Bad News

Can someone please write something that doesnt have anything to do with Credit Crunches, Carbon Emissions or Sarah pig-in-friggin-lipstick Palin!!

I'm not immune to the fact that there are serious issues with this planet that need hammered into people but when you have 5 or 6 journalists in the one newspaper (yes I'm talking about you 'The Guardian') all giving their point of view on the current crises which is basically 5 or 6 sets of wording all with the same topic, the same insensitive camaraderie about the 'injustice of it all' and making the same points that we all already know: Gordon Brown is "crap", "inadequate as prime minister", "a complete failure" and Alistair Darling is the Prince Phillip of Politics when it comes to talking long winded speeches about nothing in particular with the worst timing. Yes I know you need to fill about 40 broadsheet sized pages in order to make the not insubstantial price of 80p seem worth buying your paper but you can't truly be saying there is nothing else going on in the world that is as relevant??? How close are we to finding a cure for the common cold? How is CERN coming along? Do we need to worry about any Asteroids or large blazing planets plummeting towards us in the very near future? Perhaps I'm clutching at straws here but you don't need to be Carol Vorderman to know that sensationalizing all things credit crunch has only made the situation worse, of course if you spend 10 pages telling people that the world is ending, banks are shutting down, millions are losing their jobs and those silly little cartoons showing Stock brokers selling their cars for £1, all of these are going to make people panic.

Solution: down-size your paper to tabloid size just like the Times did, less space left to fill up and therefore less rubbish to spout. Get rid of half your staff, which will save you money which in turn can be dedicated to giving your decent journalists enough petrol money to get off their back sides and actually give us a story that's relevant for once.