After almost half a century in journalism, I still often find myself mystified by the ways of the media.

The Press and TV went to town on the drive-by shooting in Nottingham of 14-year-old Danielle Beccan. The outcome of the murder trial headed every TV and radio bulletin and made the front page of every national newspaper.

Of course, the murder was appalling. And, of course, the two convicted murderers deserved every day of the minimum 32-year tariff imposed under their life sentence.

But was the killing of Danielle, a purely random act, any worse than the deliberate slaughter, by disembowelling after four hours of torture, of the Billingham man, Keith Philpott? I think not. Yet the hideous murder of Keith, a family man whose attackers believed he was a paedophile, attracted few headlines beyond Teesside.

To me the minimum tariff of 20 years on one of the two killers and 15 on the other look woefully inadequate. A period in jail at least as long as that facing the thugs who shot Danielle Beccan wouldn't be a moment too much.

More puzzlement at the media - in particularly its dog-and-boning of the arid issue of whether Tory leadership hopeful David Cameron took drugs as a student. So what if he did? It's what he is and stands for now that matters. Conceitedly, this minor corner of the media believes his membership of a club that refuses to admit women even as guests is a more pertinent marker than what he did or did not do in younger years when, hopefully, he lived life a little wildly.

The legacy of Margaret Thatcher: a belated 80th birthday assessment. She put beggars and pawnshops back on Britain's streets, wrecked our public services, created a rural housing crisis with right-to-buy, paved the way for binge drinking by loosening planning controls, and, her worst offence, undermined the state pension by breaking its link with earnings. Yet she crowned her rule by boosting the PM's pension.

Let's look forward to next summer - always a good idea. Some are anticipating that by then Andrew Murray, the teenage tennis prodigy, will have overtaken Tim Henman as Britain's No 1. His rise from 422 to 72 in seven months has created almost an expectation that he can become Britain's first men's Wimbledon champion since Fred Perry in 1936.

I hope not - at least before Murray achieves a drastic personal change. In a game the other day he threw his racquet several times, swore loudly, kicked the hoardings, and strode from the base line to strike the netcord with his racquet. Not the best model for youngsters who might want to emulate him.

But Murray might improve. After his tantrums he said: "By Wimbledon I won't be showing so much emotion on court. I think the better I get on court the better my temper will be.''

His aim should be to behave better because he believes in it. And there's no need to eliminate emotion. Jimmy Connors oused it from every pore - the tough emotion of doing his damndest to win every point. But at least Murray has acknowledged a need to work on his sportsmanship as well as his game. So good luck to him after all.