Gordon returns to the possible pull-out of Jay-Z from Glastonbury this morning, with a grim headline:
Smart is trying to work up the possiblity of a Jay-Z pullout, and the question of if and when organisers knew, into some sort of sub-Watchdog outrage:
“If they were aware Jay-Z might not be playing they should have said something before I bought my ticket.
“I’m going to see Jay-Z. I wouldn’t have bothered buying tickets to this year’s Glastonbury otherwise.”
Another said: “Jay-Z is the world’s greatest rapper. I was only going to see him.”
Hang on a minute: These angry ticket holders who, supposedly, "only" wanted to see Jay-Z, don't have any names. Why is that, Gordon?
When you're "reporting" on rumours from "friends" of celebrities and "sources" within stars' organisations, there's some sort of justification for keeping anonymity. But why are these people so angry about their tickets but not revealing their names? Are they afraid that Emily Eavis might turn up at their houses and start putting the windows out?
Come to that, why are they so angry before Jay-Z has actually cancelled, and, consequently, before organisers have even had a chance to say 'if you want a refund, then you can have one'? It's a little early to be making up angry punters, isn't it?
Meanwhile, in a triumph for 'here's something I read in a magazine' journalism, today;s column features adverts for Closer Magazine (Coleen McLoughlin dressed - hilariously - as Audrey Hepburn) and Shape Magazine (Denise Richards). If Gordon keeps padding his pieces out with this sort of stuff, they could just cut a hole in his page and invite readers to peer through at the magazine rack when they pick up their paper.