From the Times: 'The extent of swine flu infection in the UK is being underestimated because hospitals are failing to test patients with respiratory illnesses for the virus, according to one of the world’s leading experts on the disease.' Namely? 'Professor Neil Ferguson, an epidemiologist at Imperial College London, who advises the Government and the World Health Organisation,' and who could not by his most cynical detractors be accused of having a vested interest in prolonging the life of this moribund story. Speaking where?

Page 245 of Flat Earth News notes Alastair Campbell's 'at a glance' guide to media messaging. It would be interesting to see that if it was available. In time it would be good to compare it with Christopher Meyer's guide "Hacks and Pin-striped Appeasers; Selling British Foreign Policy to the Press". Just so you know my background, I worked for Christopher and although I left the Civil Service ten years ago my fascination with the political press remains unabated.

Maybe it's good that some proof has come to light that shows some 'anti-aging skin care' products actually work, but the news store just screams of pr from Boots.

The first part of the report mentions the high turn-over of sales Boots received from the last time this Professor appeared on TV in 2007. Also, strange how the university only tested ONE make of skin cream. The findings were 'independent' even though 'the trials received funding from Boots'.

Have a look at this as an example of the depths to which desperate PRs will stoop (and perhaps to which desperate reporters also will stoop if any of them felt the need to use this as a news story):

http://msnukentertainment.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!3C09FD3E7B34CEFB!36774.entry

An interesting story about obsessive PR activity around a controversial court case in Australia, as reported by the Australian:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25378166-17044,00.htm...