Newsnight's 'Ethical Man' has enjoyed a high profile journey of late.
And I have followed, not always approvingly.
Now his latest has come to an end: Looking back over an action-packed odyssey
Sadly, I feel we are again in an area of the best messengers for the message, as this frank if perhaps not wise introductory justification from his plane seat* would suggest :
'... to be honest, I have had enough... I know it's a cop out'. Ain't flying great (well, in most ways) when others pay (especially if it's for the family, too... ask the DG). There's also the small matter of *'Doing this 6500 mile trip around America without flying' So, basically, it has all just been a bit of show for a show that has green more as a theme. Hmn. Inspiring. But I have enjoyed the bits without the agenda bolted on, especially anything that reduces practically, improves efficiencies and minimises waste. These, and those who create them, are who I hold out real hope for.
His last series ended after a year with him dropping most things mainly because, as far as I could judge, on a personal basis he didn't find it much fun and, fortunately for him, professionally there was no need to keep on doing it as the cameras were now off.
Not sure things will work out too well if the rest of the population being treated to programmes of this nature adopt the same attitude.
Showing posts with label Justin Rowlatt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Justin Rowlatt. Show all posts
Friday, June 26, 2009
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Am I unethical?
I think I might be.
'Cos I had a few issues with the latest offering from BBC's Ethical Man, as alerted by some less than impressed comments on the main Newsnight blog...
Ethical Man goes down to the woods
Whoa, a lot to digest there, if you'll excuse the mental image, as much ground is covered and over various timelines.
I would also rather wish the intros were changed from 'saving the world from climate change'. This rather paints one into a corner from the off. The climate changes. What is bad is that it might be doing it negatively, and our puny race could yet be a mitigating factor if it is man (person?)-made or, my preference, worsened.
Anyhoo, first up there's the news from Washington and this conference that is dominating the world's headlines.
Not too encouraged that almost immediately we learn that there's no actual progress, as it's more a kind of discussion vs. any actual negotiations, and the key host player is 'hoping for a dialogue' and 'thinks that will happen'. O......k. Good intentions can pave many things.
Then we hit the fact that India and China say all sorts of fluffy things are fine, but the West 'goes' first. Hold that thought.
As I try and chew on our representative saying, in one sentence 'You can't get agreement based on science', and then in one later there's 'a commitment to science'. I have long been concerned about the competencies of our politico-media establishment in this arena, but maybe should be reassured: there now seem to be two sets of sciences. How very Star Trek/Gate.
I have to give Mr. Rowlatt credit for pressing certain points in this interview, especially to provoke the gem that our government’s cabinet ministers don't seem to think they have much influence over the police 'service' and its actions. Novel. Who, in the name of public service accountability, does then?
And then I got a bit lost on the timeline, but I think it was the near present that we headed from Detroit East. Traveling can indeed be difficult, but most journeys can be made anywhere still, though agreed often not so quickly. There's the rub. If you have stuff, or a schedule, compromises need to be made. From families of four with two weeks in Cancun booked, to struggling eco-types needing to get to London for a climate conference (at £500+VAT for the day), to BBC journalists and their crews with a programme to make. Or pols heading with entourages and Caddies in the hold. Tricky when the finger wagging starts if you are not careful... or being hypocritical.
But a full load of activists in a Prius has to be as good as it gets, on a motorway, on a long haul trip... I'm sure. At least once the urban bit kicked in... if they didn't get lost. I am sure a Sat Nav was deemed evil, even if the lofted waving mobiles at the subsequent love in were deemed 'different', somehow. Even those have directions now, surely?
Anyway, these 'agents of change' (a different one to the climate variety, I guess) were a joy to behold, especially to those who had them under their spell. Once 'hope for change' wears off, I am thinking 'You are right and they are wrong' will be a great substitute when dealing with others not as keen on the views held... in a democracy. Words like 'impose' and 'enforce' have a worrying ring as backstop rhetoric vs. popular public delivery, too. And, bearing in mind the theme of this 'journey' another I am not sure I am not keen the UK learning from the US. Ta very much.
Especially when backed by 'Obama's EPA' (the environment’s protection agency not good enough?) and its larger than life leader, Ms. Jackson. A vegetarian, I am sure.
I have to say I then got a bit confused again by who was in government, who was in the quango and who was an activist with time on their hands. And who was paying for who to teach whom to do what against who.
I'll have to check and see if my local tech has civil disobedience on the curriculum, and who is funding any nifty tactics being so shared, such as resisting arrest. Might be handy in Gordon and Barak's new world order that maybe I missed in the BBC's G20 coverage.
Again a good stab at getting yet another senior administration pop star to grapple with consequences, Mr. Rowlatt, but he really didn't seem to be too convincing on the link between higher energy costs and the economic consequences. Not part of the narrative that should be overplayed, I'm guessing. Change...! Hope...! You first...! I'm more equal than you...! So it's really OK I hitch a ride on Al's jet!!!
However it was interesting that, after all this, there is still the small matter of convincing Congress and the Senate. And, I might add, having held that thought from earlier for so long, those nice folk in India and China. But there's just a few billion each that I am sure 12,000 energised 'merican yoof can reach, though I'd say a Prius might struggle with the wet bits and some terrain 'soon2B banned' 4x4s could be more suitable for.
Then, finally, we scoot to the woods. And speaking of what's done naturally, why do slots like this have such terribly faked 'surprise' first meetings? It was set up.. in advance. At the due time a fleet arrived at a remote location in the middle of a forest, at night. I reckon they were alerted.
Actually here was one potentially truly inspiring aspect, though I do have my caveats, especially when pondering eating a curry to provide the raw materials, and washing it down with a beverage, beer, that uses vast litres of water to 'make' it, at least commercially. Not a totally coherent signal.
But then this is a person who has traveled the world to spread the word on his concept, minimizing the impacts of human waste. I am sure the benefits created have many times overcome the cost of such a journey.
I would have liked to learn more about this frankly, and will beaver off thus inspired.... virtually of course (if worrying about the humming servers).
I was especially intrigued that the pathogens are destroyed, what with all this swine flu lark at the moment.
It would be interesting to see how this stacks up against our crumbling Victorian sewage systems in a row of City centre terraces. Though the space required would seem to suggest that wider spaces might be required for it to be really practical. Maybe all those college grads could be prevailed upon to give it a stab in their multi-storey dorms.
I'm guessing interesting, but not too practical for most applications. Again.
Addendum -
I was sent this, related, email:
President Obama is hosting a round of international climate negotiations in Washington DC, gathering the biggest climate emitters to try to kick−start UN talks. But oil companies are flooding the airwaves with advertisements to stop the momentum.
Avaaz.org, the global campaigning group, has filmed an advert spoofing the slick Exxon ads. It's hilarious − you can see it at this link −− check it out:
But I still had/have to reply:
Negative advertising can be effective indeed. Certainly gets you noticed, and often awarded.
But I forged a pretty good ad business, on top of career, by being more concerned on behalf of my clients with the tangible end-benefit a good product could confer to the maximum number of potential consumers.
My clients are now my kids, and their futures. I tend to prefer any money to go into proactive solutions, but being realistic these can complemented by inspiration using a fair amount of creative, honest persuasion, in turn based on information and education rather than out-gunning the other side's messages or buying power. Especially when that latter seems unwinnable if you look at the war chests and resources being deployed.
Without seeing the oil companies' ads it's hard to know what their messages are, or the media schedules to guess the eyeball impact.
But if they are being crass and unsubtle and OTT with the kneejerks, I figure it's going to backfire.
However, leading by example with one right, sold well, can really develop into more rights, and soon overcome a lot of wrongs.
Anyway, they seem to have their $100k already. It will be interesting to see how many slots that gets, when, and how many negotiators are exposed to it at the right time in the best environment. And are then motivated to respond in the desired way to it.
Or just find it has cropped up in the awards in 10 months' time.
'Cos I had a few issues with the latest offering from BBC's Ethical Man, as alerted by some less than impressed comments on the main Newsnight blog...
Ethical Man goes down to the woods
Whoa, a lot to digest there, if you'll excuse the mental image, as much ground is covered and over various timelines.
I would also rather wish the intros were changed from 'saving the world from climate change'. This rather paints one into a corner from the off. The climate changes. What is bad is that it might be doing it negatively, and our puny race could yet be a mitigating factor if it is man (person?)-made or, my preference, worsened.
Anyhoo, first up there's the news from Washington and this conference that is dominating the world's headlines.
Not too encouraged that almost immediately we learn that there's no actual progress, as it's more a kind of discussion vs. any actual negotiations, and the key host player is 'hoping for a dialogue' and 'thinks that will happen'. O......k. Good intentions can pave many things.
Then we hit the fact that India and China say all sorts of fluffy things are fine, but the West 'goes' first. Hold that thought.
As I try and chew on our representative saying, in one sentence 'You can't get agreement based on science', and then in one later there's 'a commitment to science'. I have long been concerned about the competencies of our politico-media establishment in this arena, but maybe should be reassured: there now seem to be two sets of sciences. How very Star Trek/Gate.
I have to give Mr. Rowlatt credit for pressing certain points in this interview, especially to provoke the gem that our government’s cabinet ministers don't seem to think they have much influence over the police 'service' and its actions. Novel. Who, in the name of public service accountability, does then?
And then I got a bit lost on the timeline, but I think it was the near present that we headed from Detroit East. Traveling can indeed be difficult, but most journeys can be made anywhere still, though agreed often not so quickly. There's the rub. If you have stuff, or a schedule, compromises need to be made. From families of four with two weeks in Cancun booked, to struggling eco-types needing to get to London for a climate conference (at £500+VAT for the day), to BBC journalists and their crews with a programme to make. Or pols heading with entourages and Caddies in the hold. Tricky when the finger wagging starts if you are not careful... or being hypocritical.
But a full load of activists in a Prius has to be as good as it gets, on a motorway, on a long haul trip... I'm sure. At least once the urban bit kicked in... if they didn't get lost. I am sure a Sat Nav was deemed evil, even if the lofted waving mobiles at the subsequent love in were deemed 'different', somehow. Even those have directions now, surely?
Anyway, these 'agents of change' (a different one to the climate variety, I guess) were a joy to behold, especially to those who had them under their spell. Once 'hope for change' wears off, I am thinking 'You are right and they are wrong' will be a great substitute when dealing with others not as keen on the views held... in a democracy. Words like 'impose' and 'enforce' have a worrying ring as backstop rhetoric vs. popular public delivery, too. And, bearing in mind the theme of this 'journey' another I am not sure I am not keen the UK learning from the US. Ta very much.
Especially when backed by 'Obama's EPA' (the environment’s protection agency not good enough?) and its larger than life leader, Ms. Jackson. A vegetarian, I am sure.
I have to say I then got a bit confused again by who was in government, who was in the quango and who was an activist with time on their hands. And who was paying for who to teach whom to do what against who.
I'll have to check and see if my local tech has civil disobedience on the curriculum, and who is funding any nifty tactics being so shared, such as resisting arrest. Might be handy in Gordon and Barak's new world order that maybe I missed in the BBC's G20 coverage.
Again a good stab at getting yet another senior administration pop star to grapple with consequences, Mr. Rowlatt, but he really didn't seem to be too convincing on the link between higher energy costs and the economic consequences. Not part of the narrative that should be overplayed, I'm guessing. Change...! Hope...! You first...! I'm more equal than you...! So it's really OK I hitch a ride on Al's jet!!!
However it was interesting that, after all this, there is still the small matter of convincing Congress and the Senate. And, I might add, having held that thought from earlier for so long, those nice folk in India and China. But there's just a few billion each that I am sure 12,000 energised 'merican yoof can reach, though I'd say a Prius might struggle with the wet bits and some terrain 'soon2B banned' 4x4s could be more suitable for.
Then, finally, we scoot to the woods. And speaking of what's done naturally, why do slots like this have such terribly faked 'surprise' first meetings? It was set up.. in advance. At the due time a fleet arrived at a remote location in the middle of a forest, at night. I reckon they were alerted.
Actually here was one potentially truly inspiring aspect, though I do have my caveats, especially when pondering eating a curry to provide the raw materials, and washing it down with a beverage, beer, that uses vast litres of water to 'make' it, at least commercially. Not a totally coherent signal.
But then this is a person who has traveled the world to spread the word on his concept, minimizing the impacts of human waste. I am sure the benefits created have many times overcome the cost of such a journey.
I would have liked to learn more about this frankly, and will beaver off thus inspired.... virtually of course (if worrying about the humming servers).
I was especially intrigued that the pathogens are destroyed, what with all this swine flu lark at the moment.
It would be interesting to see how this stacks up against our crumbling Victorian sewage systems in a row of City centre terraces. Though the space required would seem to suggest that wider spaces might be required for it to be really practical. Maybe all those college grads could be prevailed upon to give it a stab in their multi-storey dorms.
I'm guessing interesting, but not too practical for most applications. Again.
Addendum -
I was sent this, related, email:
President Obama is hosting a round of international climate negotiations in Washington DC, gathering the biggest climate emitters to try to kick−start UN talks. But oil companies are flooding the airwaves with advertisements to stop the momentum.
Avaaz.org, the global campaigning group, has filmed an advert spoofing the slick Exxon ads. It's hilarious − you can see it at this link −− check it out:
But I still had/have to reply:
Negative advertising can be effective indeed. Certainly gets you noticed, and often awarded.
But I forged a pretty good ad business, on top of career, by being more concerned on behalf of my clients with the tangible end-benefit a good product could confer to the maximum number of potential consumers.
My clients are now my kids, and their futures. I tend to prefer any money to go into proactive solutions, but being realistic these can complemented by inspiration using a fair amount of creative, honest persuasion, in turn based on information and education rather than out-gunning the other side's messages or buying power. Especially when that latter seems unwinnable if you look at the war chests and resources being deployed.
Without seeing the oil companies' ads it's hard to know what their messages are, or the media schedules to guess the eyeball impact.
But if they are being crass and unsubtle and OTT with the kneejerks, I figure it's going to backfire.
However, leading by example with one right, sold well, can really develop into more rights, and soon overcome a lot of wrongs.
Anyway, they seem to have their $100k already. It will be interesting to see how many slots that gets, when, and how many negotiators are exposed to it at the right time in the best environment. And are then motivated to respond in the desired way to it.
Or just find it has cropped up in the awards in 10 months' time.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Still grabbing headlines
I don't mean to tease (well...) but often Aunty doesn't seem to do irony.
Newsnight
It's looking like the Obama Administration is finding out that real life is not like a Disney Movie.
And that redirecting a pendulum that has probably swung too far one way is like changing the course of an oil tanker (how apt) and might take time and a bit more subtlety than trying to whack it with a mallet in the other direction, from foreign affairs to climate.
Speaking of the latter, I am glad our new International (I'm guessing Global has unfortunate connotations) Ethical Person has flown back out West again to cover what those on the ground there already could not, with all those contacts he built up before, and expertise in the field.
At least he managed to find this pre-Copenhagen, Kyoto's end conference that President O did not attend, but Mrs. Clinton did. As it wasn't linked above here I tried the BBC search (ever the optimist) first, and then even Google let me down. Couldn't catch the title: 'Major Economic Forum'?
Then over to Congress for testimony from such as a non-cutesy Mr. Gore. Speaking of the dangers in dealing in absolutes, I think I heard him say that 'man-made global warming pollution causes global warming'. Non negotiable. Now, I had thought the debate had moved to climate change, and for some even newer incarnations, but it seems a tough sell to not even concede that man's contribution may well be significant and worth addressing, but possibly not total in the natural scheme of things.
Anyway, in the spirit of sensible enviROI efforts back home, I have just had a DEFRA PR headed '£11m to protect our seas from climate change '. Actually the headline does not accurately the content of the release (what does these days?), but the words 'drop in the ocean' still spring to mind.
Newsnight
It's looking like the Obama Administration is finding out that real life is not like a Disney Movie.
And that redirecting a pendulum that has probably swung too far one way is like changing the course of an oil tanker (how apt) and might take time and a bit more subtlety than trying to whack it with a mallet in the other direction, from foreign affairs to climate.
Speaking of the latter, I am glad our new International (I'm guessing Global has unfortunate connotations) Ethical Person has flown back out West again to cover what those on the ground there already could not, with all those contacts he built up before, and expertise in the field.
At least he managed to find this pre-Copenhagen, Kyoto's end conference that President O did not attend, but Mrs. Clinton did. As it wasn't linked above here I tried the BBC search (ever the optimist) first, and then even Google let me down. Couldn't catch the title: 'Major Economic Forum'?
Then over to Congress for testimony from such as a non-cutesy Mr. Gore. Speaking of the dangers in dealing in absolutes, I think I heard him say that 'man-made global warming pollution causes global warming'. Non negotiable. Now, I had thought the debate had moved to climate change, and for some even newer incarnations, but it seems a tough sell to not even concede that man's contribution may well be significant and worth addressing, but possibly not total in the natural scheme of things.
Anyway, in the spirit of sensible enviROI efforts back home, I have just had a DEFRA PR headed '£11m to protect our seas from climate change '. Actually the headline does not accurately the content of the release (what does these days?), but the words 'drop in the ocean' still spring to mind.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Well, he did ask.
I don't like excessively negative criticism, but in this case it was hard to find much to be positive about.
The previous effort, while flawed by a massive agenda overload and some rampant breaches of the principles of practicing what one preaches (or, in the case of the BBC, finger-wags), at least did have some information worth having.
This one, on the evidence of this piece... not so much.
The first Ethical Man film
And I felt the urge to explain why.
OK, I have given you my 17 minutes. Now for the 2 cents.
It's a mixture of questions and thoughts, the latter as requested.
First up, this is the first of how many? What for? To whom? Where and when? Here on the blog to show all the guys back in the USA who you met? What's the anticipated audience for all that has been consumed... with what intended message?
Top of line while fresh in mind, there seemed near zero by way of any information worth much. It was also hardly cutting edge documentary. How many of these have we seen before, and will get again? At what cost... to licence fee and planet? Lugging star and entourage and kit does not come cheap.
The original EM had some value; I learned a lot and got some nifty links. And why on earth would a (genuine) experiment in ways and results of trying to reduce GHG's on a personal level be bizarre?
Odd to mention the giving up flying, and then fly to the USA next. And then make a point about not flying whilst there (except back here when it was necessary).
This was billed as what America could teach us. I am struggling to think of one thing in this first piece that taught anyone anything, though there was a Brit telling some Americans how their lives are measured in Hershey bars. Looking at the audience I think that may have sunk in.
Whilst engagingly acknowledged, the whole asking folk what they thought of 'Global Warming' at every turn, during a blizzard, was... quaint. I thought it was now 'climate change', and in The Guardian even this is being deemed so last year before records stopped. And the BBC has a spotty record on reporting science at best.
Whilst obviously a very nice family, I fear the time with the Howards is time I will not get back. But I must say Dad's powered driveway shovel looked waaay cool. I'll get rid of the spade right away. Did it run on coal?
Because I think I did get the message that this is bad stuff, and the USA has lots more bad stuff than anyone. So President O's efforts in ditching their primary energy sources in favour of others will be an interesting one to watch. Environment vs. economy can be a tricky one. A bit like PM Brown's latest wheeze (frankly he spins so much on green issues each month we could run the National Grid on him) on making us all buy as many electric cars as we can is novel, without seeing certain ironies in steel mills cranking out more cars to run on a fuel produced, currently, how? And later on, how? And how distributed?
It was great to see that even in the snow you got a nice audience at the show, but let's get real. If Fox advertised an event with cameras in our town hall, half the town would turn up to get on the telly. Hope they thought it was worth it.
Without knowing where this is going, I can only hope that if I am to invest more time in these pieces, there will be something in there of more value to help me with making tough choices on climate-related issues, and better yet with proactive solutions for the future. Flying to the USA to make a telly show on high consumption Americans isn't really spinning my turbine. But I hope it was fun.
It's personal, and subjective, but I hope still polite and fair. And I really hope that it might make such as the BBC think a bit before concocting a trite TV show, with all that entails, and tries not only to sell it as something a lot more than it is, and in content serve the cause they claim to espouse so poorly. How, in any way, did this show 'save the world from climate change'?
There was also some response in the main blog, but I sense even linked from here a few did not actually watch the piece being promoted, which does rather beg the question as to who it was being made for. The ROI as a broadcaster would be as interesting as the enviROI.
The previous effort, while flawed by a massive agenda overload and some rampant breaches of the principles of practicing what one preaches (or, in the case of the BBC, finger-wags), at least did have some information worth having.
This one, on the evidence of this piece... not so much.
The first Ethical Man film
And I felt the urge to explain why.
OK, I have given you my 17 minutes. Now for the 2 cents.
It's a mixture of questions and thoughts, the latter as requested.
First up, this is the first of how many? What for? To whom? Where and when? Here on the blog to show all the guys back in the USA who you met? What's the anticipated audience for all that has been consumed... with what intended message?
Top of line while fresh in mind, there seemed near zero by way of any information worth much. It was also hardly cutting edge documentary. How many of these have we seen before, and will get again? At what cost... to licence fee and planet? Lugging star and entourage and kit does not come cheap.
The original EM had some value; I learned a lot and got some nifty links. And why on earth would a (genuine) experiment in ways and results of trying to reduce GHG's on a personal level be bizarre?
Odd to mention the giving up flying, and then fly to the USA next. And then make a point about not flying whilst there (except back here when it was necessary).
This was billed as what America could teach us. I am struggling to think of one thing in this first piece that taught anyone anything, though there was a Brit telling some Americans how their lives are measured in Hershey bars. Looking at the audience I think that may have sunk in.
Whilst engagingly acknowledged, the whole asking folk what they thought of 'Global Warming' at every turn, during a blizzard, was... quaint. I thought it was now 'climate change', and in The Guardian even this is being deemed so last year before records stopped. And the BBC has a spotty record on reporting science at best.
Whilst obviously a very nice family, I fear the time with the Howards is time I will not get back. But I must say Dad's powered driveway shovel looked waaay cool. I'll get rid of the spade right away. Did it run on coal?
Because I think I did get the message that this is bad stuff, and the USA has lots more bad stuff than anyone. So President O's efforts in ditching their primary energy sources in favour of others will be an interesting one to watch. Environment vs. economy can be a tricky one. A bit like PM Brown's latest wheeze (frankly he spins so much on green issues each month we could run the National Grid on him) on making us all buy as many electric cars as we can is novel, without seeing certain ironies in steel mills cranking out more cars to run on a fuel produced, currently, how? And later on, how? And how distributed?
It was great to see that even in the snow you got a nice audience at the show, but let's get real. If Fox advertised an event with cameras in our town hall, half the town would turn up to get on the telly. Hope they thought it was worth it.
Without knowing where this is going, I can only hope that if I am to invest more time in these pieces, there will be something in there of more value to help me with making tough choices on climate-related issues, and better yet with proactive solutions for the future. Flying to the USA to make a telly show on high consumption Americans isn't really spinning my turbine. But I hope it was fun.
It's personal, and subjective, but I hope still polite and fair. And I really hope that it might make such as the BBC think a bit before concocting a trite TV show, with all that entails, and tries not only to sell it as something a lot more than it is, and in content serve the cause they claim to espouse so poorly. How, in any way, did this show 'save the world from climate change'?
There was also some response in the main blog, but I sense even linked from here a few did not actually watch the piece being promoted, which does rather beg the question as to who it was being made for. The ROI as a broadcaster would be as interesting as the enviROI.
Monday, March 30, 2009
I decide to reply to a BBC blooger...
On the one hand, I love useful info. On the other, I don't like being 'fed'.
There were a few elements of 'medium vs. messenger' here, and also some 'politically correct' BBC lines being taken.
Are we all doomed?
Other than death, taxes and licence fees, No. But I'm guessing you mean the humin race, and more specifically through 'probably man-worsened climate change'. In which case no, not for a while, and 'I am not sure anyone knows, yet, but it might be worth sussing out the skinny to prepare'.
Well, we came to America to do nothing less than save the world.
And here was me thinking it was another 'don't do as we do, don't do what we say don't do' jolly to get a programme out and crank up some ratings in the niche end of the schedule, and some hits on a blog. But it is great you had a good time, and guys like our Darryl liked the reach the BBC has so much she caught up with you again.
If a few things might assist in certain endeavours, I'd pop in 'realism' and 'pragmatism' for two.
I have a colleague who lives in fear of their blog because of the aggressive and rude comments people post.
That is neither welcome nor, to use one of our Dear Leader's most fatuous phrases, 'acceptable'. Aggression and rudeness are poor ways to move opinion, IMHO. Especially if the pieces that have provoked such reactions are factual, objective, and free from 'enhanced narratives' and 'interpreted events'. That's what effective, honest moderation is for.
However, as your colleague Susan and her 'superior' might appreciate, it is not unlikely there will be a robust expression of disagreement if liberties are taken. Folk were not keen that President Obama's speech was turned in the edit suite into an 'emerging truth'.
That said...
'...if readers or viewers disagreed their only way to respond was a letter to the editor that, almost always, would go unpublished, if not unread.'
You are aware of the BBC 'House Rules', I take it? They can be, and often are used to delete just about anything that some do not fancy. Still.
A fact that seems to be causing some rumblings in the blogosphere. You can't control what you don't own.
But I'll look forward to the report. So long as it is guided by 'hewing close to the line, and letting the chips fall where they may', and not dogma or agenda. And by heavens the science stays sensible and the enviROI top of mind.
If not, I'm sure a few will be on hand to give you the heads up.
There were a few elements of 'medium vs. messenger' here, and also some 'politically correct' BBC lines being taken.
Are we all doomed?
Other than death, taxes and licence fees, No. But I'm guessing you mean the humin race, and more specifically through 'probably man-worsened climate change'. In which case no, not for a while, and 'I am not sure anyone knows, yet, but it might be worth sussing out the skinny to prepare'.
Well, we came to America to do nothing less than save the world.
And here was me thinking it was another 'don't do as we do, don't do what we say don't do' jolly to get a programme out and crank up some ratings in the niche end of the schedule, and some hits on a blog. But it is great you had a good time, and guys like our Darryl liked the reach the BBC has so much she caught up with you again.
If a few things might assist in certain endeavours, I'd pop in 'realism' and 'pragmatism' for two.
I have a colleague who lives in fear of their blog because of the aggressive and rude comments people post.
That is neither welcome nor, to use one of our Dear Leader's most fatuous phrases, 'acceptable'. Aggression and rudeness are poor ways to move opinion, IMHO. Especially if the pieces that have provoked such reactions are factual, objective, and free from 'enhanced narratives' and 'interpreted events'. That's what effective, honest moderation is for.
However, as your colleague Susan and her 'superior' might appreciate, it is not unlikely there will be a robust expression of disagreement if liberties are taken. Folk were not keen that President Obama's speech was turned in the edit suite into an 'emerging truth'.
That said...
'...if readers or viewers disagreed their only way to respond was a letter to the editor that, almost always, would go unpublished, if not unread.'
You are aware of the BBC 'House Rules', I take it? They can be, and often are used to delete just about anything that some do not fancy. Still.
A fact that seems to be causing some rumblings in the blogosphere. You can't control what you don't own.
But I'll look forward to the report. So long as it is guided by 'hewing close to the line, and letting the chips fall where they may', and not dogma or agenda. And by heavens the science stays sensible and the enviROI top of mind.
If not, I'm sure a few will be on hand to give you the heads up.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
CATEGORY - GM
New topic.
This first post covers many other, related, issues...
Articles
BBC - Is the green movement part of the problem?
This first post covers many other, related, issues...
Articles
BBC - Is the green movement part of the problem?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)