slam3000

You would just end up with fluffy PR pieces, that would very quickly become tiresome for the reader. This thread started out with many people praising the article and was only when Madonna posted on Instagram that to some extent, the tide turned. What's potentially interesting with a celebrity, is reading someone else's take on them and the place they occupy in pop culture, and that's what the NYT article sought to do. I still have fond memories of the Vanity Fair cover profiles in the early 90s - 'White Heat' and 'The Misfit' - neither of which would have existed in the form they

You might not care, but Madonna obviously does. She said as much to the journalist when giving her thoughts on social media.

Terrible idea. It would bring more attention to the article that Madonna obviously hates, and many people would just say that Madonna is being over-sensitive.

I really like the eyepatch, but the costume looked very restrictive and seemed to limit her movement. I think her face is looking beautiful right now, so it would have been great if she'd come on in a more a simple, but flattering outfit and looked stunning and delivered an amazing show-stopping performance. That's all it would've taken to get a lot of people back on board. Whilst there are many who are only too happy to see her fail, Madonna's brilliance can be enough to silence her critics, which is what happened with Live8 after her reputation had taken a hit following American Li

Well, you can look forward to a whole lot more certainty if we leave the EU. Many years of it, in fact.

Hmmm...I certainly didn't see that happening.

And that's the bit the gun lobby refuse to accept, so resort to empty slogans which willfully skirt the issue and are effectively meaningless.

She knew exactly what she was saying and it made her look like a complete imbecile.

Exactly. The gun lobby is just as bad as the tobacco industry by defending their products at all costs with no regard for how they negatively impact on society. They both seek to frame the issue as one of personal rights, when all they care about is $$$$; in reality, they couldn't a fuck your 'freedom'. 'Cigarettes don't kill people. People kill people!!!!' Yeah, right.

Eyewitnesses said the gun looked antique or homemade, but more recent reports have stated it was a modified .22 rifle with sawn-off barrel.

Yes, I know. Doesn't make it any less idiotic.

In the US, 'mental illness' is used by the gun lobby as an argument to maintain the status quo. It's invariably followed by the old chestnut 'Guns don't kill people. People kill people', which merely flags up their own moronity, rather than contributing anything meaningful to the debate. Here in the UK, where we have far less of a gun problem, the Right will attempt to push the mental health aspect in regards to Jo Cox's murder, in order to deflect attention away from their own lethal ideology. So it's always worth considering the agenda of those that grasp onto the 'mental health' trope. An

''Thomas Mair has given his name as “death to traitors, freedom for Britain” as he appeared in court charged with the murder of Labour MP Jo Cox.'' https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/18/thomas-mair-charged-with-of-mp-jo-cox So, by his own admission, he's a terrorist.

Yeah, that's what I thought too. Publicly, Madonna is the mistress of diplomacy even when people have really laid into her, as she obviously doesn't want to throw more fuel on the fire. But when she said on JR about Christopher 'hopefully everything will be OK in the end', it did sound as if they're some way off from being fully reconciled.