Recovery and press post mortem

The pulse of London, at least in the West End, feels back to its usual hyperkinetic self.

The busses and tube trains are operating almost at normal capacity; the Circle, City & Hammersmith, and portions of the Picadilly Line remain down. But the Central line, which is my usual conduit into the city, is running fine. The trains have been lightly occupied during the day, but last night it was standing room only.

The stores in Oxford Street, in the midst of the half-yearly sales season, are doing brisk business. Women in burkas and head scarves search the half-price rails next to teenagers in skimpy tank tops and mini skirts. You hear ten different languages from every corner of the globe for every one overheard conversation in English.

The line at TKTS was short but bustling; we saw As You Like It in a fairly full theatre (the play has had so-so reviews so I doubt even before the terrorist attack it played to sold-out audiences. I'll save the review for my next theatre round-up but let's just say Jude Law probably doesn't need to worry about demand for Sienna Miller's acting services causing too many separations in their future).

No one on I saw on the tube or the bus seemed overly concerned or worried about lightening stricking again, although the papers today made references to worried commuters. It's in the back of your mind - how can it help not be? - but I caught few side glances or appraising looks despite carrying a backpack. But then, I doubt I look like anyone's conception of a bomber.

In fact, if I didn't read the papers or watch the news, I'd be hard-pressed to tell London was the scene of a recent terrorist atrocity. There's a lot of talk about the British resiliancy, the British "suck it up" attitude, the British "just get on with it" reaction to adversity. It's all true. The Brits also seem to be innate pessimists, which serves them better in times like this - it's just confirmation of what they already expected, so why moan about it?

And then there's the British press.

It's incredible to me that journalism here is such a blood sport. And I mean sport. There's little regard for "who, what, when, where, and how;" it's much more fun just to make stuff up and apologize later if you get caught. Press objectivity is an oxymoron (along with customer service and good Mexican food); opinion is presented as fact and vice versa. Events are personalized and told through a subjective lens. For world events, I read US newspapers such as the NY Times, LA Times and Wall Street Journal or else I'd have no topline, objective summary. For British events, I have to read two newspapers just to get a balanced, complete view: The Times, which is considered to be conversative, and The Guardian, which is considered to be liberal. If I just read one, I'd only have a very skewed, one-sided perspective. And neither of them is the most read paper in Britian - that distinction belongs to the tabloids such as The Sun and News of the World, which don't even pretend to be hard news outlets. Pity the Brit whose conception of the world is formed by these papers.