Monday, 23 May 2011

Social media, Imogen, and He Who Must Not Be Named...

Yes that's right, two blogs in two days. Just thought I'd share my thoughts on the whole super injunction saga, along with everyone else on the internet. Firstly, it greatly amuses me that the man at the centre of the whole fiasco has been turned in to a Lord Voldemort figure. For those of you who are not Harry Potter geeks (shame on you), Lord Voldemort is the main villain in the Harry Potter series. He's referred to as 'He Who Must Not Be Named' or 'You Know Who' because people are too afraid and/or in awe of him to mention his name. Even though everyone now knows who the naughty footballer is, people are still too afraid to say his name in case he sues them. This is a reasonable assumption to make, seeing as he's threatening to sue everyone on Twitter who has mentioned his name in connection with Imogen's mystery man. Yes, because that's a reasonable threat... hmm. Anyway, I'm not going to mention his name because it's much more fun to call him He Who Must Not Be Named (and I really don't want to get sued).

I think you'll agree that the footballer is marginally more attractive.

Let me get one thing straight. I really couldn't care less who Imogen Thomas does or doesn't sleep with. I don't particularly like her, I think she's a bit of an attention seeker who hasn't really achieved much, and it doesn't please me that half her family live in the village where I was born (Bottom, not Upper). So, I would really prefer that her shenanigans were kept private between her and whoever she's shenaniganing with (shenaniganing... that works, right?). However, when you decide to embark on an affair with a married Premiership footballer, it's probably not going to stay quiet. I don't know if she wanted it to become public or not - again, I don't care. Not entirely sure why some people are portraying her as the victim in all this as she must have known about the risks before she got involved in the first place. So there's not much point trying to get sympathy on Twitter - just move on, people make mistakes and everyone will accept that eventually. People will forget about He Who Must Not Be Named in time too, they'll just enjoy slating them both for the next few months then get bored of it. Maybe soon I'll be able to listen to some significant news rather than hearing everyone trying to figure out who is sleeping with who in Celebrity Land.

I still find it quite ridiculous that He Who Must Not Be Named has managed to create more publicity for himself with all this super injunction nonsense ... did he really think he'd ever successfully cover it up? Maybe in the 1950s it would have worked, but definitely not in this day and age. It would have saved a lot of hassle if he'd just come clean about it, and I'd have been subjected to less photos of Imogen looking miserable. Also, on the subject of super injuctions, what on earth is the point of them if MPs can just reveal the culprits if they want to? Money is obviously no object and the costs of the injunction probably won't even have dented his bank account, but still a big waste. And now he's wasting even more by trying to sue Twitter... sigh. Whatever happened to freedom of speech, which is surely what social networking is all about?

Which brings me on to my last topic... social media, innit. I read the following comment on a blog earlier which made me choke on my banana and chocolate flapjack:
I've never seen the point of Twitter, and I'm still not convinced of its value, even now. So-called "social media" websites are still, as far as I'm concerned, for people who have nothing better to do than post inane drivel, thinking that people are interested in it. Come on people, get a life...
Twitter might not be everyone's cup of tea, but I don't think anyone in their right mind could argue that it's pointless or has no value. This lovely gentleman would probably see my Twitter posts as 'inane drivel', but I do post useful things sometimes, believe it or not. And who cares if other people don't find my tweets useful/interesting/ground breaking? I'm expressing myself, which I have every right to do. I don't even bother to look at news websites anymore - Twitter is my first stop for everything I ever need to find out. Sometimes I even use it as a substitute for google if I'm looking for information on a specific topic that's being talked about right now. Also, I don't actually have that time on my hands, I actually post most of my tweets when I'm out and about observing various things, and this is the case with loads of people who use Twitter. You'd be very silly to ignore such a powerful tool... people need to join the conversation and get to where all the other people are! If you don't want to get involved with social media, then don't... but you still need to recognise its significance.

And obviously, if you join Twitter, you get to hear all the leaked super injunctions before everyone else does. Score!

Saturday, 30 April 2011

To blog or not to blog...?

I've been reading a crazy amount of blogs during the last few days (there's not much to do in Upper Tumble), and feel as if I should join the party. I suspect this will just be an extension of my frequent Twitter rants, where I can moan about things that annoy me for longer than 140 characters. Or get excited about things that excite me... these will usually involve Wales, Bobby, Harry Potter or Neighbours.

I'm currently watching Ding v Trump, World Snooker Championship semi final... I don't care what other people say, snooker is brilliant. Not as brilliant as rugby, but still brilliant.

Have a look at my Twitter page. Please.