GETTYThe self-serving poverty award winner Tony Blair One imagines the charity’s president of 44 years may have been minded to use some of the ripe language for which royals are famous behind palace gates.
We will never get to find out though because that is the difference between Anne and Blair: one is a trouper, the other is a blooper.
The scandal certainly raises serious questions about the relationship between so-called “slebs” and the charities they “support”.
I know I am not alone in questioning the motivation behind some of the very high-profile “do-gooding” that goes on these days. Take Band Aid 30, the recent re-recording of Do They Know It’s Christmas? in aid of Ebola victims.
Hats off to Bob Geldof for rounding up the troops. He has had a tough year and it has clearly been therapeutic for him to channel his energy into something worthwhile but don’t tell me the likes of One Direction really give up their “precious time” for altruistic reasons. Wherever there is a celebrity, there is a plug, whether they are climbing Kilimanjaro or sitting in a bath of baked beans. No one got anywhere in showbusiness doing something for nothing.
Which is why you always have stars of stage and screen queuing up to jump on the bandwagon of things like Children In Need and Comic Relief. Yes, they are worthy causes, no one is denying that, nor the fact that those involved really do want to help “raise awareness” (“I’m wearing this t-shirt/taking this selfie/loading this ice bucket to raise awareness, dahling”).
These telethons, however, also happen to have top billing on prime time TV, the perfect platform for self- promotion. I get that these famous faces bring in the donations. I also get that the punters are more likely to dig deeper into their pockets if they have been treated to a cabaret act first. I even get that footage of a pop star weeping at the sight of starving African children makes good telly.
The truth of the matter though, is that if these celebrities were genuinely interested only in selflessly doing their bit for charity then why do we all need to hear about it?
We ordinary folk don’t go around feeling the need to shout, “I sponsor a Romanian orphan!” or, “I’ve got a direct debit with Oxfam!” or, “I give all my old coats to Sue Ryder!” so why must we all be subjected to the intimate details of celebrities’ charitable endeavours?
I note that Adele snubbed Geldof in favour of making a donation to Oxfam. Fair play to her.
It is different with the royals. Because they do not have anything to promote (except the monarchy itself), they largely go about the business of doing good without fuss or fanfare.
Even Kate, one of the world’s most photographed women, doesn’t turn it on for the cameras (much to the chagrin of royal snappers everywhere).
Last week the Duchess attended a launch of a fundraising campaign for East Anglia’s Children’s Hospices of which she is patron and afterwards it emerged that she had written a letter to a mother whose three-month-old baby had died.
“I was so surprised to receive a letter with such personal comments and signed by her,” said Leigh Smith, 33, whose daughter Beatrice died in February.
“It was a lovely gesture and helped me through a terrible time.” We would never have known about the correspondence were it not for Mrs Smith telling the press.
Kate’s brother-in-law Prince Harry was also on the money last week when he said: “There are so many charities that are, dare I say it, built around egos.” He is right.
Charity should not be remotely Blairite, which is why this ludicrous award has ruffled so many feathers. How can anyone so self-serving credibly be lauded for serving others?
....................................................................................................................................................................
GETTYAndy's much more than just a pretty face in the court side player box
She is the only person in the world who appears able to put a smile on the dour Scotsman’s face
CONGRATULATIONS to Kim Sears who will soon go from being patronisingly described as “Andy Murray’s girlfriend” to “Andy Murray’s wife” after the tennis star popped the question.
There is clearly a lot more to this girl than meets the eye, not least because she is the only person in the world who appears able to put a smile on the dour Scotsman’s face.
Can I urge you to check out the bride-to-be’s website kimsears.com? You’ve never seen animal art like it.
Kim is much more than just a pretty face in the players’ box. I wish her all the luck in the world as the woman behind the first British man to win Wimbledon since 1936.
....................................................................................................................................................................
SINCE when did the exclamation mark become so misunderstood?
This piece of punctuation, once used so sparingly, has now become as ubiquitous as the comma. Visit social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter and it is not uncommon to read statements like: “My mum just died!!!”
It is used to convey a sense of gravitas but it just ends up sounding insincere.
Celebrities are the main culprits. “So-and-so has passed away!!! Rest in peace!!! My thoughts are with friends and family!!!” They cannot help themselves, these entertainment industry types. It is #drama all the way with them.
We would all be wise to remember the words of F Scott Fitzgerald: “Cut out all these exclamation points. An exclamation point is like laughing at your own jokes.” Period (that’s American for full stop).
....................................................................................................................................................................
HOW many men do you think have taken up additional paternity leave, which enables fathers to take up to 26 weeks of paid leave once mother returns to work? Less than 2 per cent, according to research.
This policy, which was, pardon the pun, Nick Clegg’s baby was always destined to fail. Why? Because most men aren’t like Clegg.
Most men are like my husband, who could not wait to return to work after the births of all three children. And who can blame them? At least they can read a newspaper without a bawling baby in the background, enjoy an undisturbed lunch and go to the toilet by themselves.
While I appreciate the flexibility offered by the policy, which is being extended to 50 weeks next April, about as many men will take it up as those who insist on changing all the nappies.
0 comments:
Post a Comment