A couple of funny reactions to old bits of Warming Up today, though both through different sources than this website. Got some feedback on the first episode of TWTTIN (which is being broadcast on Radio 2 let night on 29th November and repeated at 1pm on 1st December). I had included a bit of stand up about Natasha Bedingfield, more or less cribbed word for word from
this entry. But today the producer got back to me to say that they would have to make a cut for legal reasons, namely the bit in brackets in the following:
RICH Personally I would be quite tempted to let Natasha have my babies, but I don't think I could even countenance having Daniel Bedingfield as a brother-in-law, so sorry Natash, you can't have my babies. I wouldn't wish an uncle like that on them. (Plus there is something slightly unsettling about the closeness of your relationship
with him. I have nothing to back that up, other than a creeping feeling under my skin, but you all know what I'm talking about. And you all agree.)
It seems interesting to me that I am allowed to blatantly say that I think Daniel Bedingfield is not someone I would want as uncle to my child and yet when I merely comment that the brother and sister are close - and there's no outright suggestion of anything improper - then that is going too far. Surely you have to fill in gaps to arrive at the conclusion that Radio 2 have, that might make it improper and if you fill in your own gaps about the comment that is OK you might conclude that I am making an inappropriate remark about Daniel's relationship to children. As it happens I wasn't in that case and I was indeed trying to imply that something was going on between the brother and sister. But it's only a joke. For them to sue then surely it would be more like admitting that I maybe had a point. Of course the joke exists here on the internet, now with me making clear what I was implying, so if the Bedingfields want to sue then I guess they can. My guess is though that they will see it as the joke it clearly is. I don't for a second really think that there is anything going on between them. Mainly because Natasha could do a whole lot better than Daniel.
The worst case scenario, I guess, is if I meet Natashe Bedingfield and we get on really well and fall in love and she decides she wants to have my babies, but then when she's checking me up on the internet she comes across this blog and reads the nasty things I have said and decides I am a weirdo and chucks me (especially if she gets to this bit which then predicts this very course of events). But that's pretty unlikely. I mean what are the chances of someone doing a running joke about fancying someone (and maybe keeping them in a well) and then a few years later they meet and actually go out with each other? A million to one.
The other payback was regarding the recent entries on
the Travelodge. I had used these as my contributions to the New Statesman blog I do every fortnight. Comments are allowed on that site, so I get some feedback from readers. Imagine my surprise when Kyle Rowe, the spokesman in
the article explaining the mystery left some feedback. You can see it
here. Or if you can't be arse, here are his views:
" Entertaining that you deem the idea ‘backward’ or from the ‘dark ages’ yet make reference to Adolf Hitler as a current reference, oxymoron I believe?
Kyle Rowe- ME! (Formerly of Travelodge- Well worth checking the facts in future but do not let it influence your journalism!) is happy to congratulate Greg Dawson and the marketing team at Travelodge for a timeless idea that is still getting coverage over 2 years after the launch of the article and policy- Still leading the hotel revolution!
Keep up the entertaining articles and feel free to work on one based on my new employer!
P.S. Virgo"
Whilst his points are a little bit bogus (referencing Hitler as a comparison is not the same thing at all, nor an oxymoron and the article is actually from 2006 only a year and a bit ago. Plus it doesn't really matter if he's not in the job any more as he did say all that stuff), it's still cool to see him having a sense of humour about the whole thing. But it's also amusing to me that the people I write about so often do end up finding out what I have said. It's not surprising, I suppose, we probably all google ourselves at some point (hello Natasha, I am really sorry about the stuff I have said about you, I was only being cheeky. Please don't chuck me), but I still feel like I am writing this in a vacuum and forget that it goes out into the real world. And whilst Natasha Bedingfield might expect to be parodied on the internet, it must be a weird experience for Kyle Rowe. But it's good to know that I can let people know what I think about them without having to find out their email address.
