http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danielhannan/100016498/gordon-brown-doesnt-deserve-this-criticism/

http://www.monologues.co.uk/Brahn_Boots.html

(And no punning or facetious reference intended here.)

Perhaps I wasn’t very clear: the general shape of the letter is relatively and loosely formulaic – look at any sympathy card in a newsagents as example, people expect certain things to be expressed – but it’s desperately important to personalise it as far as is possible. I certainly wouldn’t send out some kind of bland pro forma, with each letter simply being a direct clone of another. If I actually know the person I will talk personally about what I know about him/her in as unstilted a way as possible. When you don’t know someone it’s much more difficult to do that and a general format is a helpful guide to making sure you say the important things. And, in any case, my letters are also offers of help and support and will result in me dealing directly and in person with the bereaved family. That’s the toughest part to get right and it’s that that went very badly wrong in the subsequent phone call GB made.
Please note though that I don’t however pretend here that what I have to do in any way equates to writing to the mum of a dead soldier.

Great blog by the way – it’s my first comment post, although I’ve been marvelling at your intellectual consistency for some time now!

You’ve got a lot of credit for your about turn – but you didn’t specifically apologise (the post was a politician’s non-apology apology – whereas Gordo at least manned up and did apologise (for this, even if he hasn’t for everything else).

I’m not saying you owe anyone an apology, but if you’re going to do an about turn because you feel like an arsehole, it may be an idea to apologise to those who made you realise you were being an arsehole if they were offended by your letters. Just if we’re talking about attention to detail and stuff you understand…

Unless of course, you’ve handwritten your apology (and spell checked it, and run it by Max Clifford) already.

Incidentally, RichieP, having been on the receiving end of condolence letters (not that that makes me any more qualified to comment, so I don’t really know why I’m mentioning it) it’s probably not a good idea to tell people that you’re using a formula. Kind of spoils the personalisation of it all…

The issue isn’t the formula – most people are just glad that someone is at least attempting to show some sympathy for and understanding of their bereavement. The difficulty comes in ensuring that you get it all right – names, details etc. That seems to me to be one of the most crucial aspects, because it’s the bit that the families *will notice if I get something wrong; I also realise that I *will upset them if I make errors. I check them several times over for precisely this reason.

I’m not the PM, I’m an ordinary person who tries to take care over such things because I know it’s important to the recipients. And that’s where Gordo seems to lack any real insight into the situation. If he doesn’t do empathy, as so many people claim, then he simply wouldn’t grasp this point. But someone on his staff should have done and that letter should simply not have gone out as it was – and it’s therefore pretty understandable to say, especially in the emotionally charged issue of a soldier killed, that Gordo was insulting and frankly incompetent in his approach to this task. Do it properly or not at all.

The Sun’s exploitation of this woman’s state of mind to score a cheap point is dispicable.

Meandering Mammal, you are right that the other parties are probably as bad concerning the armed forces as the present incumbents, but this lot have damaged so much of our culture, heritage and national pride (not JUST our armed forces) that there is simply nothing left in us (well, in me anyway) to cut them any slack on any matter whatsoever.

Oh, I doubt that. The ‘Sun’ is certainly doing it for money (to wit: circulation) but I don’t think anything other than grief and vengence is motivating Mrs Janes.