The puzzle of modern punditry
Take a look at the headline to Martin Kettle’s column in the Guardian today.
Now, how many people actually settled down to that thinking it was going to be an unmissable read, do you think? How many on the other hand, whether with the paper or the website, hurriedly turned the page or clicked the mouse?
You see this kind of thing a lot, particularly in the Guardian. Who is stuff like this supposed to appeal to? The audience for it must be miniscule. Those of us who’ve watched Blunkett over the years will roll their eyes at a hagiography by a New Labour hack. For those willing to overlook Machine-Gun Blunkett’s many failings, the column is equally redundant, isn’t it? By now there must be few who are going to be persuaded to change their opinion of Blunkett, least of all by Martin bloody Kettle.
Posted on December 19th, 2008 at 7:56am under Culture, media and sport, New Labour
| Related posts... • Mandelson: party like it’s 1939 • Flatus Quo • KerBlunk! |
• Permalink • Trackback • Subscribe |
|
|
|
• 2 Comments |

Isn’t it aimed at people like us, in the same ‘provoking rage and despair’ way that the Mail runs stories about lesbian asylum seekers abolishing Christmas?
I initially read that as ‘Why I still hate Blunkett’…