Talk:Chris Bryant
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://www.chrisbryantmp.co.uk/home.htm - I had to link into this page of his site because the index page of the domain ( http://www.chrisbryantmp.co.uk/ ) uses VBscript to check for the presence of Flash. I got a blank screen. Pah.
I'm also a little skittish about the NPOV status of some of the analysis here, but I don't know enough about Welsh politics to be sure.
--rbrwr
Contents |
[edit] Photo
This page needs a photo Matthewfelgate 00:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Affair of the underpants and gay website
Ridiculous hagiography this clearly written by Bryant's office if not by himself. I am a writer for Associated Newspapers in the UK and Bryant is barely tolerated by us [but he makes good copy] as he is vain, self important and self-aggrandising; he goes to wherever the wind blows. More to the point, Bryant has no prospects as a politician since he was outed for his sexually explicit postings on gay websites where he cruised for casual sex. Please consult this BBC story and also google Chris Bryant with the word 'underpants'http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22chris+bryant%22+underpants . Here is the BBC story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3256348.stm MP 'sorry' over underpants photo. Labour MP Chris Bryant has apologised for e-mailing a picture of himself in his underpants via a gay website. After the picture was published by a number of newspapers, the 41-year-old Rhondda Labour MP issued a statement on Tuesday apologising.
Bryant and his advisers are clearly positioning him back in 'serious' territories with his clever calculation that he should ride the wave of New Labour disenchantment with Blair - hence his concert-master role in the letter to Blair asking for his resignation. Us British hacks [sorry - journalists!] have utter contempt for his scruples - he was once Blair's cheerleader, when the wind was blowing fair; clearly jockeying for position with the Brown camp now.
I am amazed this encyclopaedia has not a section on the 1 week wonder of Bryant's gay underpants pictures: I was in the Press Gallery when the whole House [Commons] smirked the day after the story broke in every media outlet. I will rectify. Goonteam 19:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Controversy" Section
I've re-titled the "Controversy" section of this article. The controversy is not about Bryant's sexuality - there are plenty of other gay MPs - but over the way that he behaved. A straight MP would have been subject to the same treatment by the media if he had solicited casual sex with women, or sent half-naked pictures to an anonymous female respondent. The point of this is to highlight Bryant's judgement (or lack of it), not his sexuality. With this in mind, I've restored the sense of the earlier article (which was heavily re-written by Tawney), and added citations. RomanSpa 02:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Concern Over Editing of this Article
I have to say I share Goonteam's concern (above) about the way this article has sometimes been edited. The re-writes of 17 September 2006, in particular, seem designed for positive political spin more than dispassionate presentation of information: the excision of the main controversial points in the "underpants" story, and the blurring of the date on which Bryant resigned as Falconer's PPS, for example, suggest an attempt to slant this article away from NPOV. RomanSpa 02:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- Bryant resigned in June [1]. --Coroebus 14:18, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I have "reverted" from the version of 7 October to the version of 20 September, and then added one word ("anonymous"). I hope this reversion has worked properly, and that the reasoning is clear. One of the most important, and clearly documented, aspects of this scandal is that Bryant didn't just send his half-naked picture to people, he also actively solicited anonymous sex. I don't believe the scandal is because Bryant is gay, or that he looks dreadful in elderly underwear, but that he was soliciting sex on an anonymous basis. This is material, and documented. Any attempts to gloss over this look to me very like "spin", which I don't think is appropriate for Wikipedia. Please could we discuss further changes to this section of the article here before making them? Thanks! RomanSpa 00:39, 16 October 2006 (UTC)