http://petermusgrove.com/2008/04/08/cerys-matthews-not-arrested/
Any comments please.
Cerys Matthews Not Arrested Earlier Today
good premise for some laughs, but you didn't take advantage of them. Sorry didn't like it.
That's pretty good - I like it. 
I'd be tempted to add something like 'Sir Stanley Matthews was unavailable for comment' or 'Sir Stanley Matthews remained tight lipped over the affair as he died in the year 2000'.
Good angle, and original. The problem is you kill your stories by using language that doesn't fit. In your first line, you say "A fantastic story," no newspaper uses that language. Also the cannabis reference, comes from now where, and goes no where. Tighten your writing, and stick to fewer points that all work together.
Now the idea of every one called Mathews being arrested is a good one.
I don't know if I'm in a particularly cautious mood, but, again, this would break contempt of court laws and is also borderline libellous against Cerys Matthews.
Ok, it doesn't really matter if no one is reading your blog, but if you want to be successful and for thousands to read it you have to have solid foundations. If thousands of people read this you would end up in trouble.
There's a difference between satire and illegal.
It's a nice idea, but I agree with Paul that the laughs have been missed out.
LOL saw the headline and KNEW it had to be Kent Pete trying his luck again.
Sketch was up to your normal standard m8.
Cheers Danny Boy. A bit of positive feedback at last....
But seriously, thanks all of you who have given your honest views on the article. I'm beginning to learn how to accept criticism, It aint easy but I'm getting there. 
Quote: Norman Wisdom @ April 10 2008, 6:30 PM BSTBut seriously, thanks all of you who have given your honest views on the article. I'm beginning to learn how to accept criticism, It aint easy but I'm getting there.
Always a good thing to learn I find
I agree but at same time it is important to keep belief in your own writing style.
If I am honest, although I am learning to accept criticism or suggestions, I still tend to believe in my own material and will very rarely adapt my work.
This could be classed as arrogance but I honestly feel that if you don't believe that what you are writing is funny why bother.
Don't get me wrong if an established comedy writer such as Palin / Jones or Galton /Simpson said, "Hey KP try this ", my ears would prick up pronto.
That is not slagging off anyone in here. Just a message for everyone to keep faith in their own writing style or find a partner who compliments you.
One problem with it is it's supposed to be in the style of reported news, yet stylistically it is a shambles. I have some knowledge of writing copy, as do others on here (I think Barbs knows what she's talking about), and that text has innumerable mistakes. Commas all over the shop, random words made into Proper Nouns - inexplicably, parentheses problems, etc. - and that's just the grammar.
As a reporter so long as you can get the story - and write it out reasonably well, to an extent you're OK (you have subs after all), but as a satirist it all has to be razor-sharp and deftly executed.
I think it was Pope who said something along the lines of... erm... 'satire should decapitate its subjects without them knowing.' Rather more eloquently though...
The point is that you really have to master the style before you even think about the content - otherwise whatever you write simply won't work, no matter how wonderful the idea. It just comes across as rudely made. If that piece were a straight story it would have a sub-editor pulling his (or her...) hair out. One of the most famous pieces of satire, "A Modest Proposal", for example, wouldn't have worked so well if it had begun "I've got a bit of an idea, right, and I reckon it'll be great. Eat babies. Plenty of 'em around." No, it adopts the correct style - perfectly. IMO you can't hope to write effective satire of this ilk without knowing how to write copy. All you need to do is read papers and emulate their style - it shouldn't be too difficult for someone who knows how to write. This is something you have not yet mastered IMO.
Barbs is my nickname from my surname. I'm a man!
But I agree with everything else you say, James.
I agree with the others. You have a good idea but you've executed it poorly.
James makes a good point too. Have you tried reading the Onion? The writers on there are masters of the form you're attempting to subvert.
Quote: Norman Wisdom @ April 10 2008, 7:55 PM BSTI agree but at same time it is important to keep belief in your own writing style.
If I am honest, although I am learning to accept criticism or suggestions, I still tend to believe in my own material and will very rarely adapt my work.
This could be classed as arrogance but I honestly feel that if you don't believe that what you are writing is funny why bother.
Don't get me wrong if an established comedy writer such as Palin / Jones or Galton /Simpson said, "Hey KP try this ", my ears would prick up pronto.
That is not slagging off anyone in here. Just a message for everyone to keep faith in their own writing style or find a partner who compliments you.
If you truly beleive, then well done and I doff my cap. For you have a unique vision, and that makes you an artist, where as I am happy to be a mere populist hack. As for any of your heroes offering suggestions, might I suggest offering to mow their lawns, worm their dogs, or perhaps sign autobiographies, or maybe pay an awful lot.
You've got great ideas, and a nice site. But if I criticise your style, it's because I want to find your work a lot funnier than it is. You telegraph your punchlines, and by not matching the style of what you satirise, it just doesn't worK. At least not for me.
n.b. one thing I've found is fair, negative criticism is about the rarest thing I've found as an writer. In terms of success it's absolutely the most important, at least for me. But then like I say, I'm not the aritst you are.
No, I never actually used the word 'artist' Sooty. I would never be that pretentious. When you write an article or sketch, do you believe it to be funny ? .Do you attempt to put the words together in a humourous way ?. And do you believe you achieve that aim ?.
If so why then change your belief that it is funny just because somebody else says they don't agree?. You would be continually editing your work to please others, there would be no substance to your writing.
No... get it out there, read the suggestions but try to be objective about their comments. People have agenda's on this site like anywhere else , this site is not unique in that. So all I'm saying is stick to your guns.
If that is me being an 'artist' then call me Picasso 