When Richard Desmond dies…
...how will we be able to pay tribute?
It's a tough question, given that we need to be sensitive to the fact that he is, after all, a human being with a family and friends.
Probably the best thing to do, I've decided, would be to print a photograph of him dying - possibly already dead, who knows? - in order to pay tribute. That's what Desmond's OK magazine says it's doing this week. Not cashing in, no no. Not being macabre, no no. Paying tribute.
I know it's not the normal way that most people would 'pay tribute'. Ordinarily we use that phrase to remember someone fondly, rather than printing a ghoulish photo of the life ebbing away out of their body, but according to Richard Desmond it's the nicest way to mark the passing of a much-loved figure.
Desmond won't mind, then, as he's dying, if we stick a camera right at his dying fat fucking face and slap it on the front cover of a magazine so that everyone in the world can see that this is what a dying - or already dead, who knows? - person looks like. That would be a nice way of doing things, wouldn't it? After all, he's made it clear that's the right and proper way to deal with things.
Hang on a tick, though, what's this?
The grotesque image from the Paris car crash prompted calls for publications reproducing the photo to be banned in Britain. Around 1,000 copies of Chi, the glossy weekly magazine which carries the picture, are due to arrive in the country today, when distributors will decide whether to halt circulation of the offending issue. The Daily Express has decided not to show the photo.
Why, in that flashback to July 14, 2006, it appears that it's the Daily Express (owned by Richard Desmond, lest we forget) having a go at someone else for printing a photo of Princess Diana while she lay dying.
But but but... surely printing a photo of someone dying isn't 'grotesque'? Surely it's 'paying tribute'? No...?
Or was it just that the Express couldn't afford the Diana death photo rather than 'deciding' not to show it?
Either way, when Desmond does kick the bucket, let's all head round to his gaff with cameras to shove in his relatives' faces.
It's what he would have wanted.
Related posts:



June 30th, 2009 - 13:48
Are we actively recruiting 'facilitators' for this photo-op?
June 30th, 2009 - 13:52
'97? You remember, when all the tabloid press swore that never again would they ever use pictures from the papperazi.
June 30th, 2009 - 14:10
I wonder how long it will be before the MJ autopsy photos start surfacing…
June 30th, 2009 - 15:31
Oh this is so good it hurts.
July 1st, 2009 - 09:53
Hear hear!
July 1st, 2009 - 10:38
Why wait until he's dead? I want to see photos of him in his speedos on the beach.
Actually I don't. I want to show them to other people. I'm not willing to look at them myself. Call me a coward…
July 6th, 2009 - 16:31
This is absolutely disgusting. What's worse is that Mr. Desmond and his editor, Sarah Ivens were eager and confident to run this photo, without regard to ethics, but just try and contact him to share your thoughts and see what you get. Suddenly e-mal addresses no longer work, and when you call the office, if someone actually answers, they are clueless as to how you can reach Mr. Desmond. I really hope the publishing world does not support this kind of behavior. He has definitely crossed the line.