?

Log in

No account? Create an account
drop dead fred - The Villages

hutch0
Date: 2009-03-25 23:06
Subject: drop dead fred
Security: Public
Location:home
Mood:calmcalm
Music:snoring cats
Last night, the Edinburgh home of Sir Fred Goodwin was attacked by vandals. Some windows were smashed and a car was damaged.
This was, of course, perfectly predictable. Fred has become the jeering, leering, horned face of corporate greed in Britain, Destroyer of Banks, Murderer of Children, Rapist of Women, Drowner of Cats... Well, you get the idea.
It's hard to hate an organisation. It's even harder to punish it, to chastise it. It needs a human face, a hate figure, someone with a home you can track down and trash. A bank's a thing, a concept. You can't hate a bank. You need people, warm bodies to bitch-slap, recognisable faces. This is especially true of the media, who like to deal in personalities because the facts and figures are obscure and confusing and not wildly sexy. A table of figures and graphs doesn't look good on the front page. A picture of Fred Goodwin under the headline `BASTARD!' works far better.
The affair of Fred Goodwin's pension made him the personification of all the evil that has led us to the state we're in now. So the only surprise about the attack on his home is that it took so long.
Post A Comment | 6 Comments | | Link






calcinations
User: calcinations
Date: 2009-03-26 19:19 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Of course, if the system was set up so that organisations could be broken up/ disbanded etc, that migh make a difference with regards to revenge etc. People would feel that since the high heid yins were being sacked, justice was being done.

Goodwin is way behind in my list of people who need telling off. However he does seem to epitomise the stupid attitude which seems to be the culture today, of being arrogant and controlling because it is the behaviour which is most rewarded and enables you to climb to the top. But it has less relevance to your ability to do your job...

Then another thing which gets up my nose, people are saying "Evil marxists!" "It was horrible anarchists!" "Students!"

When theres no evidence available as to who is responsible beyond an obvious dislike of bankers. For all we know this is a stunt by a newspaper or something, but people seem programmed to blame anarchists for anything, as if they've never met one in their life before. Oh wait, they havn't. THe political monoculture has seen to that. Remind me why turnout is so low these days?
Reply | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-03-29 01:23 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I'm not so sure. The media work better when there's a face to identify with - all those shots of people queuing outside the Northern Rock in Golders Green were seriously unsexy, but a shot of Mike Ashley wearing his Newcastle Shirt with the bank's name plastered across his chest was worth a thousand words. I suspect that, even if RBS had been broken up and Fred Goodwin sent out into the wilderness wearing nothing but a hair shirt, there would still have been a pic of him headlined `BASTARD!' in the papers.
As to who did it, well, of course there's no way of knowing. It could be someone with a grievance against RBS, or someone with a grievance against bankers in general. Equally, it could have been a couple of neds who thought the media portrayal of Goodwin gave them tacit permission to attack his home. I'm reminded of the mob in Portsmouth who attacked someone's house because they mistook `paediatrician' for `paedophile.'
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



rou_killingtime
User: rou_killingtime
Date: 2009-03-29 21:09 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
(Begin pedant mode)

The vandalism of a paediatrician's home happened in Newport, Gwent - not Portsmouth. There was also no evidence to suggest that it was a mob rather than an individual responsible. It is true that there were anti-paedophile vigilante incidents in Portsmouth at around the same time, however.

(End pedant mode)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4719364.stm
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-03-31 21:40 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Aha...
Now that is very interesting. Thanks for setting me straight. That's an excellent example of how the media conflates history. Someone, somewhere, mixed the two incidents together, another writer plagiarised it, another writer plagiarised that, and eventually it became accepted truth.
A good demonstration of why we shouldn't believe anything the media tells us. Not because they're evil, but because they're fallible.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



rou_killingtime
User: rou_killingtime
Date: 2009-04-01 02:49 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I find that idea fascinating. Like a print version of Chinese whispers! All it takes is for one writer to not check their sources, thereby writing an inaccurate article, then another writer does, but unfortunately it's the inaccurate article that's used as the source.

Before you know it, yet another person believes that the Great Wall of China can be seen with the naked eye from orbit (one of my favourite myths).
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



hutch0
User: hutch0
Date: 2009-04-01 10:11 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Back when the Press Association cuttings library was still up and running, you used to be able to follow the progress of a story as it developed from paper to paper. You'd be able to spot when new information and new quotes first appeared, and watch as they were picked up by other papers and repeated over and over. This happens a lot more than people realise, and it's still happening now, but the internet makes it a little harder to follow.
As you say, all it takes is for one person to get something wrong and it winds up as a reference for everyone else - and the more people who refer to it, the more cast-iron it becomes, until it becomes the accepted version.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



browse
the villages
the links
December 2013
the promo