In a ‘post-factual'(or ‘alternative’ factual?) era, it’s hardly surprising that the Supreme Court’s ruling that the government cannot trigger Article 50 without the authorisation of Parliament has been met with scathing reviews from the UK’s top newspapers. The question of whether newspapers influence their readers’ opinions or vice versa is a moot point, but I’m finding it increasingly… Continue reading Headline Blues: The Pied Piper of Hate
2017 is off to a rollicking start, and who better to incite bad will toward the men and women who least deserve it than ‘DAILY MAIL REPORTER’: the human version of luncheon meat made of reformed ham and 29% water (where the ‘water’ is actually sewage runoff from a condemned sausage factory)? The headline ‘Lawyers raked… Continue reading ‘Raking it In’ or just Rankling?
After a week of waning public interest, intermittent media coverage and terrifying threats to incite violence against the petitioners, The Supreme Court managed to hear the arguments in support of and against the so-called Brexit Appeal. As you may recall from my first post, the issue at hand is Royal Prerogative; specifically, whether PM Theresa May can… Continue reading Which Clause Is More Important: Santa or Henry VIII? A Brexit Appeal Breakdown
As we approach the festive season, I realised that I haven’t stocked up on conversational ammunition yet. With a year like 2016, I will do whatever I can not to talk about the US Election; including talking about the other sad elephant, Brexit. This week the Supreme Court will hear the government’s appeal of the… Continue reading Brexit Appeal Hearing 4 Dummyz