Black Triangle

The recent tragic death of Stephen Gately, which may have been due to a heart problem, was exploited by Jan Moir in her Daily Mail column to make a wider point:

All the official reports point to a natural death, with no suspicious circumstances. The Gately family are – perhaps understandably – keen to register their boy’s demise on the national consciousness as nothing more than a tragic accident.

Even before the post-mortem and toxicology reports were released by the Spanish authorities, the Gatelys’ lawyer reiterated that they believed his sudden death was due to natural causes.

But, hang on a minute. Something is terribly wrong with the way this incident has been shaped and spun into nothing more than an unfortunate mishap on a holiday weekend, like a broken teacup in the rented cottage.

Consider the way it has been largely reported, as if Gately had gently keeled over at the age of 90 in the grounds of the Bide-a-Wee rest home while hoeing the sweet pea patch.

The sugar coating on this fatality is so saccharine-thick that it obscures whatever bitter truth lies beneath. Healthy and fit 33-year-old men do not just climb into their pyjamas and go to sleep on the sofa, never to wake up again
[...]
Another real sadness about Gately’s death is that it strikes another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships.

Gay activists are always calling for tolerance and understanding about same-sex relationships, arguing that they are just the same as heterosexual marriages. Not everyone, they say, is like George Michael.

Of course, in many cases this may be true. Yet the recent death of Kevin McGee, the former husband of Little Britain star Matt Lucas, and now the dubious events of Gately’s last night raise troubling questions about what happened.

It is important that the truth comes out about the exact circumstances of his strange and lonely death.

Daniel Finkelstein of The Times suggests three errors in Jan Moir’s “statistics”.

The first is that you can learn something useful from a sample size of two.

The second is that you select your sample by reading back copies of the Daily Mail and finding famous people who fall into the category you wish to study who have been in front page news stories in the last month.

There is, you see, a chance that this method will bias the sample.

And third, Ms Moir appears to have forgotten how useful it is to have a comparison group.

It did not strike her that by employing the same sample selection method (Daily Mail stories) she could have found two marriages to compare with the civil partnerships.

Of course, Finkelstein flatters the mail by using the word statistics, but his post does highlight one aspect of the Mail. They use individual anecdotal cases to “prove” their pre-existing prejudices.

Stephen Gately’s death and Kevin McGee’s death are linked to suggest dangers of a homosexual lifestyle. It’s fair to say that the Mail is a homophobic newspaper.

The death of a girl following HPV vaccination (unrelated to the vaccine), and the case of another child who developed health problems following MMR vaccine (unrelated to the vaccine) are used to cast doubt on vaccines. It’s fair to say the Daily Mail is an anti-vaccine newspaper.

Charlie Booker nails the Mail with more style:

It has been 20 minutes since I’ve read her now-notorious column, and I’m still struggling to absorb the sheer scope of its hateful idiocy. It’s like gazing through a horrid little window into an awesome universe of pure blockheaded spite. Spiralling galaxies of ignorance roll majestically against a backdrop of what looks like dark prejudice, dotted hither and thither with winking stars of snide innuendo.