Morgan versus Fry: verbal bloodbath

Piers Morgan, ex journalist come reality TV pundit, come moral gatekeeper has hit back at Steven Fry, after comments he made regarding the row over politician's expenses on Newsnight.

Fry had pointed out: "Anybody can talk about snouts in troughs and go on about it, but for journalists to do so is almost beyond belief. I know lots of journalists... and I've never met a more venal and disgusting crowd of people when it comes to expenses and allowances. Let's not confuse what politicians get really wrong - things like wars, things where people die - with the rather tedious bourgeois obsession with whether or not they're charged for their wisteria. It's not that important, it really isn't. It isn't what we're fighting for."

Not surprisingly, ,Piers, is hopping mad. He, retaliated on his blog: “I know that Stephen Fry is a national treasure and all that, but his ridiculous defence of these expense-fiddling MPs is quite the most obscene thing I’ve witnessed since his chums Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand abused poor old Andrew Sachs. Fry insists this scandal is ‘not important’, and claims journalists should not be pursuing the story at all because they are even more venal and corrupt than politicians. For a supposedly very bright man, Mr Fry emerges from this stance in an extremely stupid, naive way."

The bloodbath continues. "By dismissing this whole repulsive business as ‘not important’, and trying to claim some sort of moral equivalence between expenses met publicly by the taxpayer and those met privately by media tycoons, Fry is guilty of pathetically pompous grandstanding, and a staggering lack of understanding of both the issue and the very genuine anger felt by the cheated, thieved public. Shame on you, Stephen. I thought you were smarter than that."

With 2 such playful wordsmiths, it was bound to be a very wordy debate. Who do you think has won the battle so far?

United Kingdom - Excite Network Copyright ©1995 - 2021