Our beloved Prime Minister is visiting America. But you wouldn’t know it from the press. Never mind being the headline, he’s not even on the front page of CNN or MSNBC or the Washington Post, and he’s way down in the small print on the NY Times. Apparently, according to the BBC’s Nick Robinson, British Embassy officials didn’t know that the Pope was coming to Washington at the same time.
Poor old Brown. The blunders keep on coming. A blunderer and a bottler.
Well, I suppose you could spin it as a never-should-have-been visiting a soon-to-be has-been.
I wonder how comparable Sarkozy’s visit was in terms of coverage?
It’s certainly a gaffe, but I’m wondering how big a deal this actually is.
Though I’m not a fan of Brown, nor an apologist, and I think the upcoming local elections will slap Labour in the face, hard - what “bottling” has he been doing of late?
Obviously, this is a drop in the bucket compared to the global oil market, but it’s certainly a better situation than, say, France or Germany.
More to the point, however, is that since the OP was comparing Gordon Brown’s visit to the high media coverage for Benedict XVI, one might paraphrase Josef Stalin and ask “How Many Oilfields Does the Pope Have?”.
