When Jan Moir receives thousands of complaints about an article on Stephen Gatley's death, her response is to ask "How many of the people who complained actually read my column?".

As if to suggest that you can't complain about something unless you know the full details and that if you haven't read it, you have no right to comment.

Which is fair enough.

And yet - there is this : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1081974/JAN-MOIR-Misogyny-dressed-comedy.html

An article by Jan Moir on the Brand/Ross fiasco of a year or so ago. Saying they are both beyond contempt and appalling human beings.

But no where does it mention her listening to the show. No where does it mention her being one of the original TWO people who complained.

So why is when she is blasting someone for their behaviour, she can say whatever she wants, whether she heard the show or not, and yet now that she is being attacked an article that (having just read it now) is pretty offensive (she basically suggests that Gately did not die of natural causes and that everyone is covering up something far more sinister/perverted/etc, and appears to suggest anyone who enters in to a Civil Union is mentally disturbed), she thinks people who haven't read it shouldn't comment?

Then again - this is The Mail. Hate-filled, homophobic, hypocritical bastards who apparently have nothing better to do than bitch about everyone else without ever looking at their own and wondering "Huh - turns out I am a twat".