RICHARD ORD: David Cameron won’t be making any silk purses from this pig’s ear of a story

Prime Minister David Cameron.
Prime Minister David Cameron.
2
Have your say

Those who had a pop at our politicians for being insipid, characterless automatons and demanded a bit more colour and passion from their elected members, may be revising their wishes after this week.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t think I’ll ever see a severed pig’s head in the same light again. Almost puts me off worshipping the one I keep on a stick in the back garden.

For those who haven’t read the story, you may want to type ‘David Cameron’ and ‘Severed Pig’s Head’ into Google, then retreat to a safe distance.

What is most amusing about the claims that our Prime Minister had intimate relations with a pig’s head, is that they come hard on the heels of the furore surrounding Jeremy Corbyn not singing the National Anthem.

Internet news sites went berserk and the Corbyn singing-snub story ran and ran, with absolutely everyone having an opinion on this principled/traitorous stance, depending on your viewpoint.

I guess the internet wasn’t expecting it to be trumped by the Prime Minister putting his do-dah into a dead animal’s head.

If you were, like the Daily Mail, eye-poppingly outraged by Mr Corbyn not mumbling the chorus of God Save The Queen (and with the top button of his shirt undone!), where do you go on Severedpig’shead-gate?

What comes after eye-popping outrage?

The allegations against Mr Cameron are, of course, unsubstantiated, but that doesn’t stop them being plastered across news sites and social media.

If I’d have been accused of doing what Mr Cameron is alleged to have done, I think I would have responded with a firm, but expletive-laden, “absolutely not.” Followed, more than likely, by a punch.

I don’t know what you think, but Downing Street’s response that it “would not dignify” the accusations with a comment will do little to quash the rumours.

But then, it’s the way of the modern world. Got a story? Well, stick it up online and ask questions later.

The public has a right to know, especially if it’s funny and unlikely to be true. What, though, do our children make of it all?

If I had a particular question on prime ministers when I was a child, I was told to follow up my interest by reading a book on the subject.

Today, if your child shows an interest in our MPs you really don’t want them looking it up on the internet.

Or just about anything and anyone else for that matter.

Our 14-year-old went to the cinema the other day. The one thing I never questioned was what he was going to see.

When I was 14 years old, I was forever trying (and failing) to sneak into X-certificate films.

With our Bradley, I couldn’t care less if he is watching an 18 Certificate movie at the cinema, because whatever he’s watching at his local multiplex, it won’t be anywhere near as explicit or offensive as the material readily available to him to view on the internet.

And how, you might ask, can I know this unless I seek out this filth myself? Well, draw your own conclusions, I would not dignify the accusation with a comment.