One of the defining aspects of modern life is convenience.
We either don't have, are not given or simply think we don't have time to do anything unless it is easy and now.
I was pondering this this morning. I have been given an extra half day thanks to the floods preventing me getting to my next 'summit', and have decided to invest a little time in the media's 'take' on it all.
Thing is, I am, like most, pretty time poor. And my news snacking is hence governed primarily on convenience. And the differences are marked.
Taking the 'big 4' 'qualities' (well, that's their term) as a fair spread of left/right, social/consumerist information and opinion, I should at least try and scope the Times, Telegraph, Guardian and Indy.
Now the Times does, not (to the best of my knowledge) send a daily email. That makes them a daily visit, which is hassle. Though I do like their article listings when you do. Plus they do allow comment, though they moderate a lot and you are not allowed a link to your site.
The Telegraph used to send my a daily email, but it has gone now. They do allow comment on some limited things as well.
The Guardian also used to send me a daily, but that also has vanished. And they of course have 'comment is free', which I do indulge in. Bit of a 'club' though.
And that leaves the Indy. They don't have any comment system that I can find, other than letters to the editor, and so far they have not fancied any of mine. Their loss. But a pity.
But what I do get, and like, is their daily email. Clear categories, click to link.
And hence of them all, I mostly use theirs. For no better reason than convenience. Sad.
But it was interesting as today's allowed me to look at what I was being served up and be more critical. Especially with some rather exciting times in the whole politico-enviro water-borne unfirmament, with the Indy falling down on the green end of the spectrum, one supposes.
Here are the headings on this topic I scrolled down:
Scientists confirm global warming link to increased rain - 'Hmnn...' he said, Homer Simpson style... 'scientists'.
'There's been nothing like this since 1938' - Or all manner of other dates I've heard trotted out. So in 1938 they copped the consequences of the Industrial revolution then? And we're now getting the fallout (literally) from WW2? Something either doesn't make sense, or it is not being well explained to me.
Record rainfall hits China - OK, at least they are getting it on record levels (though from where it does not say. And sorry to be brutal, but if there are lot more of us around, a lot more are going to suffer from natural disasters, so human counts are a bit of a red herring) . It's the 50 coal-fired power stations, I tell you (in Mandarin)!
Science reporting's dark secret - Worth bearing in mind as you read:)
Leading article: The blame game and a plan for the future - 'It is impossible to state unequivocally that the floods that have caused such misery in parts of England over recent days are a direct consequence of accelerating climate change'. Doesn't quite tally with the first one, though, does it?
Ministers will allow thousands of new homes in flood zones - I guess they are hoping for a quick vote before the next downpour.
And, finally , the Letters page - One on windfarms makes an interesting read in the context of the moment. Addendum - trying to find out a bit more, I found this, which may (or not) offer some balance.
Now... is that enough to inform me adequately, and lead to a balanced view on things?
2 comments:
Peter,
My first published letter to The Indepedent was a single question, which I remember typing quickly after half an hour's thought during a lunchtime walk. So that letter was composed at the hourly rate of two sentences per hour. You know what they say: if you haven't got time to write a short letter, write a long one! I know that editors (including yourself on this blog) prize concise expression.......
As for the wind farm letter in today's Indy, it has some of the common errors in discussion of wind power. e.g. the power produced by the nation's average wind power should be expressed as a percentage of average electricity demand rather than peak demand ie out of about 35 GW rather than out of 62 GW.
The UK's peak demand for electricity happens late afternoon/early evening in the winter. This is also the time of the year and time of the day when wind power tends to be at its strongest, so the intermittency of wind is less of a problem than it appears at first sight. A corresponding calculation of wind power during early winter evenings would be interesting but rather complicated!
The other issue is that across the UK, there is some wind power all the time. Certainly not the full 2 GW, but at least some. Why is this? Well, even big turbines will start generating at about 10 mph. Also, if it's calm in Cornwall, it won't be in Scotland! As weather systems move across the UK, so spells of good and bad wind resources move across the country. This means that the output of 2 GW of installed wind capacity varies quite slowly with time and can be relied on over the timescales over which the National Grid has to balance supply and demand.
Paradoxically, big power plants (e.g. Sizewell B nuclear, 1.3 GW) mean that the grid has to be ready in case they suddenly stop supplying electricity. There is a very small (but finite) chance that its whole output could be lost in a fraction of a second any time. If you imagine that its fairly windy across the whole UK and there's 1 GW of wind power, then this won't suddenly switch off.
I fear that this has now got too long to paste into a letter to the Indy. If there isn't a good response tomorrow, I must try and find the time to write one......
Lawrence
This is one editor who should prize brevity, but seldom practices it! I'll take the 'time poor' excus... reason.
A valid, and valued clarification, thank you. I rather suspected there was more to it. Which puts the role of such letters in context. Any answer, even if emailed, and if printed, will be at least a day away. Who will remember, much less connect? Especially those less 'committed'.
Speaking of whom, in Googling the writer's 'group', I came across a whole world of pain and anguish from two (you guessed it) sets of extremes.
The things are either seagull shredding devil's spawn, or the whirling blades of of God's redemption. Nothing inbetween.
Sigh.
Post a Comment