These days, I don’t often have cause to encounter the Metro newspaper that clutters the entirety of the London public transport system of a morning. For something that used to play a vaguely significant role in my morning routine, I feel I should miss it.
The truth of the matter is that I don’t. In fact, I’m rather glad that I don’t encounter it, as it saves me from the temptation to read it. The paper is a muddle of articles partly recycled from the previous day’s Evening Standard, awkwardly-written “light interest” items, and a crossword.
The only truly original content, it seems, is to be found on the letters page. Occasionally an oversight allows a reasonably intelligent comment to slip through and get published. Sadly, however, the paper usually fails to persuade those with well-considered points to contact them. The average letter reads thus:
“I agree entirely with [insert name of previous contributor] that [insert trivial issue] has gotten completely out of hand. I fail to see why people today can’t just [insert overly simplified non-solution to issue]. If I’d carried on like that when I was younger I’d have gotten a thick ear. I say [insert perceived cause of trivial issue] should be banned.”
In spite of my desire to believe otherwise, maybe this really is how people think. But each of the letters that assume this format raise two questions: whom doe the writers think should ban all the things that want banning; and are the writers the same people who subsequently complain about the “nanny state”?
I’m no evangelist, but the ban on using mobile phones in cars and smoking in public places seem like two examples of the Government formulating policy based on exactly this variety of narrow-minded quick-fire thinking. The annoying thing is that it cannot be argued that either of these are a bad idea – but the way they’ve come about and the reasons used, at times, to justify them is somewhat disturbing.
Despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, I’d still like to believe that people can think for themselves. At best, wouldn’t it be nice if policy-making were transparent and not a popularity contest? I say that saying things should be banned should be banned.
I blame "Them".
I agree entirely with Charlie Brooker that the letters featured in Metro are quite ridiculous and have got worse than ever before. I fail to see why the morons that write them don’t realise that they’re complete idiots whose letters contribute nothing to our great society. Why don’t the editors just reject them and use all the decent letters that are out there, such as mine. When I was younger letters of this sort would never have made it into the press, and if they had done the backlash from the readers would have forced the paper to make a formal apology. I say that people who write letters like these should have their fingers chopped off and the editors that publish them should have their fingers and toes chopped off, to give the right message to anyone who is considering submitting such literary aborations.
Thank you for your comment, and well done: you successfully filled in the blanks and wrote a very stereotypical Metro-esque letter. Not sure what that achieved, but I hope you had fun doing it.
Incidentally, what’s Charlie Brooker got to do with it? Doesn’t he write for the Guardian?
Thank you. I successfully kept myself entertained (and avoided doing important work) at work. Now that’s a great achievement. I also made myself feel superior by disrepecting people that send letters to Metro. On the fun side I’d rate it a 4.6/10 (which is quite positive but doesn’t come anywhere near to sex, which is situated at the top end of the scale)
I don’t know who are so I chose someone that tends to rant, in keeping with the Metro theme.
Right. Good. That’s cleared that up, then.
Of course, I’m sure there’s nothing wrong with writing to Metro or even having your thoughts published – it just seems like the people who do get published are also people who think every little annoyance they have should be banned by some kind of higher authority.
Be grateful you don’t have to subject yourself to the evening freebies. Londonlite and thelondonpaper make Metro look like an arbiter of sober comment and good taste.