Luvvies and the downfall of the Spectator

Imagine my suprise to be reading the Spectator and find eight pages devoted to aimless witterings on America by Stephen Fry. Eight pages! you'd happily skip it if it were two pages, forgive three - maybe, but eight pages for one article in a publication supposed to be about politics. What was Cameronian D'Ancona thinking about?

Wasn't the Spectator once a hard-hitting, independent-minded right-wing alternative to the stifling homogeneity of opinion you get on the BBC? No longer, if our modernising editor has anything to do with it. D'Ancona did a 2-part BBC series, presenting a rather BBC-like picture of immigration recently. Come to think of it, I believe Fry was in a BBC documentary on the US; so this is part of an innovative and dynamic strategic partnership between the BBC and the Spectator, soon to be as liberal as each other.

I note the article was a transcript of a lecture given at the Royal Geographical Society. Is this a synergy here with the Spectator? Perhaps the board of that no doubt state-funded institution are sucking up to the new patrons, who are likely to win the election next year and think working with Cameron's media friend will help - new synergies, new partnerships; or it could just be Fry is the only connection - he is famous enough to syndicate; maybe the Conservatives' plan is to emulate the Labour Luvvie campaign of '97 and have their own band of Luvvies to bring in the Islington vote. Fry is being lined up as their leader of the luvvie campaign. Who knows?