Earlier today Ewan McGregor, doing the promotional rounds for the forthcoming 'Trainspotting 2', was scheduled to appear on 'Good Morning Britain' or 'GMTV' or 'TV A.M' or whatever the current incarnation of ITV's morning output is called. The reason for this was that McGregor took issue with comments and tweets from host Piers Morgan about the Women's March On Washington that took place the day after Donald Trump was inaugurated as 45th President.
Predictably, the Twitter reaction was, on the one hand, one of vitriolic condemnation, with the usual epithets of 'snowflake' 'leftie luvvie' and 'coward' being thrown around. On the other hand, there was unquestioning support of his decision. Morgan's reaction was one of predictable petulance, both via Twitter and on the sofa https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9UhDMmo7AE
where he urged McGregor to come on and debate the issue, whilst simultaneously stating that actors should stay out of politics because it's "not really their game". Morgan probably has a point there, as most actors have very limited experience of printing faked front page pictures depicting abuse of Iraqi prisoners.
Personally, I think Ewan McGregor, on balance, did the right thing, though I'm more than a tad uncomfortable with a man taking a stance on women's issues having previously worked with and defended self-confessed statutory rapist Roman Polanski.
The main reason he was right not to go on the show, and to ignore any offers from Morgan to debate this or any other issue is that, quite simply, ignoring Piers Morgan is the only reasonable response to anything he ever says or does. I wouldn't be surprised if Morgan (who looks like the kind of man who'd get a semi-on from belittling a waiter or cleaner) didn't even believe what he said about the marches, and simply said it, like everything else he says publicly, for the attention. If taking the complete polar opposite viewpoint on the issue could have garnered him as much attention, he would have taken it. He knew full well what the response would be. He welcomed it. He needed it. Without it he'd probably wither and die. Morgan realised some time ago that the old adage about all publicity being good publicity doesn't quite ring true. He realised that bad and negative publicity is far more sustaining for someone like him than good, so he seeks out the points of maximum controversy, and tweets from there. His cuntery ratcheted up several notches during Trump's campaign, and I imagine his narcissism is of sufficient potency to convince him he is in some way responsible for his win.
I feel fairly sure that Morgan's response was not fully born out of the fact that he felt McGregor should actually come on the show and debate the issue, but the fact that, according to his tweet, McGregor genuinely seemed not to know that Morgan was the presenter of the show he'd been booked to appear on. Imagine how wounding that must have been for old Piers, a man so desperate for vicarious fame, so desperate to attach himself to the powerful, as seen in his loathsome, lickspittle toadying to Trump (he actually described Trump as a 'mate' on Twitter. Clearly Trump is a man who doesn't have 'mates', and so is Morgan. Morgan probably just has work associates who are unable to fuck him off due to some sort of professional obligation, or he keeps around just so he's got someone to show off to). Such is his craving for power and recognition, one can only surmise he was subjected to bullying in childhood, and just wants, needs those same bullies to see how successful he's become. Not that I'm in any way denigrating the effects of bullying, but there's better ways to process it.
'Come on and debate'? What would be the point? Any debate with Piers Morgan would be about one thing; Piers Morgan. McGregor did the right thing in simply deciding not to engage with him. And that is what the rest of us should do. Mute him on Twitter, don't tune in to his TV show, and certainly don't read or react to his Mail Online columns. Obviously this last one goes without saying. Just deprive him of the attention he craves, and hopefully, eventually he'll just...go away.
And by the way, I'm aware of the irony of writing a blog post about a man to urge people to ignore him, so don't bother to point that out.