Lady Mucc-Up

Oh dear Heather, when will you ever learn? Going on GMTV and then This Morning to express your fury at the media (who have made you who you are) is maybe not the brightest thing you've ever done. Just adding more fuel to the fire.

I was planning an early start, but was glued to my sofa as she launched into an astonishing rant about media intrusion - Fern and Philip had to keep on cutting to advertisment breaks just to try and calm her down. Although I almost fell off my sofa when she responded to Fern's comment that many celebrities, such as Madonna have to deal with press intrusion with the bizarre: "Yes, but Madonna is not responsible for eight countries..." And you are?! How, exactly?

It's already front page of the Evening Standard, and she is bound to get a grilling tomorrow. Heather, don't go on Dancing With The Stars, insist on a right to give interviews in your divorce battle, and then ask for the media to keep away.

Paul was famously a supporter of the Adopt A Minefield campaign. And hasn't he just.

Presenter's embarrassing fall from Sky

Poor Julie Etchingham. One minute she is the golden girl of television, reading the headlines for Sky News (which I have been watching more and more recently, and find quite impressive). The next she is making headlines herself.

A silly comment during David Cameron's speech on immigration - she finished his sentence, when he was saying "Our policy is..." with the word "extermination" - has left red faces all round. Reports say the Tories are, understandably, fuming that one of their key speeches was lost in the storm surrounding Etchingham's comments.

And she is quite right to be embarrassed. It was a highly unprofessional gaffe - something which shouldn't happen to someone of her experience, especially seeing as she has just been offered £400,000 to front ITV's News At Ten.

This kind of thing does keep on happening, though. You would have hoped that those reading the news would be savvy enough to keep out of it themselves.

What do you wear to interview Armani?

This was the question I was faced with last week, as I went to speak to him for this week's Hello! (out Tuesday 23 October). Not owning a wardrobe full of Armani suits (sigh) I had to settle for a mad dash to Gap to pick up some semi-smart black trousers. Well, you couldn't even attempt to look as good as the "Family Armani", as they swept into the Met Hotel in all their to-die-for suited glory.

Giorgio and co were holding a cocktail party before they went to the Fashion Rocks event, and so I went with the photographer to try and snatch a word before they left. It was quite surreal, being ushered into a corner to have a little word with the Maestro himself, but he was very nice, quite chatty and such a professional - he had a very clear idea of how he wanted to present the event, steering the photographer round by his elbow and gathering his group of Beautiful People together for beaming family photographs.

The Beautiful People were mainly very friendly, and very beautiful, including beautiful ballet dancer Roberto Bolle, beautiful songstress Alicia Keys, beautiful heir to the empire Roberta Armani, and beautiful bullfighter Cayetano Rivera. Cayetano was very charming and very frank -telling me "I don't know a thing about fashion!"

He's not the only one. Later at Nobu, as Giorgio and his Beautiful People entered the restaurant, a couple of city slickers propping up the bar said very loudly: "Hey! That's Ralph Lauren!" I'm sure Armani would have found that quite funny.

Dangerous deforestation

I had to draw your attention to this article, written in today's Guardian by a friend of mine, Tom Phillips. Tom, now based in Rio, writes about how rapidly the Amazon is being destroyed in the name of progress.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/brazil/story/0,,2191877,00.html

It reminded me of when I visited the area four years ago. I was so taken aback by the beauty of the area, and really struck with the importance of preserving such a vital habitat for so many millions of plants, animals and insects.

We were camping out in the jungle, and a huge cricket jumped into the hands of our wonderful guide, Selmo. Looking at the insect by torchlight, with its amazingly intricate wings and body illuminated by the the light, Selmo said: "Nature takes thousands of years to create something so beautiful. But man can destroy it in seconds."

Pete and Paul - an unholy alliance?

There's a really interesting line in yesterday's Observer Music Magazine, when Pete Doherty is interviewing Paul McCartney, and Paul says he was: "just trying to, you know, write some songs, and sing..."

You can genuinely believe that with McCartney it was all about the music - the man is a legend, for god's sake. OK, and the girls, and the thrill, but basically about the music. But Pete Doherty? Pete Doherty? He of the crack pipes, punch-ups outside bars, supermodel girlfriends and tabloid frenzy? Do you honestly tell yourself, Pete, that you have anything in common with the genius of Sir Paul? Last night he performed on a barge in Bristol, to universal dismay - apparently, he's on the wagon, and was so disappointing sober that the crowd were distinctly unimpressed with his mumbling 40-minute set. He threw his mic into the crowd and stormed off stage. Genius.

I know people say Pete's talented. But he's also probably the most famous, or notorious, druggie around at the moment. And I have to say that I find it really sad that the OMM has put Peter and Paul, like two Biblical figures, on it's front cover - when for me there is absolutely no justification whatsoever for Pete to be put on a pedestal alongside someone so iconic as McCartney.

It just adds to the anger felt by many that Doherty has got away with so much for so long - how many times has the self-confessed heroin addict managed to worm his way out of a prison sentence? Apparently he's now clean, but how many times have we heard that before? Setting him up alongside McCartney is only adding to his fame and sending a clear message that hitting the headlines for being a vile drug-adled waster is a clear path to fame, fortune and meeting your idols.

Rock has always had it's bad boys, and I'm not naive enough to suggest that they should all be clean-living saintly choirboys. But for such a prestigious magazine to pay him such a tribute is surely endorsing his behaviour - behaviour that is not acceptable, and should definitely not be encouraged.

The future for foreign correspondents?

Earlier this week I was fortunate enough to hear some of the best women war correspondents talk about their experiences.

Maggie O'Kane, Caroline Horley and Ann McFerran all spoke quite movingly about reporting from Iraq, Bosnia and Darfur - and how, sometimes, being a woman worked to their advantage as they were granted access to places where men may be forbidden, or seen as more of a threat.

But what really caught my attention was Maggie O'Kane's view that it was really the end of the line for western crews descending on conflict zones. She argued that Iraq was showing that the future lay not with outside reporters, but rather with local correspondents who could get better access to, and move more freely in, difficult areas.

So what does that mean for the rest of us, beavering away with the hope of one day following in their footsteps? I think that it's definitely a good move to make the most of local knowledge - provided, of course, that they are given the same protection and rights as their western counterparts. But I think that it's also very important to get a balance - between male and female views, to hear western and local voices - and to continue pushing for honest, fair, insightful reporting regardless of who is behind the camera. Surely that's what journalism is all about?

Lost in Spice: Posh in Paris with the Diana jurors

It was the ultimate in bizarre juxtapositions. The sombre team of jurors, gathered outside the Ritz Hotel in Paris to retrace Diana's last movements, come face to face with Victoria Beckham in all her star-spangled glory, as she leaves her hotel and wanders through the jury.

In town for a fashion shoot for US Elle magazine, Victoria donned a series of strangely futuristic get-ups, including a Dior feather-boa creation and a thigh-skimming Barbarella minidress. In town as part of the inquest into the Princess of Wales's death, jurors had travelled to Paris so that Mohammed Al Fayed could try to convince them that Diana and his son were killed by a white Fiat punto driven by Prince Philip, sponsored by MI6 and operated by remote-control from CIA headquarters. Where Charles was probably at the helm of the satellites.

It's quite hard to know which is the more ridiculous. That Victoria Beckham is swanning around Paris dressed as Big Bird from Sesame Street, or that the British tax payer is spending £10 million on a trial at Al Fayed's whim.

Yes, the public has a voracious appetite for both VB in couture and Diana on the front pages, but is this really enough justification to indulge? The Diana inquest is a waste of money. This trial will surely prove inconclusive.

And as for Victoria - her trial, by Spice, is yet to come.

Dark days for the BBC

It's been a tough few weeks for the BBC. First there was the scandal with a phone-in involving Blue Peter. Then came the news that calls from "listeners" were actually members of the production team on Jo Whiley's Radio One show.

And now this weekend, the BBC 1 controller Peter Fincham has resigned over the controversy surrounding edited footage of the Queen, which was manipulated to show her storming off in a huff.

Poor production and cavalier editing? Certainly. Should the Beeb have been quicker to right their mistakes and swifter to put out a statement correcting the error? Undoubtedly. But should this have led to the resignation of Fincham? I don't think so.

It was undeniably a terrible error, but surely lessons have been learnt and it is time to move on. Why force a well-respected and successful figure to fall on his sword over an episode involving the Queen which, undoubtedly, the Palace wants to forget? These are certainly dark days for the BBC. Losing one of their top men will not help matters.

Kicking and screaming into the 21st Century...

It's the dawn of a new era...

New home in London. New MA just begun at City University. New excuses to explore the pulsating, gyrating, creative bundle of energy that is London... Or something like that.

And, of course, a new blog.

Now, I thought that blogs were only kept by cybernerds tapping away on their keyboards in the depths of the night, or by political activists in far-flung corners of the earth.

I didn't think anyone like me would have anything interesting to say. Maybe I don't.

But maybe this blog will turn out to be a work of poetical genius. Or maybe it is just a self-serving exercise in mouthing-off. About London, about the media, about travel. Or maybe just about the life and times of a struggling journalist.