Wednesday, 11 January 2012

Congratulations, Reading Evening Post!

Things I thought I'd never say no. 327.

  I get some haters on this blog from time to time, but the Post has now gone better than most of them.  They left out the gun porn that I get from time to time (those are the comments that get deleted, oddly enough) but there's still time for that.  Thanks Reading Evening Post for offering me a photocall tomorrow to publicise my book, I shall be there.  Such a tidal wave of pathological hatred and lies from someone on your website called Paul Cassell (who?) is bound to drive up sales, ta very much.

My little book has done no harm to anyone, and I am glad that it has not so far been treated unkindly.  Readers will however wonder who this person is who is being savagely attacked by this Mr Cassell, who as far as I know I have never met.  A piece of staggering journalistic ineptitude.  Congratulations chaps.

See you tomorrow, Reading people.  I've almost forgotten how to get there, it is years and years since I had anything to do with the place.

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

Don't get this. Is The Reading Evening Post rubbishing your book and also offering you a photocall?

Who is Paul Cassell? Is he a journalist? Why should these people assume that you have written about Reading?!!

Anonymous said...

So roughly how many comments in a week do you have to delete?
L9

Jane Griffiths said...

The Reading Evening Post is not rubbishing my book (which they have not read) they are rubbishing ME. And they chose to copy their "story" out of my blog and top and tail it with abuse. Some journalism, hein?

L9, if I post about Reading Labour in any critical way then I get three or four abusive comments and usually some violent porn in the hours following the post (usually late evening UK time), otherwise one a fortnight or less. And then not usually porn.

Jane Griffiths said...

a reader writes in response to Crappy Cassell:

"When I read the piece by Paul Cassell I had to laugh. Imagine the degradation, a journalist, that's it a professional journalist from the dead tree media being reduced to commenting on the content of a blog. No wonder he was so vile. Imagine how bad he felt about what he was doing. Such bad faith. Why they had not deigned to acknowledge your existence before. Stories taken from things first published on your blog but no mention of the origin. Sometimes the HMV habit of cut-and-paste resulted in them reading exactly as what was on the blog. But always the blog was ignored. But here he was a so-called professional writer having to write about someone, the writings of someone who is not a journalist, even worse, a blogger

Anonymous said...

It's just a bit of knockabout fun.

Anonymous said...

Anonymouse Post Apologist.

No it isn't. It doesn't play the ball it plays the person. The poor use of language and the ignorance of the history of posts on this blog show the writer of the piece was either ignorant or malevolent.

Anonymous said...

I haven't read it because I can't find the link - but I would assume is is anything but knockabotu fun, last Anon. Hey, Mr - because I am sure you ARE a Mr - do you actually know what it feels like to have people writing really horrible, nasty and abusive things about you on a regular basis? Even though the abusers are stupid dick-heads!! It isn't fun, matey - it is sick. And you feel like shit and that is just what the haters whant you to feel like.

I bet you'd get pissed off if someone said they were'nt too keen on your shoes, HEIN?

Anonymous said...

I think Martin Salter is the disgraced MP - or ex MP - for getting rid of a Labour colleague and neighbour who increased her majority; attempting to foist an ex sex offender on Westminster; not to mention the business of the MP expenses .

Didn't the guy cop off with £40,000 buckshee, Jane? Tell that to Cassell.

Anonymous said...

Anon 1800.
A bit pedantic perhaps, but can one be an EX sex-offender?
L9.

Anonymous said...

I was referring to the spent cottaging conviction. It appeared in all the newspapers with a refrence to Coronation Street

Anonymous said...

more homophobic nonsense please remove

Jane Griffiths said...

No.

Anonymous said...

I understood that the official Labour Party candidate for the Reading East seat in the 2005 General Election had a previous conviction for cottaging in a public convenience. I do not come from Readign, but read about this matter in The Daily Mail at the time.
If thsi is not the case, we need to know. And if it is untrue, then why did the person in question not sue? If it is the case, then it is a statement of fact - there is nothing homophobic in stating a fact. If we say that stating a fact is homophobic in itself, then we would have to be totally silent about Oscar Wilde's convictions. This is logic, not homophobia.