A remarkably sneeringGuardian article on the Woman's Hour Watershed Fiction poll, which ignores the fact that the whole poll was just part of months of discussion on the show. To pick at the final books for their supposed failure to match the exact wording of the initial poll, which asked readers to pick a book which "has spoken to you on a personal level; it may have changed the way you look at yourself, or simply made you happy to be a woman" is missing the point (another point which is missed in the writer's analysis is the "spoken to you on a personal level" bit, which he (I think) conveniently ignores for sneering purposes). The analyses of the final books themselves are equally idiotic. I know how easy lazy journalism is - I can't pretend I've never been guilty of it myself - but to look at the final results of a months-long debate while ignoring the debate itself is just stupid. As is looking to Julie Burchill for words of wisdom on anything, ever.