Won't someone please think of the Pope... Yesterday I wrote something for Londonist on Madonna and Guy Ritchie. You can read the post here. You'll notice that some guy called Alex disagreed with my inclusion of the ailing Pope into the story. Readers of this blog will find it unusual that I didn't offer a retort while sharp readers of this blog will notice that I did, but that it was later deleted. That was the Londonist editor's call not mine. For what it's worth here is my reply in full: Alex: The rules of reporting? I'm a blogger not a reporter. Fuck the Pope, his array of hats and his little plastic bubble car. I reserve the right to hate anyone who has done his level best to keep people in ignorance in order to maintain his own archaic station. That wheezing old bastard is quite happy to allow thousands of people to die in Africa rather than change position on condoms. Don't get me started on the Church's stance on gay marriage. Perhaps the real reason he is so reluctant to let go of life himself is because he knows he's going somewhere hot. Given time to reconsider I don't actually believe that the Pope will go to hell. He'll rot in the earth along with the rest of us - or get reduced to ash (how does one dispose of a dead Pope these days?) Everything else I said stands. Just not on the Londonist website. Here's the email I got asking me to edit the comments I made: Mike On the Pope thing...I'm going to ask if you can reword that last comment - even though it's in the comments section and has your name attached, it's just a little too aggressive for Londonist and goes against the general tone of the site. Make your point and by all means but try and avoid phrases like "fuck the pope"! If you really want to get into it with this Alex guy then I'd suggest sending him an email. I didn't want to just delete the comments so I though I'd email you first. Cheers Rob and my reply: Rob, I have no idea how to edit a comment and I'm not too sure I'd want to learn as I tend not to take back anything once it's been voiced. Would a compromise not be a comment by yourself as Editor pointing out that I'm entitled to that opinion, but it doesn't reflect Londonist as a whole? Besides which it may look a little defensive to adjust that comment but leave the one above where some non-papal entity gets called a 'prick'. I definitely wasn't being aggressive towards 'Alex' and don't see that phrase as aggressive at all as it simply pointed out that as a blogger (and not a reporter) I can make remarks that wouldn't normally see the light of day in a newspaper. Unless of course it's the New York Post Press: http://nypress.com/18/9/news&columns/taibbi.cfm From reading the other Ist sites I always felt that the comments sections were an 'anything goes' area and as such I'd be more than happy to voice all of the above if there is any further flak from readers. But you're the boss and have full powers of deletion. Mike I have no problem with Rob deleting the post - he's the editor and calls the shots and he did further qualify his reasoning in a later email and again offered me the chance to simply edit out the offensive line. I'm just a stubborn fuck so I let the whole thing be deleted instead. Of course, me being me I'm not going to let Alex' comments go unanswered - he called me a reporter... and no matter how much you love old Polish men with a tendency to overlook paeodophilia there's no need to get that personal. So I've added a link back to this post where my original comment was and then if Alex (or anyone else) wants to pick this up they can do so right here well away from the Londonist umbrella. Comments are open. Mike is writing to Joe's Garage by Frank Zappa - I'm on a vinyl trip