rover6 Posted February 16, 2009 Posted February 16, 2009 Feel free to talk about Goody here but my main point is that I want to express my deep unease with Clifford's role in publicly reading Jade Goody's last rites. I assume he is being paid for his regular updates. Am I wrong here, to find something vaguely sick about a unashamedly mercenary and selfish PR man meddling in something so inherently sacred and sensitive as the process of death by cancer? The thing is, I can't precisely explain what I find problematic - so perhaps it is only my personal prejudice against Max Clifford. Maybe more good is coming off his publicity of Goody than bad. AFter all, it is publicising the real threat of cancer and all that. However, I can't help feeling that beneath the sentimentalism and condolences, Clifford is being a venal, exploitative pillock. Obviously, there's nothing illegal here and Goody would no doubt vehemently defend Clifford's role, but I just find it morally wrong. Even if Clifford is not being paid, his past record of cold-hearted selfishness makes his role inappropriate here, I feel. I don't know much about Max Clifford. However, on a TV programme, I heard from his own mouth the suggestion that getting Westlife dropping in at a hospital ward of children cancer sufferers is MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL. (Westlife get good publicity, dying children and their parents have their hearts lifted by meeting the stars). Isn't that the most sick, avaricious, indescribably inhumane attitude? I guess we should at least appreciate his shameless honesty. Or am I being melodramatic and idealistic? PR is increasingly a massive force, even being described as the hidden government. It's basically about manipulating people for cash. Advertising is similar - but at least advertising GENERALLY engages, at least partly, the conscious mind - allowing the individual to put up some resistance. However, PR is all about by-passing into the unconscious of the subject and brainwashing them into particular views. It's insidious and disgusting - and massive, massive business.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
colin Posted February 16, 2009 Posted February 16, 2009 The lovely Max Clifford here A bit of a leech really
tony gale's mic Posted February 16, 2009 Posted February 16, 2009 Max Clifford and tabloid journalism are mutually beneficial beasts. They help each other in ensuring a good majority of our nation become increasingly ignorant and celebrity obsessed by the day.
Paul Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 I don't know much about Max Clifford. However, on a TV programme, I heard from his own mouth the suggestion that getting Westlife dropping in at a hospital ward of children cancer sufferers is MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL. (Westlife get good publicity, dying children and their parents have their hearts lifted by meeting the stars). rover6 I understand where you're coming from with this post, I don't have any time for Clifford or the tabloid media he works with / feeds off. However you're comment above could be applied to many a star / sports person / personality etc It just happens Clifford has spoken the truth. I'm sure there are many who give their time quietly and freely but please don't be fooled into thinking the world is full of personalities giving their time for the greater good of mankind.
roversmum Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 I wouldn't say it was always just for cash. The Government are pretty adept at PR (known generally as spin). It's a pity Jade Goody is mixed up with the odious Clifford, but I can see where she is coming from. It must be one of the most frightening situations I can imagine, a dying mother with two young children, worried sick about who is going to bring them up when she dies and wanting to provide for them as best she can. It has all happened at a frightening speed for the poor woman. Ananova reports Mr Clifford said: "Jade has told me to concentrate on making as much money as possible. It's for her children. She said 'I'm ignorant but I want my boys to have the best possible education.'" I am hoping that something good comes from all this. The age of testing women for this cancer has been raised in England, which is wrong and it needs to be lowered again. In Scotland and Wales women are called from the age of 20, but guess what - in England the age has been changed to 25 - too late for some. All you guys out there need to make sure that your women go for smear testing when they are called. The recently introduced HPV vaccine does not cover all the strains of this cancer. There also needs to be much more research on the origins of this cancer, it was not so long ago that women suffering from this cancer were branded promiscuous when in fact many women suffering from it had only ever had one sexual partner. This Australian site explains clearly and concisely about Cervical Cancer
dave birch Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 Spot on Mum. You blokes, get your girls to go and get a pap test every, EVERY year.
thenodrog Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 Spot on Mum. You blokes, get your girls to go and get a pap test every, EVERY year. Wouldn't have done any good. We are talking different cancers here Dave. Good advice but you might be thinking of Kylie.
BiggusLaddus Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 All you guys out there need to make sure that your women go for smear testing when they are called. I read or heard somewhere that Jade Goody had an abnormal smear and ignored it. Apart from her raking in as much cash as possible to care for her family after she's gone (which I can't fault at all), the one good thing that could come out of this is if the media reported the one daft mistake she has made that has cost her life. At the moment the reporting seems to be a mixture of morbid fascination and preparation for a bout of professional mourning. But I think that if they focused more on that mistake and got people talking about it openly, then it might make a few more people take the issue seriously and miss or ignore the results of their own tests. More reporting like this; http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/comme...dy-1623826.html And less like this; http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Showbiz-N...315223600?f=rss
roversmum Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 Kylie had breast cancer. Again, women need to be aware of any changes in their breasts, lumps etc, as screening does not start in this country until later, missing many younger women who have the disease further information on this siteand here. Men can also get breast cancer although it is rare. this is the pap test It is only available on the nhs every three years, so women need to be aware and question any unusual symptoms they may have. Whilst we are at it, you guys need to be aware of this.
broadsword Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 The only cancer you can be immunised against.
rover6 Posted February 17, 2009 Author Posted February 17, 2009 the one good thing that could come out of this is if the media reported the one daft mistake she has made that has cost her life. Great point and illustrates PR in a sentence. Publicising Goody's error of ignoring her test/s is bad PR for Goody - and therefore you won't find Clifford mentioning it, I wager. Even after she has passed away. But mentioning it - publicising it - would be for the greater good of the population. It could SAVE LIVES. But what are lives, when money and image are so important. However you're comment above could be applied to many a star / sports person / personality etc It just happens Clifford has spoken the truth. I'm sure there are many who give their time quietly and freely but please don't be fooled into thinking the world is full of personalities giving their time for the greater good of mankind. You're right. It's common place. In fact, there's an argument to say that even Rovers do it, when they send footballers to hospitals and then pat themselves on the back on the official website. I guess, it's all about intention. If someone intends to be generous and make others happy, and, as a side-effect, they get image benefit, then there can be no complaints. Sometimes you have to accept benefits from being charitable. I agree, at least Clifford has been honest about where his heart lies.
Rovermatt Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 I'm deeply unsettled by the coverage of Jade 'Is Cambridge Abroad' Goody's illness. I don't buy those papers reporting the stories but you really can't miss the pictures and inane platitudes leaping from the front pages. The serious spectre of cancer has taken a back seat to the prurient desire to see a semi-famous individual withering away. The most despicable inference however - and I don't think I'm reading too much into this - is that this person's fate, and that of her family, is somehow unusual and therefore more newsworthy than than the countless victims of this terrible disease and the heartbreak and pain that it leaves in its wake. I don't hold Goody herself responsible for promoting cancer to the front page, as if it's only a worthwhile story now, rather the people who are leeching off this sad situation.
dave birch Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 I'm deeply unsettled by the coverage of Jade 'Is Cambridge Abroad' Goody's illness. I don't buy those papers reporting the stories but you really can't miss the pictures and inane platitudes leaping from the front pages. The serious spectre of cancer has taken a back seat to the prurient desire to see a semi-famous individual withering away. The most despicable inference however - and I don't think I'm reading too much into this - is that this person's fate, and that of her family, is somehow unusual and therefore more newsworthy than than the countless victims of this terrible disease and the heartbreak and pain that it leaves in its wake. I don't hold Goody herself responsible for promoting cancer to the front page, as if it's only a worthwhile story now, rather the people who are leeching off this sad situation. But if the ensuing publicity makes one person do something and by doing something saves a life, then it's all been worthwhile in my book.
thenodrog Posted February 17, 2009 Posted February 17, 2009 But if the ensuing publicity makes one person do something and by doing something saves a life, then it's all been worthwhile in my book. Ooops been showing my ignorance of such matters. Sorry DB.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.