The New York Times has now decided to update on the Brand/Ross fiasco, just as the British press had moved onto other things – such as ‘is Obama really black’ (see today’s Comment is Free at Guardian.co.uk).
It’s a legacy which has given British newspaper journalists an easy way to coin a name for the latest ‘scandal’ (scandal defined in its broadest sense: we have Flakegate, after all).
But when it comes to last week’s BBC outrage no-one seems to know which gate to stick with:
And some consistency please: should the named gate namesake be the perpetrators, or the victims of the ‘scandal’? That particular detail often bothers me: we’ve had Queengate, but also Cherie and Camillagate (Nipplegate of Justin Timberlake fame is a particular favourite).
Reuters and most of the papers/blogs are going with Manuelgate but my vote’s with ‘whatnewanglecanwepossiblytakenowgate’ (she says, fully aware of the irony as she pens her own tenuous angle for this blog post).
Mainly because Rossgate could lead to confusion for the poor pupils at this school in Hemel Hempstead.
Any gates on this particular story I’ve missed? For those that care and are thinking of writing their Masters thesis on the subject, there’s actually a Wikipedia page dedicated to ‘scandal-gates’ (which actually already lists Manuelgate, fyi).