Terry Prone: What were the board members doing during Theranos debacle?
Elizabeth Holmes: In court, she pulled the line that none of it was her fault and the blame lay with the coercive boyfriend.
SUNDAY
The other passengers at the luggage carousel talk amongst themselves about the broken, hard-side suitcase as it barrels along, its contents kept inside only by the fabric lining. I grab it, praying it does not vomit forth its contents, pathetically desirous of telling them that itâs brand new. Cheap, though. A false economy, as its gaping sides announce to the world.
MONDAY
Never let it be said that cats donât miss you when youâre away. Since I came home, Dino has gone into mouse-catching overdrive. Every time I look around, he deposits a new victim at my feet.
As I am a moron who refuses to accept nature as she is, I get a bowl and an envelope, capturing the mouse under the bowl and sliding the envelope under it, then carrying it to the garden for release with instructions on survival. The cat spends 20 minutes trying to figure out where the mouse has gone before giving up in mystified disappointment.
TUESDAY
Elizabeth Holmes is found guilty. This is a woman whose company was valued at a trillion dollars or so more than it was worth; who codded the market, financial journalists, and international VIPs such as Bill Clinton and Henry Kissinger; and who, in court, pulled the line that none of it was her fault and the blame lay with the coercive boyfriend.
The truly mystifying thing about this story is that no journalist seems to have seriously gone after members of Theranosâ board of directors to find out why they never asked obvious questions (like why the company president spent so much time on self-promotion and brand marketing rather than on ensuring the technology actually worked), and why they never followed up on early stories, which effectively said: âThis is a smart idea, but isnât going to work the way itâs claimed because, you know what, it couldnât.â
The board had an express duty to protect the shareholders, who have seen the value of their equity diminish to nothing.Â
They must be wondering where the protection was and how guys like Clinton and Kissinger were so easily seduced by a blonde in a permanently applied polo-neck sweater who talked in a baritone which, like the rest of her, was 100% spurious.
WEDNESDAY
A Star Trek exhibition in a Jewish cultural centre in Los Angeles makes the point that Leonard Nimoyâs finger-splayed gesture, as Mr Spock, owes much to a traditional Jewish blessing.

Mr Spock, you will recall, was part-Vulcan. His wish, conveyed by his raised hand, was: âLive long and prosper.âÂ
However, according to the actorâs son, his father, the son of Ukrainian Jews, adapted it from a Hebrew blessing he saw in Boston as a kid attending an Orthodox Jewish synagogue.
Missing from that exhibition is another borrowing, this time from Jewish artist Harry Kernoff, who was based in Dublin in the early
to mid-20th century. One of Kernoffâs best-known paintings, Bird Never Flew on One Wing, commemorates the Dublin pubs of his time, their names scrawled, higgledy piggledy, behind two drinking Dubs. The guy on the right was known as The Toucher Doyle, based on his capacity to touch people for a few quid.
During the 1960s, the painting hung in OâBrienâs, a Leeson St pub. The man hired to give a distinctive look to a new TV series about spacemen boldly going where none had gone before happened to visit Dublin before production started, and have a drink in that very pub, where he noticed the painting. He paid it enough attention to register The Toucher Doyleâs pointy ears and decided to transplant them to the Nimoy character.
Someone needs to tell the organisers of the exhibition that Judaism didnât just give Spock his gesture, but his ears, too â via a pub in Leeson St, Dublin.
THURSDAY
You must be sick of the directive headline. Thatâs the one that assumes youâre a thick, lazy, uneducated, inert blob who must be instructed pretty directly on how to reduce your blob status.
âWhat you must know aboutâŠâ is one version of it. âHow to wearâŠâ is another. The first assumes the right to decide what you want to know about a particular topic, the second that you couldnât work out where to put a scarf if you had one. Then thereâs âWhat to cook right nowâ, with the implication that you were OK unguarded in the kitchen up to this week, but your competence took a nosedive last Friday or Saturday.
Sometimes these headlines are not just bossy but negative: âWhat not to say to your boss when you want a raise.â This last tends to be followed by advice such as not storming into their office demanding salary equity with Roberto, whose earnings you know because you spied on his payslip.
FRIDAY
Pat Kenny is asked if heâs going to write an autobiography. His response is unequivocal.
âNo, absolutely not,â he says, adding a crack â apropos books by RTĂ stars â about there being âa lot of yarns out there that are told and retoldâ. The idea of adding to the repetitious yarns doesnât appeal to him. Plus he has to read a lot of books for his programme and wouldnât have the time.
He has a point, does Mr Kenny. He doesnât really need to add to the pile of showbiz autobiographies, most characterised by a subterranean crawl towards reader approval, half-concealed by self-deprecatory humour.
Two notable show business exceptions are to be found. The first is Christopher Plummerâs life story, told with an amused detachment and ruthless self-excoriation untypical of the genre. Plummer doesnât seem to have liked himself that much, but whatâs even more intriguing is that he doesnât seem to have DISliked himself that much either. His book is not about confession leading to redemption. Itâs more a scientific study of an interesting specimen, and makes for delicious reading.

The other exception is the first account of his life by Sidney Poitier, who died last week, leaving behind a solid body of cinematic work and a reputation as a man of courage and decency. The book about his early life is about striving and suffering, and the power of a helping hand.
SATURDAY
That TV show is everywhere â mostly being condemned, either because itâs triggering people with eating disorders or because so many of the participants gain back the weight. Also because of female participants wearing Lycra to be weighed, the significance of which somewhat escapes me.
In response to the blast of coverage, a colleague texts me to say: âI just have an overwhelming urge to eat chips every time I hear the Operation Transformation theme tune.â The tune is âBohemian like youâ by the Dandy Warhols â just in case you want a chip prompt.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates





