Most newspaper articles are, I think, designed to irritate people. One thing which has annoyed me recenty is the idea of footballers and their "WAGs". What annoys me is that this is supposed to be an abbreviation of Wives and Girlfriends. However whenever a journalist uses this abbreviation they also have to explain what it stands for. Surely this defeats the point? It's the trick of a TWAT* perhaps?
Actually I think the idea behind it is to spread a meme. Much in the same way as the word "chav" was a few years ago. This idea, very much of our time, is that ideas and concepts can be spread from human mind to human mind much like a computer virus. Media TWATs get a kick out of spreading them. The experiment is a success when a non-media person uses the phrase in conversation. I presume that "WAGs" is a phrase designed to foster a dislike a jealous feeling towards the women who it targets.
It has less a channce of catching on compared to "chav" though. That phenomenon was amazing. Watching all the human cattle pick up on a word which hadn't existed less than five years ago. A word perfectly designed to oppress them, being used with such glee. The lower ranks of the pyramid spitting down on those even further beneath them.
It's a good job I'm immune to mind control and can see through this media circus isn't it readers? Anyway, I'm off to watch Big Brother now. Can't wait to boo at the screen. I'm ace.
*Tired writer and typer.