London Diary: Boris Johnson Vs media

One morning recently, some of Britain’s most prominent political journalists gathered at Downing Street for the daily “lobby” briefing by Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s official spokesman. But to their shock and horror, instead of being escorted to the briefing room as they usually are, they were told to stand in two groups on opposite sides of the entrance hall.

PM’s Director of Communications, Lee Cain, then invited those on one side to head for the briefing room and told those on the other to leave. When they protested, Mr Cain retorted: “We are welcome to brief whoever we want whenever we want.”

Upon which the entire press corps, including the “chosen” ones, walked out in protest calling it a collective insult.

“I felt deeply uncomfortable being left to stand on one side of the room while colleagues’ names were read out one-by-one and they joined the group who were deemed ‘acceptable’ by No 10,” said one journalist.

This was the latest twist in the Johnson administration’s increasingly combative approach towards the media prompting accusations that he is “resorting to tactics imported from Donald Trump to hide from scrutiny”, as Labour’s culture spokesperson put it. Under him, Downing Street has set up one of the most ruthless media-control operations seen in recent years--outdoing even Tony Blair’s extraordinary attempt to control the media.

Astonishingly, ministers have been ordered to boycott the BBC’s agenda-setting news and current affairs morning radio programme, Today, because it didn’t toe the government line on Brexit. Johnson’s chief of staff Dominic Cummings has accused it of “bias” and called it a “waste of time”. Also, in the doghouse is Channel 4 for refusing to swallow everything dished out by No. 10.

As a former journalist and self-proclaimed scourge of authority Johnson was expected to treat the media with a bit more respect than Trump and Narendra Modi with their pathological hatred towards the Fourth Estate do. But, it seems, he too has succumbed to the corrupting influence of power.

Names! names!

For all their tub-thumping nationalism, Indians are notoriously Anglophiles, especially when it comes to imitating famous British names —from those of elite educational institutions to fashionable addresses.

The country is littered with “Oxford” and “Cambridge” academies; “Mayfair Villas”; and assorted “Clark’s” and “Imperial” hotels. Lucky them, nobody has sued them for copyright violation.

But Jel Singh Nagra, a British Indian shop owner, was not so lucky when he tried to call his grocery store “Singhsbury’s” after “Sainsbury’s”, Britain’s biggest store chain. Barely had the signboard gone up on his obscure store that he was slapped with a legal notice to change the name or else. He promptly obliged, and renamed it “Morrisinghs”, a play on “Morrisons”, another leading store.

“When the first sign went down, the customers kept saying I should come up with a similar name, so I had to think of something.”

The name, he claims, is not only bringing in more business, but proving to be a bit of a tourist attraction. “When we posted the picture on Facebook, we had over 10,000 views in less than 24 hours. People have driven past and pulled over to take a photograph.”

So far, Morrisons have let him be. Good luck to him.

But what is it about Indian businesses and British names?

Now an infidelity test

Once, if someone suspected their partner of cheating on them, the only way to find out was risking a showdown over breakfast; or hiring a detective who may or may not be able to come up with conclusive evidence.

Now all they need to do is order an “Infidelity DNA Test Kit” online and check it out themselves with the help of a DNA sample —hair, blood, a piece of clothing belonging to the suspected infidel. Or easier still send the sample to an online “Infidelity DNA Test” centre, and they will have a result within hours.

“Cheating is no longer about guess work. Our infidelity DNA test is ideal to help provide a good indication of whether or not cheating has taken place,” says an ad for one such company which charges 299 US dollars for its labours.

A flourishing cottage industry of Infidelity DNA Test centres has sprung up across the West, especially in America. Even in Britain where taking a DNA sample without the other party’s consent is illegal. the trade is flourishing, according to a Sunday Times investigation.

One UK company, Affinity DNA, describes the technique as a “powerful tool for those wishing to have a scientific indication of whether cheating has taken place”. Another claims that its processing facilities have “highly advanced forensic testing capabilities and can extract DNA from even the smallest samples of genetic material”.

Welcome to the intersection of science and sex.

And, lastly, what’s the correct pronunciation of the Dutch master Van Gogh’s name? “Van Gogh? “Van Ho”? Or “Van Goff”?

Apparently, none of the above. It’s “Van Hokh”, according to Dutch purists.