Difference between revisions of "Talk:Editorial Intelligence"
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| − | This para needs discussion. | + | This para needs discussion. Can the language be toned down while keeping the main point? |
Polly Filler is the Eye’s satire of someone psychologically out of touch with reality, luxuriating in smug affluence and with a casual callous indifference to the plight of others, particularly the poor, while pontificating for profit on behalf of the rich. Of all the stereotypes surrounding PR Cocaine has traditionally been portrayed as its metaphorical fuel — into a comfortable illusion reality gradually seeps and the addict needs yet another (head)line, until eventually they become a bullshitting embarassment to everyone. Does Hobsbawm break the mould? | Polly Filler is the Eye’s satire of someone psychologically out of touch with reality, luxuriating in smug affluence and with a casual callous indifference to the plight of others, particularly the poor, while pontificating for profit on behalf of the rich. Of all the stereotypes surrounding PR Cocaine has traditionally been portrayed as its metaphorical fuel — into a comfortable illusion reality gradually seeps and the addict needs yet another (head)line, until eventually they become a bullshitting embarassment to everyone. Does Hobsbawm break the mould? | ||
--[[User:David|David]] 17:05, 15 Sep 2006 (BST) | --[[User:David|David]] 17:05, 15 Sep 2006 (BST) | ||
Revision as of 16:16, 15 September 2006
well this has been changed quite a bit I wonder if it could be explained to me please. I don't really think whoever changed it really has improved it and when there is so much to be done here what's the point: I think the plan to section it off as some sort of 'polemic' seemed a better idea — I just don't trust the editting that's being done here — seems tendentious to me: do i have to go about re-instating bits, can't I be consulted first?
Best leave this to me I think — I'm quite open to suggestions on how to possibly change it and also if we are to publish it as a pamphlet I'm releuctant to name another author!
This para needs discussion. Can the language be toned down while keeping the main point?
Polly Filler is the Eye’s satire of someone psychologically out of touch with reality, luxuriating in smug affluence and with a casual callous indifference to the plight of others, particularly the poor, while pontificating for profit on behalf of the rich. Of all the stereotypes surrounding PR Cocaine has traditionally been portrayed as its metaphorical fuel — into a comfortable illusion reality gradually seeps and the addict needs yet another (head)line, until eventually they become a bullshitting embarassment to everyone. Does Hobsbawm break the mould? --David 17:05, 15 Sep 2006 (BST)
