The BBC thinks that the most important and interesting piece of news today is Naomi Campbell lying on oath at the International Criminal Court. Until now it had paid no attention whatever to the terrible litany of crimes for which the monstrous Charles Taylor is being tried. Is any comment necessary? And oh, they did not even hint that she was lying on oath, although she certainly was.
I never thought I would say this, but Naomi Campbell has been thoroughly ill-treated by the international news media, and the people she was angry at have got a thoroughly undeserved free pass. She was perfectly right to be angry, and if I were her, I would already be talking to my lawyers.
Ms.Campbell had booked a place on a flight that started from Heathrow's notorious fifth terminal. Yes, the one from which all the horror stories have emanated. This may have been incautious, but the flight, being a business one, was probably booked months in advance; and how was she to know, among the barrage of triumphalist stories being broadcast from the new building every few days, that the opening of the super-modern, super-splendid, super-efficient, super-huge new monster was to turn into the worst and most ludicrous organizational disaster even Britain had seen in years? Sir, she was not. The fashion industry has all the sins in the world except one: when they organize something, it is done in time and to the specifications required. Ms.Campbell could legitimately expect that "the world's favourite airline" would perform no worse than the people she normally worked with.
Punctually, as the plane was waiting to go, a number of bags went missing - including one of Ms.Campbell's, containing a number of expensive dresses she was supposed to model in Los Angeles. This was not personal gear, these were instruments of work, and expensive instruments at that. And the pilot was proposing to go anyway, taking her not around the corner but to another continent, without any news of that expensive and necessary item, without which her very reason to travel was, at least, damaged. Would you have lost your temper? I know I would have.
"Yes, but she spat in a policeman's face." Ah, yes, that policeman. Not many people know that, although the Heathrow police station is legally a part of the Metropolitan Police, it is in fact fully paid for by the airport and the airlines, and pretty much tends to act as their private force. In the past, they have been known to spy upon and harrass journalists and disgruntled customers who were investigating British Airways. I can just imagine what the intrusion of a "policeman" with that kind of mindset must have done for any atmosphere of peace and reasonableness. Come on, it has happened to all of you: some corporate entity does something badly that ends up seriously damaging or incommodating you - and instead of listening to you, they go and call the security guard. I would not have spat in their face, since I never learned how to spit; but you may be sure that the corporate morons involved would have learned a lot of interesting things about their own moral character, sexual habits, and descent.
What happened here is this: Naomi Campbell has a terrible temper - something I know about. In the past, she has repeatedly come to the attention of the law for exaggerated and violent displays of it, and been punished, probably quite deservedly. So, on the occasion when she has a right to be angry at a piece of shoddy and disastrous "service", probably quite expensive too, all that the papers hear is that she has lost her temper - again. Even though it is in a situation where you or I - I certainly - would lose it ourselves, and would have a perfect right to.
Ms.Campbell had booked a place on a flight that started from Heathrow's notorious fifth terminal. Yes, the one from which all the horror stories have emanated. This may have been incautious, but the flight, being a business one, was probably booked months in advance; and how was she to know, among the barrage of triumphalist stories being broadcast from the new building every few days, that the opening of the super-modern, super-splendid, super-efficient, super-huge new monster was to turn into the worst and most ludicrous organizational disaster even Britain had seen in years? Sir, she was not. The fashion industry has all the sins in the world except one: when they organize something, it is done in time and to the specifications required. Ms.Campbell could legitimately expect that "the world's favourite airline" would perform no worse than the people she normally worked with.
Punctually, as the plane was waiting to go, a number of bags went missing - including one of Ms.Campbell's, containing a number of expensive dresses she was supposed to model in Los Angeles. This was not personal gear, these were instruments of work, and expensive instruments at that. And the pilot was proposing to go anyway, taking her not around the corner but to another continent, without any news of that expensive and necessary item, without which her very reason to travel was, at least, damaged. Would you have lost your temper? I know I would have.
"Yes, but she spat in a policeman's face." Ah, yes, that policeman. Not many people know that, although the Heathrow police station is legally a part of the Metropolitan Police, it is in fact fully paid for by the airport and the airlines, and pretty much tends to act as their private force. In the past, they have been known to spy upon and harrass journalists and disgruntled customers who were investigating British Airways. I can just imagine what the intrusion of a "policeman" with that kind of mindset must have done for any atmosphere of peace and reasonableness. Come on, it has happened to all of you: some corporate entity does something badly that ends up seriously damaging or incommodating you - and instead of listening to you, they go and call the security guard. I would not have spat in their face, since I never learned how to spit; but you may be sure that the corporate morons involved would have learned a lot of interesting things about their own moral character, sexual habits, and descent.
What happened here is this: Naomi Campbell has a terrible temper - something I know about. In the past, she has repeatedly come to the attention of the law for exaggerated and violent displays of it, and been punished, probably quite deservedly. So, on the occasion when she has a right to be angry at a piece of shoddy and disastrous "service", probably quite expensive too, all that the papers hear is that she has lost her temper - again. Even though it is in a situation where you or I - I certainly - would lose it ourselves, and would have a perfect right to.