Jade Goody Coverage

Brekkie, will you please stop making yourself out as some sort of victim of persecution? You're not, and you're no martyr for free speech as you seem to be insinuating - you are just posting a different opinion to other people on the board. That is fine - but not when you report it as arrogant fact. Fyi I'm neither a crony of Gavin, nor am I a n00b on TVF; I am merely someone who reads frequently and posts in both forums. So don't try and accuse me of cronyism.

Martin: like it or not, Jade has and always will divide public opinion. There are many who think she's a waste of space and many who still look up to her. I don't think there's anyone to "blame" here - and to be honest, I don't think it's really appropriate to discuss things like "who's to blame for the coverage" when we all know that celebrity sells copies, and the majority of the Brits seem to love celebrity.

However, you will find that a lot of people (particularly mums, young mums at that) will sympathise with Jade. A common line seems to be "I don't like her, but I wouldn't wish this on anyone, not even Jade". To be honest, I'd agree with that. She's not a bad person per se, just ignorant (East Angular springs to mind, as does Shilpa Poppadom) and lacking class. Obviously the press sensationalises but I would have thought a rational human being like yourself could form your own opinion of her, without it being rammed down your throat and onto your keyboard by a redtop.

You can criticise the way she's turned her death into a media circus, but she seems to have done it with the sole intention of making money for her sons' future after her "career" unravelled following BB, and with raising awareness of this terrible disease. I can't fault her on either count - while it may not be the way you'd choose to die, it is the way Jade has chosen to live her final few weeks/days and we can all accept that. Don't forget - if you don't want to hear/read about it, you have a built-in "ignore" switch. It's called a brain.

Sums up my feelings on the subject quite well, but I agree with Martin, and wish that she can be left, with her family until her time is up, rather than having every detail of what's happening splashed across the newspapers and news programmes.

She is the reason I feel like this. If she, as many other (less famous) sufferers of cancer have in the past, devoted the remainder of thier time to raising awareness of the illness and raising money for the various charities who support those who have to suffer, along with their families, I would be much happier about seeing this level of publicity. Instead, she has quite publicly stated she will flaunt the rest of her life to the press solely to fund her childrens lifestyle. The rise in screenings, and publicity for cancer charities has been a completely inconsequential outcome of the publicity she is creating about herself to earn money.

Sorry Gavin, but I don't subscribe to the "she may not be the most popular person on the planet, but she's suffering from a horrible illness and must be given our sympathy" idea, simply because she doesn't either. She couldn't give two hoots about anyone else dying of the same disease, as long as she's raked in the cash for her children. And, you know what, I don't really blame her... Just as long as she doesn't expect everyone to pretend she's not doing this for any other reason.

Raising money for her kids isn't wrong, I just wish she could do it in a better way. My anger is really with those who buy these magazines, papers, and watch these TV shows about her death.

As I said, I don't blame her for doing it, or the way she's doing it. It just annoys me when people try to make out that it's anyone's choice but hers to be doing this.

I guess somebody else has already picked this up, but I had to reply to this ridiculous attitude and haven't read on.

Firstly, stop labelling people who disagree with you 'Gavin and his cronies'.

Also, please stop implying (for example, through your silly signatures) that anyone who challenges you is somehow compromising your right to express your opinion.

My problem with you is not that you have an opinion. In fact, I love you having an opinion, and would strongly stick up for you if anyone tried to deny you that. What I don't like however is the matter-of-fact way you post it which intentionally or not comes across as arrogant.

To be honest, you'd be a lot more tolerable if you posted less; because you're in danger of becoming a broken record. I think I would know your opinion on any subject that's been discussed on TV Forum if asked because you've said it so often.

Please don't think I'm saying this to be spiteful. Its something that's been building up for a few weeks now. I'm hardly the forum's favourite poster, and I'm fully prepared for any criticism which comes my way (which will probably be six times as worse). But its something I just had to say.

Right well, it depends on the newspaper as to if consumers do want to know about Jade and not every newspaper has her on the front page at the same time tmk although I know you just tend to judge everything with the same brush ad-nauseam.

And secondly, perhaps most people aren't likely to be tuning in for an update on Jade but again...most people are and I wouldn't say it was always 'top story' but it will be covered.

Thirdly, your signature is ridiculous and pointless once again.

How do you know that?

Perhaps "hypocritical" is the wrong phrase for me to have used, "double-think" would've been better. I don't expect the papers to consistent; as you say, that would he hopelessly naive.

My previous comment about the papers being "hypocritical" was more of an observation really, even a point of satire (aimed at the papers). You only have to look through "Hackwatch" or "Street of Shame" sections of Private Eye to see copious examples-- indeed I'm extremely thankful that Ian Hislop does the work he does.

Of course it would be nice if papers were consistent; but as you remark Gavin, the papers bend with the wind to shift copies. I would opine there is an irony in this: I would suggest part of the reason newspaper circulations are dwindling as a whole, is sensationlism and double-standards. I believe growing numbers of people are becoming disillusioned with papers' increased chicanery; as Paul O'Grady often has it: "You can only really believe the date in papers these days"

So papers may boost their circulation for one day; but in the long-run it's counter-productive, as most papers' circulations are on the slide (by all accounts).

Indeed, there's a very amusing piece in this edition of Private Eye.



I think that pretty much sums up the celebrity culture we live in, and the behaviour of those editors desperate to retain their circulation.

Knowing this, as I assumed most on this forum do, I wonder why anyone would turn to the person at the centre who is dying, and attack her further?

She is the epitome of reality-show celeb, so one can hardly expect her to do anything more than what she does best - get money in the bank for giving interviews. The public want it - 770,000 watched her wedding on Living TV (surely a large audience for them?) - and she wants the money for her kids.

I don't like any part of this. I think it holds a very large mirror up to the public, and this "hunger" they have for gossip and celebrity voyeurism.

But common decency stops me from wishing her dead, or blaming her for contracting a disease and dealing with it as she has, in the manner which has been written here and elsewhere.

If anything her death will exacerbate the public's somewhat ghoulish appetite.

It's all abit morbid setting up camp on her doorstep on a deathwatch.

I'm finding all this very uncomfortable now, i don't want to witness her decline but it's so hard to avoid.

Anyone seen the ads for OK! tonight? I think whatever your stance on this story (and it's the story, not the victim, I have the issue with), it's pretty despicable to release a tribute issue before she's even died with phrases such as "In Loving Memory", "1981-2009" and "Final Words".
http://www.rp-network.com/tvforum/uploads/ok.jpg
Are magazines regulated in the same way as newspapers?

'In Loving Memory'??

She's still alive for God's sake.