Sim-O

Peter Preston, in the Guardian, spots a bit of funny adding up by the Equality and Human Rights Commission:

It’s awful, says the Equality and Human Rights Commission: top women are even thinner on the ground than they were last year. The percentage of women national newspaper editors has plummeted from 17.4 per cent in 2006 to 13.6 per cent in 2007-08 (having happily risen from 9.1 per cent in 2003). And this sad slump in female fortunes gets big news treatment (including a full page in the Mail.

Yet puzzle over the figures a moment. At the end of 2003, there were four women editors already in place: Rebekah Wade at the Sun, Dawn Neesom at the Star, Tina Weaver at the Sunday Mirror and Veronica Wadley at the Standard.

The only change since then has seen Sarah Sands and Patience Wheatcroft sit briefly in the Sunday Telegraph chair, then depart.

How did 9.1 per cent in 2003 become 13.6 per cent in 2007 when the actual numbers involved are exactly the same? Maybe there should be more top women statisticians, too.

I’m no mathmatician, but even I know that one of the figures somewhere is wrong.

Two excellent new posts over at The Sun – Tabloid Lies.

The first, showing a case of complete bullshit reporting on the return of Gary Glitter.

The second, about aChristian fundamentalist extremist (call ’em what they are) bringing a private prosecution, against an art gallery, possibly because of a picture the Sun published of a different art installation . It features many of your favourite characters too.

What do you call someone who spreads bollox, and when told by Google how Google and Googlebombing works doesn’t listen?

Yup: Julie Moult.
(background)

[[image:julie_moult.jpg:Julie Moult. An idiot? Hmm. Let me think…:center:0]]

Step One – Create an image featuring the words “Julie Moult is an idiot” (or “Julie Moult is not an idiot, but instead a much-misunderstood campaigner for truth and a very nice person once you get to know her”).

Step Two – Include the words ‘julie’ and ‘moult’ in the filename for your image.

Step Three – Publish it on your website or weblog in a post explaining what it is and why it’s there (including, if you like, these steps and a link back to this article).

Step Four (optional) – If you really mean business, put her name in your article title and maybe even drop in some ‘ALT’ or ‘Title’ goodness for your image.

:: Please keep in mind that Julie Moult might be willing and able to sue you if she can prove that she isn’t an idiot (though I’m quietly confident that this won’t be a problem).

:: You may also wish to include a picture/glimpse of yourself in your image, as I have (above), so Julie is certain that real people, not invisible Google pixies, lurk behind the eventual results.

Notable search results will be posted below as soon as they start appearing, and a prize will be awarded for the best relevant performance in Google Images (not including mine).

Good luck to you all. I hope to see you in the top row soon.