What they said about Christopher England #2

In my last article I mentioned that a spontaneous collection of pronouncements about Christopher England recently appeared on a message board infested by old radio anoraks.
I have to mention somebody too scared to use one of their regular names, who called themselves “A Reader” for this bit of mis-information:
He’s tweeted nearly everyday including yesterday (16 Dec) https://twitter.com/christopher_eng

Methinks ‘A Reader’ mistook the daily auto-tweet from the paper.li that goes out on my Twitter timeline, thinking it was me tweeting away.  Wrong.  The internet and social meeja is a wonder to a lot of these older folk!
So, next we get to that particularly nasty piece of work Paul Rusling and his pronouncement:
I too would defend His rights to express his views, however obnoxious to most folks they invariably were. So much that I doubt even he believed what he wrote. I KNOW he often posted utter nonsense and lies, and so washed my hands of any contact with him. I was appalled by his anti-anorak stance and found his vitriol towards free radio quite despicable (though I doubt even he really believed the drivel he wrote). It’s a huge shame, as he did have considerable talent but chose to waste it.
I don’t really recall having any contact with Rusling, so the great hand-washing event passed me by unnoticed.  I certainly don’t recall anything Rusling has done ever touching my life in any way.  Why would it?  I work in the meeja world.  He doesn’t.  He runs a pub.  I don’t drink.  I would never apologise for Jimmy Savile’s child abuse nor ever suggest the children themselves were in some way to blame for their abuse. I’m also not a racist.  So, there’s nothing that would have ever brought us together in the first place.
Rusling explains that he takes a moral high ground and has issued one of his edicts that condemns me for laughing and pointing at the ridiculousness of most radio anoraks.  He misses the point that I consider him to be one of the worst kinds of radio anorak, worthy only of being laughed and pointed at.  He is one who believes he is in some way important or has in some way actually done something in radio, and craves idolatry from other anoraks lesser down the ladder of importance than he believes he is.
Next we have Dave M who said:  
I was a regular listener to Christopher when he was on Euronet. He did some great radio on there. 
Was that really 20 odd years ago? 

I do agree with other posters though that CE often makes statements online seemingly just to get a reaction. It’s one thing having a good debate. Its another thing altogether to create dissent and conflict just for his own amusement. Its a shame because at his best, Chris can be both amusing and thought provoking. Anyway I am glad that he is well and I hope that he might return to radio again one day.
Well, I’m glad Mr Dave M is happy I’m not dead, and I thank him for his observations about Euronet.  
However, as he says, that was 20 odd years ago.  I don’t think a person can be judged on what they once did.  They should be judged on what they do now.  There’s an old saying that you are only as good as your last gig.  Well, Christopher England doesn’t do radio as such, so what’s in the past stays in the past.  You’ll just find me on voice-overs if you know where to look, and that’s only when I can’t find others to do it!
My love in radio is of the phone-in, debate, discussion, interaction.  In order to provoke a reaction, as Jeremy Paxman will agree, you sometimes have to labour a point or even take a particular stance in order to draw others out.  And, as Jeremy Paxman will also agree, when people are talking bollocks they have to be challenged rather than allowed to get away with it.  This is the golden rule that Christopher England has always followed, and so fools have not been suffered gladly.  And why should they?
So, finally, on a pleasant note, the thread on the message board ends with this from Garry Stevens:  
I must admit the first post in this thread had me a bit concerned, glad to find out further down that he is fine. I’v known Chris personally since 76 and in all that time we’ve never had a cross word. They say speak as you find, and to that I can only say Chris is both talented, and has been good to me down the road of time. 
Thanks Garry.  See?  Christopher England ain’t all bad.  I hope you have a very happy 2013.