Celebrities are maddeningly ubiquitous.
They are on TV and in the paper and on the radio. They appear on billboards and perfume bottles and bus shelters. They can even be seen opening shopping centres in our pleasant towns - that is, if you can call Peter Andre a celebrity, and call East Kilbride pleasant.
This is the price we pay for living in relatively easy times; we needn't flee war or famine or plague so let's flop down on the sofa and dwindle our minds away on Kim Kardashian and her trashy ilk.
I'm content to let celebrities do their glossy flashbulb thing. They're just part of our cultural landscape now but what I can never accept is when we see them crouch next to a baby stricken with malaria, or wring their manicured hands as a child pokes through a steamy rubbish dump for things to sell.
I want to snap and growl when the blow-dried celebrity observes these horrors then swivels expertly to the camera, clasps their hands together in a subtle pleading gesture, and asks us to donate money.
Their mock sincerity is appalling, particularly when we know the cash which went to the Botox in their foreheads would vaccinate and educate the third-world urchin for whom they're currently working up tears. Their fame has literally gone to their heads and so they ask us to fork out instead.
I cannot bear this celebrity reaction to poverty. It's rehearsed and faked and distasteful and not one word from their glossed lips is genuinely felt.
Sport Relief showed this celebrity insincerity at its worst. Gary Lineker and David Walliams clowned and simpered onstage like a monstrous and aged Ant and Dec. They had the awkward task of introducing the various acts, and trying to make it seem tasteful and natural to follow a report on diseased babies with some slinky ballroom dancing. For those who were already grimacing, the uncomfortable pair kept reminding us that David Beckham would soon be appearing in a special version of Only Fools and Horses.
It was all flashy, tasteless and tiresome, with the audience forever howling 'woooo' just like X Factor.
In fact, the only refreshing aspect of the whole display was that the cumbersome Miranda did a skit involving some maracas and, amazingly, didn't do that thing where she falls over.
Sport Relief was three hours of tedious celebrity showing-off but I genuinely believe it is all necessary tedium. Charities need to reach us somehow and, apart from TV and social media, the best way they can do this is by hurling one of their 'chuggers' at us in the street.
We do everything we can to dodge chuggers, those overly-bright, eager students with their clipboards and bobble hats. Ipods are adjusted, mobiles are checked, expressions are set to crazed-grumpy mode. No-one wants to be halted with a 'hey guys, you got a minute?' so we zigzag away and look at the sky and bolt through the crowd only to see another bobble hat standing in our path, arms outstretched. Hey there, got a minute?
This is Britain. No-one wants that.
So these celebrity TV extravaganzas are the most effective way for charities to reach us: we can to donate without having to make small talk with a student outside Primark. Yes, they are tedious but, until we drop our chugger-aversion and our hectic lifestyles, they are necessary.
I just wish, with the wonders of digital TV, they could invent a feature which lets me press the red button to skip Miranda, go straight to Only Fools and Horses, then take a reasonable donation from my bank account. I can then switch over to something good.
But until they invent that brilliant feature I'd rather hail a chugger in the street.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article