Could Murphy Richards get in touch?

You know my email.

How’d you like to have a regular column?

14 thoughts on “Could Murphy Richards get in touch?”

  1. Zero, just fame, no fortune.

    Running a spoof, as you do, of what you do currently. Just publishing pieces on CT as well as what you do on twitter.

  2. Is it Noel? Is it Christy Malry?

    Is it Murph himself, or his alter ego, Sasha Baron Cohen. This time Sasha B-Cohen really is getting his character into the House of Lords in the ultimate prank.

  3. I think your new thing will be better without the Murphy-focus of your old thing. Most people have no idea and no care for Richard Murphy.

  4. @tomsmith

    Was going to post to say the same thing as you but held off when I remembered how much I’d enjoyed the satire over at El Reg (at least in its glory days). Generally not sure how well satire works on what is otherwise a news’n’views, or views-on-news, site. Craig Brown is an excellent satirist yet regularly gets perplexed or point-missing comments posted under his Mail pieces. If the satire route were to be taken, there are plenty of worthy targets to lampoon out there – a restriction to someone as, in the grand scheme of things, obscure as Murphy seems a bit of an opportunity missed.

  5. My Burning Ears: absolutely, a focus on someone so obscure and irrelevant is first confusing and then perplexing or even troubling to a general audience. I think keep it focused on the big things and don’t let the little ones drag it down.

  6. Depends on how the esteemed Murphy Richards writes it. Regular contributions from a guru of international political economics as a stand-alone expounder of preposterous lefty bollocks could be fun. There’s ample source material over in Spudworld to work from but there’s no requirement to labour the reference.

  7. A latterday Way of the World. Start with a single character and before you know it you’ve got Heinz Kiosk, Dierdre Dutt Pauker and all the rest.

  8. I think if it’s satire you want, the real Richard Murphy’s writings are far more divorced from reality than Murphy Richards’s.

  9. “Generally not sure how well satire works on what is otherwise a news’n’views…”

    It reads more like a soft-right content farm to me. Like Breitbart with more accuracy and less lunatic incitement.

  10. I’m finding a lot of the articles over on CT are getting blocked as obscene/tasteless, which never happens here. Something to look into Tim?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *