As he admitted to only contacting her to plug 'his' business, Mr 5% and his senior partners must be mortified at the the type of publicity he has actually generated. I have no sympathy[/B
Likewise.
He seems like a pretty awful person in his own right. He and Lizard deserve each other.
I wonder what will be in this week's dreary? I want to see what happens when the relationship with DScrace inevitably fails. Only then might the dreary be remotely interesting to read again. Ever since she got with him it's been unbelievably dull and repetitive.
Interesting to see in her main farticle about bullying trolls, how she has managed to criticise people attacking D'Scrace over his lack of cleanliness.
Interesting also to see how she singularly manages to avoid the blame for such criticism, when she started the whole thing off in her diary last week.
'I told him I am not a housewife, so why does he put dirty laundry back in his cupboard and not in the laundry basket, and why does he never empty the dishwasher?
Why does he not shave, and cut his fingernails?'
The dreary is more whinge-fuelled than ever, with her trotting out the usual 'I give so much and yet get nothing in return' for the zillionth time.
I've commented today about her creating drama in her relationships deliberately - let's see if it's printed.
She does seem to be the most impossible person to get along with. I have no particular liking for her current beau, but I don't think he could do anything at all that she would not moan about. Unfortunately she has "David Cassidy Syndrome" - the unrealistic expectation that someone will embody her fantasies of thirty years ago. And if she met David Cassidy now, she would drive him straight back to the bottle within days.
So she and lover-boy went to the Conran shop to buy kitchen utensils but didn't I read somewhere quite recently that she had her kitchen ripped out because she doesn't eat? Or did I imagine that?
I've commented today about her creating drama in her relationships deliberately - let's see if it's printed.
I made a post too at around 7.30am this morning... but nothing !
I reckon that her days at the DM are numbered. I can understand the DM employing her for creating click-through from polemic-writing, but she doesn't achieve this anymore. Her articles are all regurgitated from past input, it's like watching dirty-washing going around in a washing-machine, and sooner or later the program will come to an end.
She just creates a need for heavy-handed moderation.
I could understand if my post was rude - I've had a few posts not posted when I've said "your behaviour is vile" sort of thing - but this wasn't rude. And it's not been posted!
Liz, Queen of Trolls, hasn't worked out that she can have comments to The Diary removed and new ones suspended as much as she likes but the fact is SHE has already written in great detail about her elderly boyfriend, his alleged lack of hygiene and named his business. Readers may not be able to comment on it anymore (and what else are they meant to comment on?) but - they all still know the unsavoury facts. Are we to have our memories wiped after reading The Diary now? The few comments the Diary gets merely reflect what many other readers are thinking even if they don't comment. The damage is done to her boyfriend's reputation by her alone (and him for allowing it), regardless of the readers' comments.
It's interesting that Liz seems to follow almost exactly the same pattern every time she gets into trouble for overstepping the mark in print. It goes like this:
(1) She writes something in print that is massively unkind/thoughtless/cruel/spiteful/hurtful to someone else. (Insulting Clare Balding, exploiting relatives' personal tragedies, using a distressing image of her mother in bed, being rude about Kirstie Allsop's "fat", quoting the emails of people who have asked her not to, ignoring the wishes of people who have specifically asked not to be written about....the list goes on).
(2) Some sort of backlash occurs....complaints from the affected party, reader outrage, requests from family members to withdraw the photo, etc.
(3) She reacts to this perfectly justified criticism by playing the victim, accusing the complainer of "dripping poison" or "delivering jellyfish stings" or "bullying" or being a "vile troll."
At this point, either she defiantly repeats the original offence (her response when Kirstie Allsop complained to the editor was to write the exact same insult again the following week.) ...or she tries to backtrack and rewrite history to present herself as the innocent party, claiming "I only said"...(insert something far more acceptable than her actual words, even though the actual words are easily checkable online).
The text message episode in last week's Diary was a classic example of this. The original article was there online for all to see, with the line about the text message blatantly (and unforgivably) giving away the identity of the person she was talking about. Yet she still tried to wriggle out of it when challenged, claiming she just said "X" and pretending she gave no clues as to who she was talking about.
She then made matters worse by going off on the usual petulant, whiny, passive-aggressive rant about how badly treated she is by all the nasty bullies, and ending the column with the usual whinge that she "can't do this any more." As always, she doesn't seem to even consider for a second that she is not the victim of the situation, and that she has brought any criticism entirely upon herself by trampling over other people's feelings and wishes..
Sorry to quote my own post, (written last year) but it struck me that the situation she's complaining about this week is a perfect example of the above.....albeit with a victim closer to (her) home than her usual targets. It's ridiculous for her to blame the readers' comments for damaging the poor chap's reputation, when SHE is the one who has put this stuff out there. If she hadn't written all these unsavoury and unflattering things, no-one would even know about them, let alone comment on them. Now she's playing the victim because people are reacting to something SHE wrote. And, as always, she's trying to rewrite history by pretending she wrote something relatively harmless and innocuous....when her actual comments, written just a week or two before, are there online for all to see. Even she must realise that she can't blame other people for this latest drama?
Absolutely Cathrin, all the comments that were removed were merely paraphrasing Liz's own revelations and pointing out that her Diary would affect 'his' business. And of course we must remember that it is said that nothing bad can ever happen to a writer (well, apart from piles...!) so whilst the rest of the world has forgotten 'party-gate' and most didn't actually believe the allegations anyway, months later she is now milking it for all it is worth. She must have been ecstatic to be given another golden chance to play the victim card. What's the betting that the elderly baker is given a smart make-over soon in a farticle?
She herself is the vilest of trolls, so it does amuse me when she tries to portray herself as a victim. Can't wait for the day her family finally take their revenge on her, tbh!:D
I feel sorry for Liz in this week's column. Clearly the concept of a man of 60-odd having exes, and not wanting to treat them like crap, is something that doesn't quite click with her. Should she and the elderly baker split, which seems likely, I anticipate a lot of whining about how mean he is to her and how it's sooo awful that he refused to remain friends, unlike with his previous exes. The fact that it's what she is demanding of him now will entirely escape her.
"with David not even thinking about the fact we hadn’t eaten, so I might be hungry"
In which a woman of 50-something is incapable of finding herself a bite to eat.
This week's may be the most childish column I've ever read.
Just read the farticle Liz posted about trolls and it seems only positive comments were let through...I shouldn't be surprised.
Then, on one of the recent diary entries, there were only 5 comments.
Why do the Mail still employ this woman? She's clearly lost it as far as any ability she once had to get people to give a shit about what drivel she spews out goes.
This, from her column today, is just absurd crap -
"PS: I can’t really blame Gwyneth for wanting to divorce her rock star husband. Having dated a once-famous musician, I don’t know how she stood Chris Martin for ten days, let alone a decade.
After sex, my stadia-filling boyfriend said: ‘Thank you for your support.’ Leaving on yet another tour, his parting shot was: ‘You take care.’ I once found him scouring my CD collection for one of his albums.
When at last he found one, he complained it was ‘dusty’. At a music festival, I took along a pair of ear-protecting headphones for my border collie: He’s my hearing dog, so I didn’t want him to become deaf, too.
The boyfriend, upon spying said cans on said sheepdog, which I had to hold on to his head as they were designed for humans, said: ‘Are you going to be putting fur all over my jumpsuit later?’ Seriously, Gwyn, you can do much, much better."
1) Can't believe she's ever had sex!
2) So was he 'once-famous' or 'stadia-filling' - they are opposites?
3) 'Jumpsuit'?
This, from her column today, is just absurd crap -
"PS: I can’t really blame Gwyneth for wanting to divorce her rock star husband. Having dated a once-famous musician, I don’t know how she stood Chris Martin for ten days, let alone a decade.
After sex, my stadia-filling boyfriend said: ‘Thank you for your support.’ Leaving on yet another tour, his parting shot was: ‘You take care.’ I once found him scouring my CD collection for one of his albums.
When at last he found one, he complained it was ‘dusty’. At a music festival, I took along a pair of ear-protecting headphones for my border collie: He’s my hearing dog, so I didn’t want him to become deaf, too.
The boyfriend, upon spying said cans on said sheepdog, which I had to hold on to his head as they were designed for humans, said: ‘Are you going to be putting fur all over my jumpsuit later?’ Seriously, Gwyn, you can do much, much better."
1) Can't believe she's ever had sex!
2) So was he 'once-famous' or 'stadia-filling'? - they're opposites.
3) Jumpsuit?
4) She can't understand how Goopy stood Chris Martin for 10 days, but she dragged her own 'RS' fiction out for years.
5) It's Chris Martin who can do much, much, MUCH better.
6) I know she says she's deaf, but since when has she had a 'hearing dog'? First I've heard mention of her owning one.
I wouldn't put it past her, now there seems to be stormy weather with the Masterbaker, to resurrect the 'RS', as she seems to have started here.
I feel sorry for Liz in this week's column. Clearly the concept of a man of 60-odd having exes, and not wanting to treat them like crap, is something that doesn't quite click with her. Should she and the elderly baker split, which seems likely, I anticipate a lot of whining about how mean he is to her and how it's sooo awful that he refused to remain friends, unlike with his previous exes. The fact that it's what she is demanding of him now will entirely escape her.
"with David not even thinking about the fact we hadn’t eaten, so I might be hungry"
In which a woman of 50-something is incapable of finding herself a bite to eat.
This week's may be the most childish column I've ever read.
But at the beginning of the column she states that she had been to M & S and lugged home £100 worth of food
He left the iPad and the gold lighter outside her door, she'd bought them for him as she'd stated in almost every Diary since Christmas, are we supposed to be impressed by her generosity?
"But at the beginning of the column she states that she had been to M & S and lugged home £100 worth of food"
I know, right?
And I suppose she thinks reading all his emails on the iPad is OK because she paid for it, and also he dared to correspond with someone he used to go out with, privately, rather than putting it on the internet for all to read.
The Mail have spoilt all the fun now as the comments were definitely the best part and in doing so might have destroyed the column altogether as I imagine that (certainly online) quite a few read her column just to be amused at the sometimes infinitely superior comments underneath!
No comments for this weeks 'gem' so far. Dear me, she really is a juvenile in a 50-odd year old body isn't she? About time she grew up. Some people are capable of sustaining decent relationships with their exes, something she herself seems incapable of as she's far too busy noting every alleged wrong doing and listing everything she bought for them/paid for and feeling incredibly sorry for herself because they are so ungrateful. *roll eyes*
The Mail have spoilt all the fun now as the comments were definitely the best part and in doing so might have destroyed the column altogether as I imagine that (certainly online) quite a few read her column just to be amused at the sometimes infinitely superior comments underneath!
No comments for this weeks 'gem' so far. Dear me, she really is a juvenile in a 50-odd year old body isn't she? About time she grew up. Some people are capable of sustaining decent relationships with their exes, something she herself seems incapable of as she's far too busy noting every alleged wrong doing and listing everything she bought for them/paid for and feeling incredibly sorry for herself because they are so ungrateful. *roll eyes*
Couldn't agree more. What I personally find disturbing, is her constant need to say she is anexoric..or was..or is....
She cannot seem to make up her mind as to what state of mind/body she is in.
I will stand corrected if she is indeed in the throes of an eating disorder, nothing to be joked about, however I just don't see it myself. The woman is a self pitying bore of the highest order.>:(
So she and lover-boy went to the Conran shop to buy kitchen utensils but didn't I read somewhere quite recently that she had her kitchen ripped out because she doesn't eat? Or did I imagine that?
No, you didn't imagine that. She did say that she had her kitchen ripped out, and it was recent too. She said she had got rid of the London base too but she still seems to have a place in London. And, wasn't she renting the place in Yorkshire which is where the kitchen was ripped out?Landlord will be happy, but then I doubt the authenticity of a lot of what she writes. Because of these blatant contradictions I think a team write the diary and they don't have any continuity. She once said she had on friends but recently she keeps on saying my friend x, my friend y etc. she has either got suddenly very popular or it is another attention to detail lapse.
Something has gone pear-shaped since last week. Replies heavily filtered last week, nothing this week thus far ( tried a test one).
Suggest everyone moves the discussion to digital spy and let them get the advertising revenue. Play LjJ and the DM at their own game.
Glad everyone else is disgusted at the comment filtering.
You really have to wonder why they still bother with LJ as for years they have used her as click bait to get people reading and commenting and it worked wonders for them. So what now when comments are so heavily moderated only five got accepted on a recent dreary entry, with only positive comments being allowed on her trolling article about trolling. People here have said in their droves they no longer read LJ because she's so boring now, too. Yet the woman will presumably still be paid 500K a year to write crap people aren't interested in and can't even comment on.
The Mail online showbiz section has really lost it's readability during the last year or so, what with it's catering to overseas readers and now this. It used to be a riot to read and now I barely bother.
I suppose that the constant expressions of doubt on the authenticity of the writing could lead you to doubt the accuracy of their other content. And that could be very embarassing for MoS. Perhaps that is why they are not publishing them anymore. The fact that there are contradictory facts that keep appearing in her column, the appalling editing and proofreading on the Mail's website in general, makes me think that something bad is going down with their quality control.
No, you didn't imagine that. She did say that she had her kitchen ripped out, and it was recent too. She said she had got rid of the London base too but she still seems to have a place in London. And, wasn't she renting the place in Yorkshire which is where the kitchen was ripped out?Landlord will be happy, but then I doubt the authenticity of a lot of what she writes. Because of these blatant contradictions I think a team write the diary and they don't have any continuity. She once said she had on friends but recently she keeps on saying my friend x, my friend y etc. she has either got suddenly very popular or it is another attention to detail lapse.
She has actually bought the, formerly rented, place in Yorkshire. Her finances, possibly due to CBB, have improved. I wonder how long that will last. But yes, she did say she was getting ri of the London pad and that doesn't seem to have happened yet.
Comments
Likewise.
He seems like a pretty awful person in his own right. He and Lizard deserve each other.
(and a further whingefest in an article about people being beastly to her in various ways, shapes and forms)
Interesting also to see how she singularly manages to avoid the blame for such criticism, when she started the whole thing off in her diary last week.
'I told him I am not a housewife, so why does he put dirty laundry back in his cupboard and not in the laundry basket, and why does he never empty the dishwasher?
Why does he not shave, and cut his fingernails?'
The dreary is more whinge-fuelled than ever, with her trotting out the usual 'I give so much and yet get nothing in return' for the zillionth time.
She does seem to be the most impossible person to get along with. I have no particular liking for her current beau, but I don't think he could do anything at all that she would not moan about. Unfortunately she has "David Cassidy Syndrome" - the unrealistic expectation that someone will embody her fantasies of thirty years ago. And if she met David Cassidy now, she would drive him straight back to the bottle within days.
I made a post too at around 7.30am this morning... but nothing !
I reckon that her days at the DM are numbered. I can understand the DM employing her for creating click-through from polemic-writing, but she doesn't achieve this anymore. Her articles are all regurgitated from past input, it's like watching dirty-washing going around in a washing-machine, and sooner or later the program will come to an end.
She just creates a need for heavy-handed moderation.
Sorry to quote my own post, (written last year) but it struck me that the situation she's complaining about this week is a perfect example of the above.....albeit with a victim closer to (her) home than her usual targets. It's ridiculous for her to blame the readers' comments for damaging the poor chap's reputation, when SHE is the one who has put this stuff out there. If she hadn't written all these unsavoury and unflattering things, no-one would even know about them, let alone comment on them. Now she's playing the victim because people are reacting to something SHE wrote. And, as always, she's trying to rewrite history by pretending she wrote something relatively harmless and innocuous....when her actual comments, written just a week or two before, are there online for all to see. Even she must realise that she can't blame other people for this latest drama?
"with David not even thinking about the fact we hadn’t eaten, so I might be hungry"
In which a woman of 50-something is incapable of finding herself a bite to eat.
This week's may be the most childish column I've ever read.
Then, on one of the recent diary entries, there were only 5 comments.
Why do the Mail still employ this woman? She's clearly lost it as far as any ability she once had to get people to give a shit about what drivel she spews out goes.
"PS: I can’t really blame Gwyneth for wanting to divorce her rock star husband. Having dated a once-famous musician, I don’t know how she stood Chris Martin for ten days, let alone a decade.
After sex, my stadia-filling boyfriend said: ‘Thank you for your support.’ Leaving on yet another tour, his parting shot was: ‘You take care.’ I once found him scouring my CD collection for one of his albums.
When at last he found one, he complained it was ‘dusty’. At a music festival, I took along a pair of ear-protecting headphones for my border collie: He’s my hearing dog, so I didn’t want him to become deaf, too.
The boyfriend, upon spying said cans on said sheepdog, which I had to hold on to his head as they were designed for humans, said: ‘Are you going to be putting fur all over my jumpsuit later?’ Seriously, Gwyn, you can do much, much better."
1) Can't believe she's ever had sex!
2) So was he 'once-famous' or 'stadia-filling' - they are opposites?
3) 'Jumpsuit'?
"PS: I can’t really blame Gwyneth for wanting to divorce her rock star husband. Having dated a once-famous musician, I don’t know how she stood Chris Martin for ten days, let alone a decade.
After sex, my stadia-filling boyfriend said: ‘Thank you for your support.’ Leaving on yet another tour, his parting shot was: ‘You take care.’ I once found him scouring my CD collection for one of his albums.
When at last he found one, he complained it was ‘dusty’. At a music festival, I took along a pair of ear-protecting headphones for my border collie: He’s my hearing dog, so I didn’t want him to become deaf, too.
The boyfriend, upon spying said cans on said sheepdog, which I had to hold on to his head as they were designed for humans, said: ‘Are you going to be putting fur all over my jumpsuit later?’ Seriously, Gwyn, you can do much, much better."
1) Can't believe she's ever had sex!
2) So was he 'once-famous' or 'stadia-filling'? - they're opposites.
3) Jumpsuit?
4) She can't understand how Goopy stood Chris Martin for 10 days, but she dragged her own 'RS' fiction out for years.
5) It's Chris Martin who can do much, much, MUCH better.
6) I know she says she's deaf, but since when has she had a 'hearing dog'? First I've heard mention of her owning one.
I wouldn't put it past her, now there seems to be stormy weather with the Masterbaker, to resurrect the 'RS', as she seems to have started here.
But at the beginning of the column she states that she had been to M & S and lugged home £100 worth of food
He left the iPad and the gold lighter outside her door, she'd bought them for him as she'd stated in almost every Diary since Christmas, are we supposed to be impressed by her generosity?
I know, right?
And I suppose she thinks reading all his emails on the iPad is OK because she paid for it, and also he dared to correspond with someone he used to go out with, privately, rather than putting it on the internet for all to read.
The Mail have spoilt all the fun now as the comments were definitely the best part and in doing so might have destroyed the column altogether as I imagine that (certainly online) quite a few read her column just to be amused at the sometimes infinitely superior comments underneath!
No comments for this weeks 'gem' so far. Dear me, she really is a juvenile in a 50-odd year old body isn't she? About time she grew up. Some people are capable of sustaining decent relationships with their exes, something she herself seems incapable of as she's far too busy noting every alleged wrong doing and listing everything she bought for them/paid for and feeling incredibly sorry for herself because they are so ungrateful. *roll eyes*
Couldn't agree more. What I personally find disturbing, is her constant need to say she is anexoric..or was..or is....
She cannot seem to make up her mind as to what state of mind/body she is in.
I will stand corrected if she is indeed in the throes of an eating disorder, nothing to be joked about, however I just don't see it myself. The woman is a self pitying bore of the highest order.>:(
No, you didn't imagine that. She did say that she had her kitchen ripped out, and it was recent too. She said she had got rid of the London base too but she still seems to have a place in London. And, wasn't she renting the place in Yorkshire which is where the kitchen was ripped out?Landlord will be happy, but then I doubt the authenticity of a lot of what she writes. Because of these blatant contradictions I think a team write the diary and they don't have any continuity. She once said she had on friends but recently she keeps on saying my friend x, my friend y etc. she has either got suddenly very popular or it is another attention to detail lapse.
Suggest everyone moves the discussion to digital spy and let them get the advertising revenue. Play LjJ and the DM at their own game.
You really have to wonder why they still bother with LJ as for years they have used her as click bait to get people reading and commenting and it worked wonders for them. So what now when comments are so heavily moderated only five got accepted on a recent dreary entry, with only positive comments being allowed on her trolling article about trolling. People here have said in their droves they no longer read LJ because she's so boring now, too. Yet the woman will presumably still be paid 500K a year to write crap people aren't interested in and can't even comment on.
The Mail online showbiz section has really lost it's readability during the last year or so, what with it's catering to overseas readers and now this. It used to be a riot to read and now I barely bother.
She has actually bought the, formerly rented, place in Yorkshire. Her finances, possibly due to CBB, have improved. I wonder how long that will last. But yes, she did say she was getting ri of the London pad and that doesn't seem to have happened yet.