Re: Diana - yet again!
- From: Alf <Alf@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 18:41:18 +0100
Robin T Cox wrote:
On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 18:25:41 +0100, jake wrote:
Can't people get enough of her. For pete's sake, it just goes on and
on an on. She was just a simple girl who didn't hav enough
intelligence to realise that marrying the heir to the throne involved
meeting lots of people, going places and uttering platitudes most of
the time. As such she was a terrible wife to Charles (an all round
good guy in my book). She let him down big time and drove him away and
he ended up with the big Cam. - a mother figure with whom he is far
happier. Why on earth people are trying to turn her into a saint just because
she did good because she had nothing else to do I just don't know. I
mean all credit to her for doing that rather that nothing - but good
grief, it wasn't a second coming.
She sells newspapers and gossip magazines, and in today's celebrity
culture that's good enough. Also, as she is conveniently dead, she can
never be indiscreet enough to ruin her reputation. So she is an ideal
media property.
Yes of course, all that is true. But for her to be a valuable media property a lot of people must actually be interested? She was just one of many people who find themselves in bad marriages. She died in a car crash after leaving the Paris Hilton accompanied by her latest boyfriend. Apart photo opportunities of her shaking hands with AIDs victims where are the grounds for this worship?
In the same week Mother Theresa died. Her death just managed to make the middle pages?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Diana - yet again!
- From: joblard
- Re: Diana - yet again!
- From: Smolley
- Re: Diana - yet again!
- References:
- Diana - yet again!
- From: jake
- Re: Diana - yet again!
- From: Robin T Cox
- Diana - yet again!
- Prev by Date: Re: August posting stats for u.p.m.
- Next by Date: Re: August posting stats for u.p.m.
- Previous by thread: Re: Diana - yet again!
- Next by thread: Re: Diana - yet again!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
