GS
But she was awful on Newsnight. She tried to think she was Paxman and failed.
Totally agreed - she put on this pseudo-authorative look on her face, but she just looked like she was really angry, shaking her head violently and practically shouting the headlines.
Your opinion would be more relevant if you remotely touched upon her abilities as a political correspondent, rather than totally superficial reviews of how she looks.
By the same reckoning you probably find Gary O’Donoghue equally "awful", being blind as he is and therefore unaware of how he appears.
Would that be a fair statement?
I think it's fairly obvious that the earlier poster was referring to the manner with which LK presented, rather than a comment about how she looked, as Gavin has chosen to understand it.
I didn't choose anything. I referred to the comments.
I'm sorry if the word "looks" confused you. I was referring a critique which solely mentioned her delivery style, tone of her voice and physical demeanor, with not a reference to her knowledge, ability to editorialise large chunks of daily political chatter or interview guests.
But then, you decided she's "over-rated" without any clue why you came to this conclusion, and said she's only noticeable because of her gender.
Or have I misunderstood again?
Gavin Scott
Founding member
They could have given Laura some more regular, high profile, presenting work possibly (e.g. Newsnight) until a bigger role came up, but certainly no obvious, more senior, reporting vacancies available
Has she got any past business experience?
Has she got any past business experience?
But she was awful on Newsnight. She tried to think she was Paxman and failed.
Totally agreed - she put on this pseudo-authorative look on her face, but she just looked like she was really angry, shaking her head violently and practically shouting the headlines.
Your opinion would be more relevant if you remotely touched upon her abilities as a political correspondent, rather than totally superficial reviews of how she looks.
By the same reckoning you probably find Gary O’Donoghue equally "awful", being blind as he is and therefore unaware of how he appears.
Would that be a fair statement?
I think it's fairly obvious that the earlier poster was referring to the manner with which LK presented, rather than a comment about how she looked, as Gavin has chosen to understand it.
I didn't choose anything. I referred to the comments.
I'm sorry if the word "looks" confused you. I was referring a critique which solely mentioned her delivery style, tone of her voice and physical demeanor, with not a reference to her knowledge, ability to editorialise large chunks of daily political chatter or interview guests.
But then, you decided she's "over-rated" without any clue why you came to this conclusion, and said she's only noticeable because of her gender.
Or have I misunderstood again?