t_atzmueller There is a saying that people who have been around during the JFK-assassination distinctly remember what they did or where they were when President Kennedy was shot.I distinctly recall that mourning of the 01. September 1997: Visiting my parents, I was awoken by my mother and told to turn the TV on. What on earth had happened, I wondered, that was so important that I would have to turn on the TV 7 o'clock in the morning? Did somebody accidentally launch a nuclear missile? Had a tsunami struck somewhere? Had aliens finally made first contact? Well, if you were around that time, you'll surely remember the date. Diana Spencer, former Princess of Whales had died in a car accident in Paris the day before.My first reaction was that I felt sorry for her sons (as I'd feel sorry for any son who looses his mother). The second reaction: Why on earth would I care? I don't read tabloids. I don't watch the Academy Awards ©. I don't care whether Justin Bieber (note, in case you're reading this in 2016: he was a popular YouTube-singer) has been caught DUI or is pregnant. And I'm not even British. Yet, I couldn't help watching the "Breaking News" on TV – nor did I have much of a choice, since nothing else was broad-casted that week. What else happened between 31st August and the 7th of September? I'm sure: a lot I'm sure; a military junta could have taken over the White House and we would never have heard about it. There was just too much live footage of a mob of grieving house-wives parading in front of Buckingham palace and laying down an ocean of flowers, slowly spiraling down into hysteria. Then everybody who had ever seen a camera gave their 2-cents on the matter on CNN and BBC (I believe, Tom Cruise, Madonna and Steven Spielberg, amongst others); Queen Elisabeth II. was virtually forced by public pressure to give a statement and then, of course, the funeral; re-broadcast over and over again (I can still sing along to "Goodbye, Norma Jean", pardon, "Candle in the Wind" to this day, despite neither being a fan of Elton John nor liking the song very much).In "Diana: The Mourning After" Christopher Hitchens tries to investigate how the media created a "national experience" – a Woodstock-of-Mourning, if you want. And how opportunistic politicians like Tony Blair and hanger-ons used that event for their own points and purposes. Hitchens wonders what warranted this experience. The answer is typically Hitchens, precise, logic and down to the point: not much. The essential answer was much more trivial, if not vulgar: People mourning, not because they have lost somebody near and dear or because the world lost somebody who had a great impact on world-history (we all knew AIDS and land-mines existed long before Diana), but that the tabloids would be a little emptier after Diana's passing.Years later the news broad-casted that Kim-Jong-Il, president of North-Korea, had passed away and showed footage of "mourners" in Pyongyang - pardon me, I cannot recall the exact date, but I distinctly remember what I thought during that time: "It is as if Diana Spencer had died all over again".One of the interviewees pointed out, that the world would grief very much about a person who has "actually made a huge difference in the world" and points out Nelson Mandela. 16 years have gone by since then and Nelson Mandela has passed away a few months ago. Compare the amount of media-coverage and decide for yourself.8/10 (for the documentary, that is)

Theo Robertson If there's been two people I've admired in my adult life it's been Alex Higgins and Christopher Hitchens . They both have entirely different backgrounds . Higgins was a working class lad from the back streets of Belfast while Hitchens was born in to a life of relative privilege a fact reflected that Hitchens went to a public school followed by university while Higgins had little secondary education. That said they have very similar personalities where they'd fight individuals and institutions , literally in Higgins case , metaphorically in Hitchens case . Their lifestyles also involved copious amounts of cigarettes and alcohol which meant both men died at a relatively early age . To me the world is a much poorer place without them Hitchens made a follow up of sorts to the 1994 short documentary HELLS ANGEL that tore apart the nauseating hyperbolic world view of Mother Theresa of Calcutta called DIANA THE MOURNING AFTER that suggests Diana Princess of Wales wasn't worth the public display of grief that the entire country of Britain seemed to be conscripted in to circa late 1997 as the death and funeral of the former princess took place and Hitchens asks " What was and is the significence of the death of the princess ? "Hitchens never pulls punches and from the outset as he describes the death of Diana as being " cruelly and abruptly translated from the banal to sublime . After putting on the Ritz with her jet-set playboy escort she got in to a car with a hyped up driver. Minutes later her life was wastefully and pointlessly over . Wasteful , pointless but meaningless ? For millions of people this accident was no less than a personal tragedy " Cut to the myriad of pilgrims who felt they had to take to the streets to grieve the lost of someone they didn't know . The term hadn't been invented yet but such people would be described as " Grief whores " a strange , morbid phenomena who feel the need in engage in public flagellation wailing like banshees stating that because they are grieving louder than anyone else they must be a better human being than anyone else. So Hitchens interviews a man who has complained to the British press that the press coverage of Diana's death was OTT . What the media are essentially doing is telling us we must mourn the death of someone we have never met " This is how you should feel which is rather obscene " Hitchens tries to set the record straight that not everyone in Britain was a grief whore that week . The problem was that it was so difficult to hear a contrarian view since very few media outlets would broadcast them , one very noticeable outlet being Talk Radio . The mainstream media was according to Hitchens guilty of great moral cowardice referring to mourners " Not as they but as us " . Hitchens then interviews Simon Hefer then editor of the pro-monarchy Dail Mail was forced to go on holiday by his publishers simply because he had previously written a couple of articles criticising Diana . Hitchens then interviews the editor of Private Eye a best selling satirical magazine who quickly found themselves banned from newsagents because they weren't happy with a photograph tying in with the death of Diana .... and so the documentary continues A very good incisive documentary about the cult of celebrity , the media and the rather puzzling need for some people who cut themselves up in displays of public grief . A human being should be judged by what they brought to the world - not how tears they cried . Alex Higgins brought a rather obscure lowly regarded " sport " in to the homes of millions and it's difficult to imagine being a teenager in 1980s Britain not wanting to emulate the hellraising antics of Alex Higgins . Likewise it's impossible not to be an anti-theist in the 21st Century without quoting Christopher Hitchens . They both greatly enriched my existence but I never cried when they died having never known either . Who wants to be a grief whore ?