It’s a shame that some of your contributors and writers adopt sarcastic clever-dick attitudes. It lets down both the magazine, which offers solid news and insight, and the business of professional marketing. I refer to two pieces published in the issue dated April 11. George Pitcher’s page about TV and football, and the Diary piece about the performers at the Edinburgh Festival.
Pitcher makes a valid point about the nonsense of TV’s relationship with football clubs. His opinion is likely to be shared by many and is part of the debate on this issue that really does deserve full investigation. Why then does he have to spoil the argument by using an objectionable style and approach that makes him sound like an self-congratulatory know-all. It isn’t endearing and devalues what he has to say. The Diary takes the same approach with the Edinburgh story. The item has no intrinsic value other than to show the writer to be a bigot.
In writing to you, I take the risk of being shown up by your rag as being a pompous arse without a sense of humour. So be it. I would rather not share the style of humour and ridicule that your magazine evidently supports. It is damaging to you and the people it attacks and, worse, does so for no real purpose or gain.
Motive Public Relations