Blatant rip off journalism

[JamesMc]

Has someone been perusing this site i wonder

http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/22098.html

And she wants to demolish the Cardross Seminary!

James.

[Apollo]

I started reading this and began to think this was someone who just picked a view and then wrote about in a way to get their column noticed and so perpetuate their employment, regardless of the cost to their subject.

As I got to the end, I had come to the conclusion that (assuming the persona is not just for the column) this was someone I wish to remain a safe distance from, as the message coming across was that here was someone who took pleasure from shooting the messenger if they didn't like the message. They don't like the reason the building came into existence for, so regardless of its architectural significance, remove it. Bit like the architectural eqivalent to book-burning

'Tis depressing reading.

[My Kitten]

Thats got me worked up for the rest of the day now. Useless woman! Was she not the womans editor for the evening times years ago - too much time spent talking about scone recipes!.

I agree about cumbernauld town centre but St Peters thats a cracking example of modernist architecture, not to everyones liking but we really have to keep some examples.

[Gazzathecoigne]

She can be described in the Glasgow dialect as "a bint!"

[caine]

i gave up reading it after the first page, began to make me angry. i can imagine that would be the kind of person i would never tire of slapping..... if i were a violent man.

[Ronnie]

Don't just sit there seething ... fire off a letter to the editor (I think it's [email protected]). I was sad to see so many personal attacks on the writer, rather than any arguments against her point of view.

[Sharon]

http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/22098.html

or if you click on her face (HARD) it fires up an email to her...

Its probaly better to send them to the editor though....

[DesignerMonkey]

Hey look! They're all at it up n' down the country...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/3569944.stm

Demolish it all apparently, although someone does mention Tay house so it's not ALL bad.

[JamesMc]

To be fair, i suppose we all have personal views on what buildings should go. We just had a thread on it, right?

My problem with it is that she is basically saying that just because a building is old and historic, doesn't mean it should be preserved, because "respect should be earned by beauty and warmth". Define beauty and warmth - surely highly subjective qualities in any area of life. I think that buildings can teach us so much about the past and the people that inhabited them. Just because we disagree with the shape or style, is that grounds to demolish? It's hard because there are buildings currently i think are awful. But who has the final say on whether something is demolished? It should be about involving the people, consulting those who live in and around any building. Not just one or two planners deciding.

[AMcD]

It must be National Demolish Things day.

"Careful now"
"Down with that sort of thing"
/Father Ted

Here's the UGC cinema getting it now for being ugly. Suppose it can look ugly from most angles, main entrance and criss-cross escalators look good though.

Design expert's call to bulldoze UGC cinema hall
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/hi/news/5029692.html

[caine]

Don't just sit there seething ... fire off a letter to the editor (I think it's [email protected]). I was sad to see so many personal attacks on the writer, rather than any arguments against her point of view.

my main reason being that most of the article is unfounded and based on her own opinions of what she claims to be beautiful. isnt journalism supposed to be all about researching and putting forth all aspects of the argument? and not that of ones own view?

how can she say that we should only give A listed status to buildings that earn it by beauty and warmth? what governs this? how do we decide whats is "nice" when we can't agree on some of the most fundamental issues in life such as race, religion, pollitics? and who would govern this, the fashion police?


the most asthetically pleasing building in the world could be nothing but the home of your average joe, and that should gain A list status for what reason? just cos its nice? where as a building of historical importance that happens to be a bit unsightly because the architeque of that era was trying something new and exciting, which just happened to be dull and boring, should not be given this A listed status, purely cos we dont like the look of it? yeah right!!!!

maybe i should have made my point clear at the time of my first post, but was a bit busy, i am supposed to be working after all and i bet you all woulnt like me to be wasting tax payers money on my wages while i'm sitting here typing this....

after all that, i refer back to my original statement. she needs a good slapping to knock some common sense into her. how can one of the most respected papers in the country print such narrow minded drivel? and more to the point, why waste paper printing it as our natural resouces are limited enough, she should campaign to do something more positive about some that actually matters.


rant over.

[martin]

my main reason being that most of the article is unfounded and based on her own opinions of what she claims to be beautiful. isnt journalism supposed to be all about researching and putting forth all aspects of the argument? and not that of ones own view?

That depends on whether or not you appear on an Opinion page - which, in this case, the article did.

[caine]

well they shouldnt have one then.....

[caine]

even then its a shit article that really shouldnt have been printed based on the fact that its an outlandish opinion that only a fool would come up with.

"lets destroy our history just because its unsightly!!! yeaaaaaah!"

thats like saying we might as well brain wash everyone to forget the holocaust cos its not very nice. damn right itds not nice, but we need to learn from these mistakes, and her opinion is imo not worth the paper or the screne it was printed on.

but then opinions are like arse holes, every one has one.

[AMcD]

I read all that article and hadn't spotted it was an opinion column. Makes a bit more sense in that context I suppose. I had just assumed it was another example of lazy journalism, that seems to ramble on and never quite make a point.

One such piece that really got on my tits recently tried to pass itself off as a story about a lottery winner from my home town of Kilmarnock.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/print.cfm?id=802572004

Kilmarnock is by far not the greatest place in the world, and it certainly is not the town it once was, but it can do without attacks like this from a woman who seems to write mostly restaurant reviews and was last in the town as a child many years ago. I guess someone must have been on holiday that week.