One of my photos

Double standards

December 8th, 2006 · Posted by Skuds in Life · 4 Comments · Life

I would like to give a shout out, as I believe youngsters like him would have it, to my colleague Danivon, who would easily be Crawley’s best blogger if only he would pull his finger out, stop having a full and active social life and write more.

This week he has written an amusing fisk of the Crawley News, which I recommend to everyone, and thank him for bringing this act of corporate hypocrisy to our attention.

The main thrust of it is that the News has a front page headline this week – “Anger over escort ad” – because a shop in Tilgate was displaying a card in its window which said:

Female 18+ to earn good money.
£30 per hour
Open minded, fun work
Immediate start

There are lots of quotes from appalled citizens of Crawley, including this one:

Someone shouldn’t be advertising for girls for this sort of thing. It is not something you expect round here. Maybe in Brighton but not around here.

That quote was from soeone who has obviously never bothered to read page 55 of the same newspaper where, after the adverts for sex chat lines a massage service and two escort services, there is an advert for Staff Required which reads:

Glamorous ladies required for prestigious escort agency. Please leave name and number for interview.

I think we have to wonder whether the Crawley News really objects to the advert in a newsagents’ window on moral grounds or simply because they don’t want the competition.

The double standards are compounded by the fact that one of the escort agency ads is for an “Oriental babe, Crawley/Three Bridges” while the story on page 6 is more shock/horror about a “Chinese woman deported after raid on brothel”

Do the editorial team not talk to the advertising sales staff?

Tags: ·····

4 Comments so far ↓

  • Danivon

    Cheers for the plug. I reckon you could get away with ‘shout out’, if you are Tim Westwood (shudder) 🙂

    I wonder what the old Crawley Informer himself, Walter Schweeney, would have made of it?

  • Danivon

    In a bid to rise to the bat, I tried to come up with a list of reasons why tenants should vote against transfer and came up with six.

    They all have one thing in common though, which I can’t quite put my finger on.

  • Richard

    There is one thing in common that I see :

    It’s a sell-off of public assets (our money/land) to private ownership – in other words, it’s ‘selling the family silver to the highest private bidder’. That is monstrous, obscene and unjust to those who will be disadvantaged (eg killed off) in a private system of greed which doesn’t give a damn about anybody less fortunate than themselves.

  • Danivon

    If you read my post, I think you’ll see that the common thread it a little more tangible to the tenants that that.