golden opportunity,missed the promo for that. Oh dear never mind.:p
She doesn't have the bottle to speak to people like that in real life, see how quickly she caves in when being interviewed.
I have never watched it, but is SATC that riveting that anyone could want to see it as many times as LJ claims?
"Hello Liz, can you tell us who the rock star is and how, in this multi-media age you two love birds have managed to keep your golden love so private and sacred?"
"Pardon? I'm deaf? Next question, preferably about animals..."
"You've made him up haven't you Liz, he doesn't exist does he?"
"Sorry, I can't hear the question, I have borderline selective hearing, here is a slide show of my animals though..."
T&C, By attending the event you agree to be photographed and waive all rights, including moral rights, in any photography.
Bloody hell! DM really taking the pee now.:mad:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you/article-2370122/Exclusive-reader-event-Meet-YOU-columnist-Liz-Jones.html
In a nutshell: She wanted to write an article to promote her book. (The idea for the article was someone else's,already done by someone else in another publication). It involved contacting a load of people who no longer want anything to do with her, asking them WHY they no longer want anything to do with her, and then whingeing because they don't reply (er, I think the clues were all in place for that one Liz!) So the article she had planned to write didn't happen. But what the hell, she writes about them and names them anyway. Full names. Charming.
Shame on the DM for printing this. Imagine if you were one of those people, living your life and trying to forget whatever unfortunate experience led you to cut someone out of your life years ago. And then suddenly this. Shockingly bad journalism. And there's something inherently vicious about the attitude "You don't want to be a part of my self-indulgent article? Tough. I'll write about you anyway, and I'll name you too."
ETA: I think I vaguely remember the original feature, in fact I think we may have discussed it on this thread? Another female journalist sought out a load of ex-boyfriends, and tried to get them to chew over the relationship with her. They all ran a mile from the idea IIRC, and she took this to be a sign that she must have hurt them very badly (it didn't seem to cross her mind that she might have been an absolute nightmare to go out with and maybe they couldn't bear to think about her!) Can't remember who it was...one of the usual bunch I guess!
I loved: I am sorely tempted, as I have many questions that I should like to put to Liz. A bit worried about the photos though, wouldn't like to end up pictured in the Mail with a gurning Liz clad in plastic apron and gloves beside me. So, on balance, I think I'll pass and tweeze my knees instead.
My bloke likes to buy the Sunday papers rather than read them online, so I always read the Dreary in YOU magazine. Directly beneath it is a cartoon entitled DEMENTED, the first word printed after Liz's last. Apt.
If it does go ahead, filled with her devotees, we will all see their pictures in a farticle. what with them giving up all moral/legal rights.
I can't see any detractors wasting that amount of money somehow.
Clearly a very small room. But in the heart of Mayfair, so that's all right then.