NOT SO MUCH COMPLICATED AS DISAPPOINTED: 'Avril Lavigne - is she for real?' trumpets a banner on the front page of this morning's Guardian. Sadly,it just turns out to be a lift of the Rolling Stone article (frustrating in itself - why would the arts pages take material from RS? It's not like the magazine has a reputation for anything other than PR-petting puff anymore. And even if the article was created without one eye on Future Access To The LA Reid Stable, are we supposed to buy the conclusion "she might be put together, but at least she isn't put together by Britney?" Why is the fact she's aping something credible meant to be better than if she was mainstream? Isn't that worse? Wouldn't it be more disturbing to have politicans being controlled by unseen hands than circus performers?