Spot on, Edna. I would imagine that most of these co-called "celebrity columns" are in fact penned by ghost writers.

Ahh BNP supporters, those people who assume they know the characters of certain people., in spite of never having actually met them?. I agree, the BNP are arseholes.

Goes without saying that people are free to like whom they like and change their opinions favourably or unfavourably towards people. We all do it in life. I´m just confused that this article does it for some. I´ve read it five times trying to see what I´m missing and I still don´t get it. Not seeing any great insight there or anything to make me reassess or give credit to anyone. Just one little opinion amongst the masses who are free to disagree, I´m just not seeing anything there that hasn´t been spoken about on the boards for a week now and viewed by many of us.

All of them are. Well ones like BB columns are.

As I said in another thread, we have quite heated discussions on here as to whether or not being in the BB house gives someone the qualifications to be a television presenter, so why should we assume it can also turn someone into a columnist overnight?

Can we lose the idea that doing a proper newspaper or magazine piece is easy? Carrie Bradshaw might just tap out the odd sentence on her laptop but that's not reality people.

Ask anyone who writes a column for Digi Spy here and they'll tell you it's hard work. I've no doubt the DS team have had to turn down applications from very competent forum members who just didn't have the knack of writing a column.

Jon's pieces for here might not be as polished, but he's written them himself in his spare time.

By the way, I can spot a writing style a mile off and having read Cameron's numerous posts on another forum that shall not be named, I can confidently say that he did not write the newspaper piece all by himself.

There's enough people on here who know what forum I'm talking about - go have a look and compare the two styles for yourselves

cameron: ".....trendy anarchists"

if only it were true. sadly the dominant trend of today is a trend for ultra-conformity and apathy.

Indeed. I actually often read The Sun and I think it's hilarious. Tabloid journalism is a genuine art form. It's about getting very specific information across using very specific vocabulary.

And of course the Daily Mail isn't written by retired colonels and blue-rinsed WASP old ladies, it's written for that demographic.

And all the journos probably meet up in some swanky wine bar and have a good laugh at all of us.

Indeed. Kitten is almost a walking anachronism.

You mean badly interpreted religious text. The Bible is translated into English very well, by professional translators. Unfortunately, a lot of people misunderstand it. There's nothing in The Bible about gay marriages.



So, you're saying that most people in this country (who voted Cameron to win) are the kind of areseholes who support the BNP? Surely, saying that makes you the kind of arsehole who supports the BNP, since you've just made a very offensive generalisation about everyone who likes Cameron.

Why does everyone here hate Cameron? Could anyone explain? I thought he was the nicest guy in there last year.

Finally people are starting to come round...cameron is not the son of satan...he has done nothing wrong...his article is wonderful...far better than jon tickles...hopefully digital spy will sign him up next year...we would be proud to have him...

Mr Blonde this a wind up correct ???

No...i dont do wind ups...

And I thought you were a fun person

I wrote that the people who support Cameron, based on several articles he's written and the "Cameron Stout: Bigger, Longer And Uncut" on E4 (as opposed to the sanitised Channel 4 shows, where all his offensive behaviour was curiously absent), must either be reactionary BNP scum or those "who are too thick to know any better". I wonder which category you fall into?



There's numerous threads dealing with what an odious bastard Cameron is, settle yourself down with some cocoa and biscuits and read.

its almost as if...as if...i dunno - there's more to these *housemate people* than the 10 weeks we see of them stuck inside the BB house!]

Iain

whats that? it was *desperate way* to make him look nice?

you know your big mistake there? presuming people give a monkeys? you think, much like, say, i dunno - Tom Cruise, has a whole backroom of various staff, Cameron has people behind the scenes, desperate to create this finely hones image of him? so he can become a big tv, amd maybe even film star?

you honestly don't think Cameron could come up with a second rate article for a second rate column in a second rate newspaper all by himself? that even that has to be part of a more sinister and alarming Cameron-like deviousness and cunning?

you guys crack me up, you really do!

Iain

Yes. Shocking, isn't it?

whats that? newspapers aren't always what they seem? hmm - isn't it?

Iain

its almost as if, yet i'm sure its not, as tho' you're saying that the tabloids have an uncanny knack of telling people what they want to hear?

i might have my wires crossed again tho'.

Iain

I'm saying that the tone and content of a particular paper (The Sun, The Daily Mail etc.) is somewhat attuned to the mindset of its readers. And people will usually filter what is presented before them through their own perspective.

in a nutshell :

he did and said about three things, with which he was hung, drawn and quartered. and that was just for starters.

it was all *Cameron's an obnoxious (bloke from) *****
*I know - isn't he*
etc etc,
whereby people who didn't like him snowballed the thing to outrageous proportions, through the medium of positive reinforcement garnered within the confines of these forums, until things become reinforced to the point where they become *fact*, regardless of whether or not they are.

i think that was about it anyway.

the whole *positive reinforcement* thing has actually handily taken place in this thread.

ie

*i wouldn't be surprised if he didn't even write that article*
*i didn't think he would have written it either*
*absolutely - i don't think any of these things are written by their apparent authors*
*these things are never written by their authors*
*from what everyone is saying, we can safely say he didn't write it*.

of course by then the point is lost - even if cameron's article had been edited for style or whatever, the chances are it still represents his opinion - but by now that doesn't matter, because it has been shown, once again, that he is A Very Evil Man. and so the myth self perpetuates.

Iain

Or indeed that he did behave like a **** in the house and lots of people coincidentally formed the same opinion and there seemed to be a general concensus of that opinion on this forum. I found some of his behaviour to be unpleasant and I disliked him.

Then again, the BB house is a very strange, pressurised environment and he may very well be a completely different person outside it. However, having formed a negative view of him based on what I saw in the house, I don't care enough about him to want to find out.

it certainly is, i agree.

Iain

Doesn't necessarily mean it's not fully representative of his opinions.

does that matter tho', if the aim is simply to cast Cameron in a bad light.

people are a bit surprised by his opinions in the article, and it goes against what they think of him - so the only possible answer is that it had nothing to do with him!

what othe explanation could there possibly be?

Iain