Shan't
Jack Monroe #66 A potato is a potato
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Jack Monroe Threads Wiki
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
My thoughts exactly because journalists are all honest, and fully transparent int their reporting and thorough in finding the truth of a story...
Its pure laziness, CBA to do the hard work of researching herself. Just wants the attention, and all the recent tweets about her new 'book' feeds that 'look at me' desire. I don't think the book will appear, probably because
a. She will not finish it. or
b. It's not real. or
c. It won't get past the legals to be published.
Ooh, double-word score. Excellent. Thanks so much. I promise to credit you at the end of the game and I’ll send you a picture of my winning board, signed obviously.
I would be very interested in point (c). I don't know much about getting a book through legal if it's non fiction. Would they require to see the original sources etc? Does it depend on the publication rather than the legal process?
I feel like this book is going to be an Owen Jones 'Chavs' 2.0. Which relied on lots of interviews he conducted with people to deliver a narrative to the book. It was published in 2011 so would now be massively out of date, but I suspect Jackie's will cover a lot of similar points. I haven't read that book since I was 19/20 so don't know what I'd make of it now and TBH how good it is. But yeah, I imagine it will be similar.
I predict C, “it’s just too honest and shocking to be published, I’m being silenced”
Wow Jackie really delivered last night. I've had to Grunka big time. She is lower than a rat's baws. The black eye is hardly original. The reply about her sources for the book is so rude and she doesn't seem to see what is wrong with using newspaper accounts of those poor people.
I thought she resented her family and especially her mum because she was allegedly sexually assaulted by a foster brother and her parents did not believe her. That might explain why she is weird with her mother online. I feel really bad for her if it is true but given her track record, I feel it might not be.
I thought she resented her family and especially her mum because she was allegedly sexually assaulted by a foster brother and her parents did not believe her. That might explain why she is weird with her mother online. I feel really bad for her if it is true but given her track record, I feel it might not be.
Need to add head up her arse 100% of the time too.
I don't either, maybe I am being naive in thinking such books are checked by lawyers for the publisher, maybe full responsibility is solely the authors by contract?
She has definitely, definitely gotten worse.
Maybe it's the moon, maybe she's just an insufferable bleep when she's panicking about a deadline (can relate to that, tbf).
I'm almost certain she's drinking again. Tbh I don't believe that she ever committed to AA and on a personal level that's fine if it didn't work for her, but on a public level it's pretty despicable that she's painting such a negative and inaccurate picture of the organisation when it could help others and she doesn't know what she's on about.
Just reminded me that we never did get to the bottom of Russell Brand potentially being her sponsor either.
Less than a week ago she cooked a couple of dishes (including reheating a pack of Waitrose parmentier potatoes) and was suddenly declaring her unfulfilled dream to open a restaurant. A week is an eternity in the Jackiverse!
I think she'll start freaking out about this book (it's already happening - the massive procrastination, the not-so-subtle hinting that she wants another deadline extension, the 'oooooh i'm raging SO HARD' which will soon turn to 'I can't do this, I'm just too angry') because she knows there will be a major spotlight on it. It's not like filling a book with average to terrible recipes - nobody gets hurt if they buy a cookbook that's a bit crap. Politics, on the other hand, is always scrutinised. Legit critics read political books and it will possibly be reviewed in the major papers. She knows she doesn't have the time or ability to produce something actually good, and that means CRITICISM - which we all know oor Jackie cannot take even a smidgeon of. If this book actually has been in the works for years, I don't think it'll ever - thankfully - see the light of day.
She is going to blame not finishing it on her mental health being too fragile, isn't she? Also I 100% believe she's drinking again - her late night tweets only make sense in that context.
I still can't believe she's given herself 40 days to write an entire book that she considers to be the most important of her career. I gave myself more time for my MA dissertation! And I didn't even have the responsibility of saving the entire nation's poor, helpless underclass weighing on my shoulders
I think the law is a bit opaque here. You have to be really careful and get legal sign-off if you are quoting someone in a book and using their real name (usually the case with a famous person, in case they sue for libel, etc) but with a book like the one Jack is talking about, you can use a pseudonym and obviously present the facts in a way that builds your case, and be selective and omit certain facts. When the 'Chavs' book was published it was praised by some, but other reviewers (on the Right) said that it was totally one-sided, etc, and was highly selective in its facts. So, I think it depends on the writer and what their agenda is. Polly Toynbee did this years ago - she wrote a book about living for a week on minimum wage - and after it was published some people she had met and quoted in the book (ordinary people, like someone living in a tower block, or another cleaner, etc) said she had totally distorted what they'd said.
I'm really tired so feeling a bit foggy in the brain department but surely she has caught herself out for this current book. She's been asking for people's experiences on the one hand yet on the other hand she is admitting in that tweet she is just going to lift poverty accounts published by the press.
Also shocked at Louisa's naivety if it is that.
Jack putting off writing her book, tweeting about any mundane thing on twitter reminds me of Dylan Moran in the first episode of Black Books trying avoid doing his tax return
Also shocked at Louisa's naivety if it is that.
Jack putting off writing her book, tweeting about any mundane thing on twitter reminds me of Dylan Moran in the first episode of Black Books trying avoid doing his tax return
Typical half arsed lazy attitude which she applies to all her 'income generation', you can’t call it work as that requires effort, rather than coasting on the effort of others
she is morally bankrupt, I do not understand how she can take money from the people who have actually earned it While she fannies about doing less than the bare minimum. In the real world she would be sacked. She couldn’t even hold down a job as a paper person.
But, but, but! She specifically asked her followers to send her THEIR stories about poverty and claimed that she’s collated them in 3 (lol) lever arch files.
Now she’s saying that her book consists of ‘case studies’ that other journos have written including incidents where people have died? My God she’s such a knob. A lying, inconsistent, rude, manipulative and difficult knob.
Now she’s saying that her book consists of ‘case studies’ that other journos have written including incidents where people have died? My God she’s such a knob. A lying, inconsistent, rude, manipulative and difficult knob.
So if I just copy and paste a few articles from random newspapers I’ll have written a book? Brilliant! I always thought being an author would be difficult but this seems so easy. Thanks for the tips Jack, cor blimey I’ll soon be a millionaire!
New thread title?
Was the restaurant really a week ago?!
- Status