Home > Uncategorized > Woman Gives Birth, Dave Thinks Of The Children

Woman Gives Birth, Dave Thinks Of The Children

One news story that’s been woefully under-reported in the last week here in the UK was the highly important news that Prince William and Princess Katie have had a baby, so now we have a Prince George Alexander Louis Michael Quentin Charles Diana Betty Larry Curly Moe George The 3rd. Or something.

Only joking! The news wasn’t underreported at all, it was everywhere. Turn on a TV, royal baby. Load up the Internet, you got a pop-up informing you about the royal baby. Open a newspaper, a comical boxing glove on a spring leaps out and punches you square on the nose, the words “ROYAL BABY” emblazoned on the red leather.

It got so silly that at one point a BBC News 24 reporter confessed that they probably wouldn’t have any news “but that’s not going to stop us”

It made me wonder when Sky News were just going to burst into the hospital and point a camera right at Kate’s vagina, so we can get the birth live as it happens. Why Sky News specifically? Well, I don’t know the full joke, but the punchline is Rupert Murdoch.

The punchline is always Rupert Murdoch

And that’s before we get to amount of organisations using the birth as a promotional tool. The most ridiculous one I saw was the Met Office promoting themselves through reports of what the weather was like when both William and Kate were born, as if that mattered to anyone anywhere. Let’s not forget that the Met Office is hardly an organisation that needs much promoting considering their entire job is to monitor the weather. But that’s not gonna stop ‘em!

So why is this birth more important than the many others that were likely happening at the same time? Well, this baby will be king one day, apparently. In a country where being the monarch involves hanging out with career politicians who make the actual decisions, waving at pointless pompous events and dealing with sycophantic media who put you on a pedestal constantly. As Mel Brooks once said, it’s good to be the king. Although it doesn’t sound it.

She loves it

But wait! Ol’ Liz is still queen, and it looks like she’s not going anywhere any time soon, and even when she does go, Chaz and Willz need to be king first. And that’s assuming Liz does go at all. It’s only a matter of time before she gets cybernetic enhancements and rules all of Britain and the Commonwealth with a literal iron fist until the heat death of the universe.

So it’s all a bit of a non-event, really. Unless the baby suddenly starts exhibiting super powers, I don’t want to know. We didn’t even get a national holiday out of it! How do they expect us to care under those circumstances?

Still, at least some media outlets were happy to point out the absurdity of it all. The Daily Mail criticised the BBC for their over-the-top coverage. Which felt somewhat ridiculous when prior to that criticism they’d dedicated twenty-one pages to the baby. Yeah, that’ll show ’em!

I have to admit, stuff like this is making me convinced that the Daily Mail is slowly turning into The Onion without telling anyone and waiting to see if anyone notices. Well, I’ve noticed, Mail.

After all, how do you explain the coverage of the other major story that day? Reporting how proud they were that David Cameron is considering a porn block across the Internet while simultaneously featuring unsolicited pictures of celebrities in bikinis, including some as young as 15.

Perfect! Keep up the good work, lads!

Let’s talk about that porn block too, shall we? Rather more important than a princess popping out progeny is the news that David Cameron, in his never-ending wisdom, has decided that we need to protect the children of Britain by blocking access to all pornography, and if you wish to access such material, you need to inform a government body and/or private organisation that you like masturbating to images of other people boffing.

That’s right, on the day that the UK media is obsessed with a woman’s vagina, Dave wants to prevent people from seeing vaginas on the Internet. Perfect, keep up the good work, Dave.

You see, the problem here is that Dave’s first step was to publicly demand that Google need to get their act together and remove all that filthy child porn from their servers. After all, Google is the entire Internet and everything found in Google search results is on their servers. At least, in Dave’s mind, that is the case. Reality suggests otherwise.

It’s bizarre to watch a man who knows so little about the Internet make decisions to police the Internet. When his own experts are pointing out how ludicrous an idea it is, maybe it’s not an idea that should go ahead?

David Cameron, constantly

For a start, by using the “blocking child porn” argument, he’s roped in perfectly legal adult pornography too. This is a slippery slope to take, especially since the justification is “think of the children!” Because the lil kiddywinks are going to accidentally stumble on porn through casual browsing, of course.

Dave, take it from me. I spend a lot of time on the Internet. I have never accidentally stumbled on porn unless it’s spambots in my email. If you are finding porn through casual web searches, then you are doing something wrong.

Of course, this isn’t an effective block in the slightest. The sidebar of shame on the Daily Mail will remain, The Sun will be allowed to pointlessly have a woman with her boobs out on Page 3, and David Cameron will still be allowed to appear in public despite being a massive cock.

No, not that kind of massive cock!

It’s also ineffective because Dave has yet to define what he means by “pornography”, which means there’s the very real risk that legitimate sexual health and education sites could easily be blocked through overzealous filtering, and maybe even just taking out sites like Youtube just in case someone decides to upload porn. Youtube automatically deletes porn, I know, but I have little faith in Dave’s knowledge of this widely-known fact.

Treating everyone like children is no way to run a country. All this is going to do is anger and frustrate people when legitimate sites go down and eventually everyone ends up opting in to see porn, just so they can see the unfortunate non-porn sites that will inevitably be taken down in the process.

Either that or it’s going to be completely ineffective. It certainly isn’t going to block child porn, because the police force has been pretty clear that most of that stuff is distributed via peer-to-peer networks and the like to reduce the chances of getting caught.

Basically, what I’m saying here is that Dave, get back to doing actual work and leave the Internet to people who know how to use the Internet. Or maybe you should invest some time in educating the people of Britain to look after their own damn kids instead of expecting the rest of us to do it for them.

What are your thoughts on the royal baby coverage? Was it over the top? What about the porn block? How do you feel about that? Leave your comments below or tweet me @TheCheapFerret

  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: