Royal wedding fashion round up

You know every man and his dog has had their two cents' worth about the royal wedding and I was feeling a bit left out. I knew you've all been awake all night this past week wondering what on Earth DeepKickGirl thought of Princess Beatrice's hat.... well, your wait is over.

To be honest I've paid only marginal attention to the whole circus but today I was reading my first iPad version of the Women's Weekly and had my first good look at the wedding fashion and decided I had something to say.

Firstly Kate (surely it should be Cate?). Simple, elegant, beautiful. Well done.

Chelsea Davy (Prince Harry's on again, off again). Looked like she was on day release from Ladette to Lady. Could have brushed her hair for f's sake.

Princess Eugenie. Frumpy.

Princess Beatrice. On first glance, terrible. But on closer inspection it was just the hat; the dress and shoes were actually lovely. The hat was a crime against humanity. I hope Philip Treacy, who was responsible for most of the hat atrocities on the day, is on Scotland Yard's Most Wanted list.... talk about the Emperor's New Clothes!

Now let's talk about Becks and Posh. What the fuck is wrong with that woman? Would it kill her to crack a smile. Here she is, next to her gorgeous, beaming man, looking like she's just been slapped in the face by a dead fish. Furthermore her dress was plain drab, more suitable for a funeral than a wedding. She really really shits me! Eat something and cheer up, you silly cow.

I'm afraid I have nothing positive to say about our PM but I do have a soft spot for the First Hairdresser, seems like a lovely bloke. Our GG looked elegant, as always.

Away from fashion I thought the media hoopla that went on in the lead up to the wedding was downright obscene and pretty much every Australian media outlet should be ashamed of themselves.

To finish let me paraphrase a joke on the subject. K(C)ate Middleton asks the Queen about the secret to a long and happy marriage. The Queen tells her "wear your seatbelt and don't piss me off".

Disasterpointment

I think that's what the commercial media are feeling this morning. I just don't think Yasi gave them the desired level of disaster and destruction, certainly no lives lost (thank goodness). Yes, houses have lost roofs, banana crops have been "devestated" and I'm sure a few smaller towns like Mission Beach are a real mess but I just get the feeling that's not enough.

The term "disaster porn" has been put out there and I love it. The media has been wallowing in it big time - the bushfires, the mine disasters, the floods, now Cyclone Yasi. They just can't get enough of this nonsense in the guise of keeping us updated with latestest (non)developments.

This constant, on-the-spot reporting of absolutely nothing is really stupid. It's hanging around waiting for something to happen and filling in the time with gibberish. For the dumb viewer like me it's emotionally draining and of no particular use. For the people really experiencing these emergencies I'm sure the "news" coverage is of no use whatsoever - most have their power cut and would be relying on radio news if they have access to battery powered radios.

What I really hate is the emotive language used in these constant reports. It's always the "worst ever", "terrible", "horrific", "devestating", "carnage", "apocolyptic". Words that inspire panic and dread but don't really tell us anything about the situation in specific terms.

This is the evolution of the sort of news reporting which hatched out of September 11. I blame CNN.

While there were (hopefully) no deaths as a result of Yasi there was at least a gift from the media gods, a Yasi Baby. All is not lost.

I never thought I'd find myself defending Kyle Sandilands but here I am.

I think the media witch hunt which has gone on this last week is beyond pathetic and beyond stupid. No one can deny Kyle is a moron (or at least a very smart operator disguised as a moron). But is he really the main person responsible for this bit of drama? Why is he being set up as the fall guy here? To the best of my knowledge he is not trawling the streets with a gun rounding up people to appear on his show. The participants come on willingly, in this case (I believe) for the incentive of winning concert tickets, at other times simply for the incentive of airing their troubles in public (a la Jerry Springer contestants).

My main question is: why is no-one placing the blame where it needs to be placed, i.e. with the mother of the 14 year old girl at the centre of this storm in a tea cup? Is the mother not the person who brought her child to the studio, knowing that she would be attached to a lie detector machine? I'm not sure whether the mother knew that the girl had been raped or not. That's not the point (mostly). The point is that the mother actively subjected her daughter to this situation in the first place.

I can not imagine thinking that the best way to deal with my teenage child's awful behaviour would be to strap them to a lie detector in a radio studio and have them questioned by a shock jock and his bimbette sidekick.

Furthermore, Kyle does not work in a void. He is part of a team, sure the public face of that team, but a team nevertheless. There would be producers and assorted others responsible for putting the show together. People who would have discussed the format and direction of the show and who would have spoken with the mother and daughter prior to the show going to air.

The fact that it is Kyle who is being hung, drawn and quartered here is really misleading and unfair. If he's going to be sacked from Australian Idol, let's sack him for a sensible reason: he's a shithouse judge. His musical knowledge is about the same as that of the average house fly. His comments are about as useful as a MENSA membership form to Paris Hilton. If he's going to be sacked from his radio program let it be because he's a crap interviewer and his fawning and celebrity arse-licking is enough to make even the strongest stomach queasy. If he's going to be shafted from the upcoming Celebrity MasterChef let it be because no-one in their right mind would want to watch a food program featuring Kyle's sneering mug (even I, who would happily tuck into Chris' half pig's head presented during the recent MC series, would balk at replicating any recipe Kyle presented).

Let's call a spade a spade here and string up the person really responsible for this media storm: the mother. Above all else, it was her job to have her daughter's best interests at heart; her job to protect her daughter and not put her in this situation.