Obvious really, its...
Tom Tucker...or maybe Trisha Takanawa.
C5 tablet-using newsreader hotness
Well, it's been something of a week: and one of the main tech news events, like it or lump it, has been the appearance of the Apple MaxiPad - aka the Apple Surface Pro, or even in some circles iPad Pro Air Beats. Naturally the forecast appearance of the strokable whopper led us here at the Register to speculate on the target …
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 11th September 2015 14:09 GMT Anonymous Custard
Re: The issue you raise was anticipated
So if we take part in the poll, are we going to end up in a double-page spread in the Daily Fail next week like that pair (ooer) from Linkedin seem to have done repeatedly?
Enquiring minds probably want to know, although personally I don't give a toss. That said I would like to know how the poll actually managed to get past work's p(r)oxy server, which routinely used to eat all of Lester's LOHAN polls (or at least the Javascript behind them).
-
-
-
-
Friday 11th September 2015 14:34 GMT SW10
Correctitudinal quadrantification
I think to qualify in the top-right bell-quadrant of neuro-grammatical correctitude in the field of satiristic info-tech journalism, then the aptitude of the usage 'less' demonstrated by the post-Friday lunch journo should be rapidly assimilated into a conversion-substitution algorithm in order to produce 'fewer', thusly:
no fewer than 96 respondents
-
-
Friday 11th September 2015 17:49 GMT Mark 85
At least there's honesty
At least you, in the UK, have the job title of "news reader" for them. Which is what they do. Over here in the States, they call themselves "journalists" or "reporters" which is holdover from the old print days. The early news "jouirnalists" were all former print people so it applied. Now, they're just talking heads but like to think they're more than that.
-
Saturday 12th September 2015 07:58 GMT jonathanb
Re: At least there's honesty
We have "news readers" and "reporters". The news reader will stand or sit in the studio and tell you that for example there are loads of fanbois queued in Regent Street waiting to buy the new Jesus Phone. Then they will go to a reporter who is standing in Regent St with the said queue of fanbois behind him and he will tell us that there is a queue of fanbois behind him. He might interview a couple of the fanbois and ask them why they are in the queue.
-
-
-
Friday 11th September 2015 21:04 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I appreciate that this is probably horrendously politically incorrect but ...
He is sexist and not a very good lawyer.*
I mean, you work in the legal profession and you don't see that one coming and make a remark that could be misconstrued *even* if it was meant in a non-sexist way.
*[By my definition it is *not* possible for you to make those sort of statements in a non-sexist way because the 'meaning' is controlled by the recipient *not* the giver.
This is similar to racist remarks that are 'Just a joke' you don't control the meaning the recipient does.]
-
Friday 11th September 2015 21:27 GMT BobRocket
Re: I appreciate that this is probably horrendously politically incorrect but ...
Isn't LinkedIn some kind of dating website for professionals ?
He sounds like some kind of pompous dinosaur and she sounds like an attention seeking bunny boiler, a perfect match then (I haven't seen pictures of either of them).
RT has a bevy of beauties as newsreaders and one anchorman., Suchet is his name, I think his dad used to be Miss Marple (or Columbus)
-
-
Friday 11th September 2015 22:56 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I appreciate that this is probably horrendously politically incorrect but ...
That was just stupid on both sides.
On his side, for prefacing his statement which made it plausible he knew he was on thin ice. Not a smart move if you're talking to a lawyer, certainly if you're a lawyer yourself. Also, for not using a private channel, because that would have changed the response - making things public always throws in a lot of dynamics that can quickly totally spin out of control as it puts her in a position she'd have to respond publicly too. Well, QED.
On her side, for choosing the baseball-in-face method instead of a more intelligent and possibly humourous remark which made it clear his statement was (a) open to various interpretations and (b) she was not impressed. Instead, she chooses an approach which is certain to create a train crash of politically correctness where nobody learns what would have been better, both sides end up entrenched and all sorts of external wildlife will put their opinion of the day in and try to ride it for all its worth. If I were to look for a lawyer to solve a dispute, she would certainly not be my first choice (also because I already have a lawyer - who happens to be female, btw - who is an ace at negotiation).
Taking into account his age, I think this a bit too "outragists", I think he meant a compliment (as above, it would have been better in private). I fully support women having a comeback for men being utter jerks because they jolly well deserve it, but going full nuclear on something that is potentially meant well is *way* OTT. I'm sure the guy is sitting in his office wondering what the hell he did wrong to have something blow up so much.
-
Friday 11th September 2015 23:17 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I appreciate that this is probably horrendously politically incorrect but ...
Edit: according to an article in The Telegraph, he DID use a private channel (the email associated with a network hookup at LinkedIn), and her response was initially private.
If that is true, I certainly disagree with the public shaming and the extend to which she has driven it. God help the male who ever buys her a coffee - he'd immediately be publicly shamed for being a caveman who thinks women can be bought...
Oh, and we have a lawyer here who publishes a private conversation. Oops.
-
Saturday 12th September 2015 07:59 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: I appreciate that this is probably horrendously politically incorrect but ...
Oh good grief! That woman needs to get a life IMO! Being a feminist doesn't mean stopping being a human being, and saying nice things to each other is simply one of the pleasant parts of normal human interaction.
Acting like an arse in a situation like that is what gives feminism a bad name. Me, I'd've given a much gentler response. If you make the good men worry about ever opening their mouths in your direction for fear of a nuking, then you'll just make them grumpy and resentful - and then they'll be more liable to start talking to you like the less well-intentioned ones do.
Politeness seldom hurts. Going nuclear over small things makes everyone, male and female think you're an arse.
-
-
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
