ludicrous advertising

hi


when you find yourself in a hole, the general advice, at least for those concerned by it, look you see, is to stop digging. rather admit the problem, or if applicable accept defeat, and graciously move on instead of going right ahead and making it worse.

there are those who would, of course, never accept such advice, for they are so "brilliant", or those which so few care about anyway that the concern would never be expressed. in a weird way, for many (perhaps a possible majority) in the UK, something that ticks both boxes with some comfort is a business called News UK, what owns things like The Sun, which gets sold for some inexplicable reason on the same shelf as where they keep newspapers, and Virgin radio, albeit "indirectly".

as News UK controls so many aspects of the media, and has an unnerving level of influence mostly due to one of the more interesting proprietors (if memory serves, the incumbent Mr Jerry Hall), they tend not to really care about brand reputation, or if anyone actually likes them or not. of late, they have taken this to extremes, spending an awful lot of money to showcase just how little they care if people don't like them, at all.

when Virgin Radio came along and "pinched" or "poached" the (rubbish, horrible UK version of) Chris Evans (and not the decent, proper US actor of same name) from the BBC, it was a massive, massive blessing. all of a sudden those what pay the BBC licence fee were free of the internal, sickening disgust felt at paying his wages. his replacement, Zoe Ball, exemplified the point that many made during the reign of terror - basically anyone, no matter how limited in talent, would surely be at least as good, or more than likely competent or better. even when Ms Ball does her best to upset and infuriate listeners (the 'show and tell' section, for example, where children are encouraged to play three blind mice or similar, on a kazoo or xylophone, down the phone), she is nowhere near as bad. often close, yes, but nowhere near.

i am unsure as to why Virgin Radio felt that getting him was such a good idea. the only remote benefit to him being on commercial radio was that if you tuned in by accident, there was always a chance you might get to hear an interesting advert. this sole advantage was removed when they decided to make his show "ad free". perhaps they have become aware of their folly, for in this insane, full front page advert they have made the fact that the show is ad break free bigger and more prominent than the name of the ostensible host. Puppet Show and Spinal Tap springs to mind.

no, i have not listened to the show, and never shall. a great bonus of all this "dab" digital radio is that you can actually delete entire stations from your radio, meaning you don't have to hear it at all, even by accident. so, i could be wrong and maybe he is now all of a sudden for some reason a mix of competent, good and worth listening to, but i will bravely assume not.

well, good luck to them, i guess, not that they particularly need it, or even would accept it.




be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!