I almost pissed myself laughing at the Viewpoint column in the current issue of AP (31 December) where someone called Andy Blackmore rants about the people who indulge in the taking of "selfies". You will need to read the full column to gauge the enormity of Mr Blackmore's ire. One of his best sentences is where he accuses selfie-takers in the fine invective, "Who are you that it is not enough to witness history but that you feel so self-important you must become part of it?" There is a lot more like that. But the reason I laughed out loud is, of course, that anyone who commits his opinions to the printed page is doing exactly the same thing - albeit with words rather than pictures. Does Mr Blackmore imagine that his views on any subject are sufficiently important to be recorded and become part of history? Does he not realise that what he is publishing is merely a literary selfie? I am not saying that he - or any other writer/journalist - is wrong to publish his thoughts. As someone who has had a dozen books and thousands of magazine articles printed, I would be hoisting myself by my own petard were I to suggest that. But is the selfie-taker any less worthy of publication than we scribes? As I say, the implications of what he wrote gave me a laugh.