Celebrities and dirty laundry on Twitter: why?

My mum asked a question that stumped me. I was telling her about the spat that Christine Bleakley had with her footballer fiance's ex fiancee, and she said: "why do celebrities divulge so much in public on Twitter?"

Why indeed?

It may only have been a half-hearted argument, but Bleakley's response spoke volumes about how she and smug Frank Lampard regard Elen Rivas, the mother of his two daughters.

Apparently Elen had tweeted about her frustration when, on holiday in India over Christmas, she rang the Lampard abode to speak to her daughters, Frank and Christine having custody of them for the holiday period.

When she couldn't speak to them she then vented her frustration on Twitter, saying she would have expected "the girlfriend" to be a bit more understanding.

"The girlfriend" - former golden girl TV presenter Bleakley, who was recently sacked from Daybreak, responded with the ultimate in sanctimonious tweets - something about not debating in public "where children are involved."

But she then preceded to retweet several supportive and aghast messages from her friends. One of them said "is she up to her old tricks?" which suggested that Elen's behaviour has been a topic for discussion for Bleakley and her pals.

It the transpired, from the Bleakley camp, that Elen had rung in the middle of the night UK-time. The inference was she was too stupid to realise. Well, we can't all be members of Mensa  (smug Frank, the oxymoron "brainy footballer").

I personally felt myself sympathising for Elen. Not only did she have a lonely Christmas without her kids., she had to put up with retweets from the Bleakley Supporters' Club when a bit of dignity (or silence) might have been better.

Another grieving ex on holiday alone over Christmas was Demi Moore. Her marriage, and its demise, was lived on Twitter. The end of the Russell Brand / Katy Perry marriage was also played out on Twitter for our delectation.

I do wonder why. Aren't the paraparazzi and the hacked phones enough to keep a celebrity in the public eye, without having to wash their own dirty linen?

All I expect from a celebrity on Twitter are slices of wit or insight. Not boring tweets about the mundanities of life  (we do that ourselves) and not undignified rants or fallings out.

Christine to go - please!

I was discussing Strictly Come Dancing with Anonymous. Well we discuss it every time we see each other, truth be told. We are united on the Rachel Factor (don't like her). Lisa is perceived as somewhat dull and flashy. Tom is a good egg, and strangely persecuted by the judges because he hasn't had a 10 yet (I was a little put off by Tom initially because his dad wears a bow tie). We don't like Austin. He's too arrogant, and he looks like a neanderthal stomping around. And then there's Christine.

I don't like her, I find her smiles and guile a bit fake. And why is Adrian Chiles always hanging around if they aren't an item? But Anonymous does like her, but, sorry A, she has to go tonight. She has long over stayed her welcome and should, in my view, have gone last week instead of the lovely Jodie. Such a shame to see the back of Ian Waite too.

Strictly Come Dancing inflection point?

I believe we have reached what the management moguls call "a strategic inflection point" in the SCD epoch.

If John Sergeant is kept in this weekend - and the campaign to vote for him seems to have been renewed in the papers - then the judges will have to choose to evict "good" dancers and will be spitting feathers. Which of course is good entertainment.

In fact, I enjoyed the plight of Rachel so much last week (terrible, isn't it!) that I'm half hoping she'll be at the bottom again tomorrow. An article in one of the papers said she is desperate to win because her career has never taken off since she left S Club 7, and she was distraught at being in the bottom two.

I'm also a bit fed up with Cherie and that impecunious tight smile she always gives.

I predict that if Sergeant is "saved," the bottom two will comprise Jodie and Christine, and probably Jodie will go. That's a shame because she's been building in stature and comes across very well. I find Christine a bit too relentlessly saccharine.

Tom and Austin are still going for it but I'm predicting the final will be between Tom and Lisa. I hope so anyway. Who are you tipping?

Mark Foster and John Sergeant were appalling, as expected

Strictly Come Dancing

As I predicted on Friday, swimmer Mark Foster made what my mum described as a "pig's ear" of his paso doble last night and now resides at the bottom of the leader board. I suspect the public will leave him there, but will probably save John Sergeant. So Foster will either be joined by Christine Bleakley or Heather Small. They're both in the dangerous mid-table position where it all depends on the public vote.

Ah, dear John Sergeant. He had a beguiling charm at the start but I'm getting a bit bored of him now. His paso was notable for him dragging his poor partner across the floor as if he was a caveman taking her to his lair, and for his endless foot stomping. Time for him to go folks!

Heather did a good job, better than I was expecting. I had anticipated that both Cherie and Christine would suffer with the paso doble and I was right. Christine lacked the dramatic performance and Cherie was thrown off kilter by a stumble at the start.

Jodie is looking doggedly good and Lisa Snowdon did OK, although near enough to keep her tenuous place at the top.

A lot of emphasis was placed on how Tom sacrificed his honeymoon to practice, but for crying out loud, he only practiced for 9.5 hours last week so he was lucky that his Viennese waltz was as polished as it was!

Austin Healey did a proficient job but I find him a bit boring, as I tend to find most of the sportspeople. To them it's just a competitive thing of having to do well. I don't see any love of the actual dancing.

Here Come the Girls: Strictly Come Dancing preview

Saturday is the big one - the arrival of the women! From what I've seen on Claudia's Take Two show, they look a strong line-up dance-wise. The only one who looks like a potential Kate Garraway is Gillian Taylforth, who, in the group dance and in rehearsals this week, looks like she's being dragged around by the gallant Anton du Beke. Why does Anton always get the no-hopers? I don't think there's a lot of fairness to the way they "give out" the celebrities. To my mind, the newcomers should have had the no hopers.

Back to the girls. The top three look likely to be Rachel Stevens, Lisa Snowdon and Heather Small. I'm not sure about Christine Bleakley. I think she could be pretty average. I don't think she'll do well with the public because of the ("alleged") business of her stealing Adrian Chiles away from his wife.

Jodie Kidd is just too tall and looked awkward in the group dance, although Zoe Ball is tall and she turned out very well. Cherie Lunghi has had dance training but she's in her late 50s, maybe early 60s, so I think she'll make a good run based on her talent but she's not so likely to win the public vote. A bit similar to Jane Seymour in the US version, Dancing with the Stars.

Jessie Wallace looks as if she'll be fairly competent. She strikes me as another Letitia Dean: has potential but little confidence. She could do well with the fickle old public.

I noticed that Vincent was quoted saying that Rachel Stevens, his partner, was not quite as good as he had expected but "she hasn't had any dance training". I note they always try to get that in. Well, Rachel may not have had formal training but she did spend a lot of her time in S Club Seven dancing and probably worked with top choreographers and trainers, so let's not pretend she's a novice, eh, Vince?

Who are you tipping for the first exit, and to win?