Leaving the line?

This I couldn't resist. A senior editor at the Telegraph had a horror train trip, and as he is lucky enough to enjoy a pulpit from which to share his frustration, did so. Were it that lesser mortals, or those who pay their own salaries ('sorry I'm late' doesn't cut it with my boss, or his clients, so it's out of pocket for me), had the same opportunity.

However, having expereinced in a concentrated period all that our transport systems can offer, I had to contribute. I just don't know how those who have to do it daily manage. And dread it if I have to join them. Here's my reply:

"Ouch.

But to this, and all the other stories that will be shared (watch this space... mine follows shortly), will come the response that these are but inevitable, isolated incidents. As I do not have the figures (and there will doubtless be many, proving both sides' claims) I can only go on what I know.

I live in Ross on Wye. Mostly I need to visit London for my work (and, as an ex-Londoner, with my family on social trips – that’s a factor of four on costs with some options).

There is a lovely collection of bricks at the end of the road where the train line used to be (nice one, Mr. Beeching).

To use the train, I could bus it I guess to Gloucester, but that would mean getting up at 4.30am to make the 7ish effort to arrive for a morning kick off. So it's a car then. The same one that my wife often has to drive hers to pick me up from Swindon to collect when the connection fails, as I've come back too late or had to wait until after 7 something pm to get the cheaper ticket. This can be, by the way, around £70. So I can't do short notice, change plans or travel 1st class.

Fuel to & fro costs £25. Parking, if required (not if I stay with a chum) £8-£20. And try lugging a demo kit or porty on the rush hour tube.

Save the planet? See my family? FEED my family...keep competitive?

It's a no brainer. If my clients could accept the world's first ethical copywriter and bear the ADDITIONAL costs of my using public transport, and the ADDITIONAL time (and hence opportunity cost) consequences of my travelling with same, all would be tikeddy boo. Fat chance. So it's the car, then (Or, longer trek, a budget plane).

Trouble is, the other day I had to dive off to the A40 when the M4 was closed (all day!) and then head home when the M40 ahead was also removed as an option and I stood no chance of getting where I was meant to be in time - and had no intention of sitting in a jam heating up Oxfordshire.

So it's obvious. Stay at home.

Now, about that job I’m pitching for..."

Don't do as we do. Do as we say.

As a persistent critic of much that our media se4rves up, it is worth reminding ourselves of the value of having thriving, curious, questioning independent checks on all that is done for us, and to us in our name.

This from an email for the BBC about last night's Newsnight:

RAINFOREST TIMBER

It's official - the government is destroying the rainforest. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown may have emphasised the importance of the environment in their conference speeches, but there is saying...and doing.

Newsnight has discovered that the government is using rainforest timber in the House of Commons as part of a £5 million refurbishment. I'll be asking the minister for the environment, why.

Sadly I am these days well abed before the programme airs, but I'm hoping to find out the answer online if I can.

And whether there will be a fine and/or prosecution on par with popping a crisp packet in the wrong bin on the wrong day. It would be too much to expect anyone gets held tangiblyresponsiblee and personallyaccountablel, and of course the only people who will suffer from any financialpenaltyy will be... the taxpayer. Interesting system.

Of course, we could be fair all round and say that mistakes do get made, and those in the House (or the household) may not know what others are up to, and it's a bit much to come down on them hard. Sometimes a bit of slack is all we need... so long as it works both ways.

It ain't what you've done, it's the way that they remember you doing it

I have about two week's worth of rather amazing activities, all Junkk-related, to blog upon, but as I look at the huge pile of materials to go through to do so, I keep procrastinating and dive off on a detour.

Last one, promise. And, sorry, not a heck of a lot to do with the environment, though I guess as a commentary on political leadership, media reporting and public opinion I guess it could be bent to fit. It's amazing how some other things have been.

As I sat in yet another jam, I happened to listen to Bill Clinton's speech at the Labour conference. I am still trying to scrape the sticky sweet ooze (that's saccharine, should anyone wonder) out of my speaker grilles. This was a consummate politician and speaker charming the crowds?

Maybe it's because I am biased. I'm afraid that no matter what his other achievements (I am sure there were some, but can't recall exactly what they were, or indeed any that were environmentally beneficial. Big Al, yes... Bill, no) all I can hark back to is a guy who didn't inhale, and a President of the USA who stood in the Oval office and figured not having relations would be a neat plan to establishing his country's position in the eyes of the world.

I must think of a twist on Groucho's 'I wouldn't want to join a club...' to apply to those who should be careful from whom they receive praise. So I couldn't resist this to the Sunday Times:

"So an ex-President is moved, special-relationship-wise, to confer not such faint praise on the personalities, achievements and legacies of our current government. Considering the source, cigars all round!"

More seriously, I do fear for political direction across all areas, especially the environment, when the media and public can be swayed so far, so quickly, so often, yet in the full face of the historical facts.

Addendum:

Hey, maybe I could become a columnist: This from the next day's Telegraph (don't worry, I'll be sure to have a go at some right-wing nonsense soon - Cameron's Huskie Hugging for example - and quote the BBC or Guardian when they catch up;):

"It was left to former President Bill Clinton to cheer them all up with a bucketful of Arkansan syrup – New Labour was a "stunning success" and had produced "prosperity and social progress for so long it's easy for people to believe it's just part of the landscape". That's one view.

A different assessment came from Dagenham MP Jon Cruddas, a contender for the deputy leadership. This one-time Downing Street adviser accused Mr Blair of living in a "parallel world". The real world inhabited by his constituents was one of falling wages, growing housing pressures, and healthcare in crisis: "You cannot say things are getting materially better." Who is right – Clinton or Cruddas? We know whose word we would take."

Guilty until proven innocent... or you keep your nerve

As I'm a roll (blogging that is, I certainly can't apply that term to my journeys), I'd like to share something I just fired off to Jeremy Vine of Radio 2, having ached to contribute to a debate on speed cameras yesterday whilst trapped in my car.

It was a potetially interesting debate, involving points of law and frnakly bigger issues of precedent, and like usual I was amazed at the selection of contributors, designed more to stir things up than allow reasoned discourse. I was also suprised that certain key issues were not raised (and totally unsuprised, if frustarted, at what unnecessaily emotive ones were allowed to be introduced).

Let's make one thing clear. Speeding to excess is not safe. It is also illegal. It shoudl not be done. However, as this reply (typically verbose, and hence unlikley to be featured) shows, in addition to my views on rational legislation, the spirit of justice and a resonabel expecation of what policing should be about, there is a bigger picture to consider, and that is where the burden of proof lies, or should do. And in case you are wondering what the heck this has to do with the environement, well, not a lot. Until you get to a para near the end:):

"I was driving yesterday when you broadcast the segment about self-incriminating, potentially human rights-breaching, heavy-handed bureaucratic fascism in action.

It's not often I find myself on the side of human rights lawyers, but in this case I wish I could have sped up to find a layby and pitch in.

But as you offered a follow-up beyond the speeding issue, here's my two cents (first on this, second on the broader one):

There is a principle at stake here, and I'm surprised it was not mentioned (or I missed it).

That is: 'innocent until proven guilty'.

I may be misquoting as it was a while ago, but think it was Lord Denning who long ago said he was interested in justice, not the law.

Well, we've sped way past the spirit of the law, and now the letter is where we depressingly now find ourselves, from both sides:

WEDNESDAY 27 SEPTEMBER 22.30 BST - BBC TWO

FROM GAVIN ESLER

Speed cameras

A great aid to road safety or an unfair tax on those honest enough to pay the fines without a fight?

As two motorists go to Strasbourg to protect their privacy from snooping speed cameras, the UK's top traffic policeman has just launched a crackdown on motorists who use legal loopholes to avoid convictions for speeding. But we can reveal that police have been using their own loophole to cancel tickets for their officers who have been caught speeding.

Those who sprang to the cameras' defence, especially those with a vested interest in the revenues, seem to want it all one way.

But what worries me more is that fact that this all smacks of 'guilty until you prove yourself innocent'. The authorities are simply too lazy, mean or inept to police dangerous driving in a fair manner, and are relying on the catch-all of dumb robots to do the job of getting the truly guilty in with a much wider net, with the bonus of a nice little earner of the fine income.

I have not yet had a speeding ticket, but I'm waiting for the day I do. And dreading that I have an accident because my eye is too often on the speedo rather on driving the road safely.

However, I have had two motoring 'offence' notices, both of which were subsequently quashed, but only because I took the issue as far as it would go.

And yes, I was subjected to these aggressive notices, along with escalating threats of increased fines and eventually court proceedings, at every stage feeling I was dealing with a computer. And why not? Because having been vindicated, all that happened was the original, invalid fines were cancelled. I was put through the hoops and ever-greater penalties for simply questioning, yet the authorities had no such disincentive in the proceedings.

This is official extortion. Argue and the price goes up. Argue some more and we drag you to court. But if they are wrong, all bets are off.

When I see a speed camera where my kids are walking back from school (and yes, make it 20mph), and not on the only clear stretch of a remote A road where you can get safely past a tractor, and the damn thing has the speed limit posted on it (as opposed to a preceding few miles' worth of hundreds of bits of useless 'road furniture'), I'll call them safety cameras. If they are policed properly. And if booked I'll take my medicine, and rue the day that such things as context, mitigation and proof supported by official testimony and expert witnesses are no longer part of the legal process.

If someone is proven driving illegally and dangerously, throw the full legal book at them. Fines. Jail. No more licence. I'll support that 100%. But not using a robot backed with bureaucratic fascism to generate income from the easy mark of someone who has paid for their tax and insurance, and may have very good reason for thinking they were not at fault or simply not know who was driving or how their car was so labeled (which is what policemen are for, to stop and catch them - no wonder we no longer hear 'it's a fair cop').

And to those who use the 'what if it was your kid' for bending this aspect of criminal justice to suit, wait 'til there's a knock on your door because a facial recognition system has you or them pegged as a mugger, or your bin has the wrong rubbish in it. Fine if it's up to the system to prove it was you first: not so fine (or actually ever-increasing fines) if it's incumbent upon you to prove first that you have no association with the crime or a good explanation. Or drop a family member in it instead.

I'd be glad for someone to explain the difference with such cases and the one above.

First they booked the [alleged] speeders, then they came for...

It's an interesting state, sorry, country, Britain has become. And a fine legacy for the leadership who have brought us here.

Addendum:

I have awoken next morning to posting this to the following in my in-box from the Telegraph:

'The case for speed cameras destroyed in a flash"

While this will doubtless intensify debate, it does broadly add weight to my core beliefs.

However, I personally believe that we should have the cameras, only that they should be moved to urban situations where pedestarisans are at danger. At best they will act to cause even the most dangerous to check their speed, and at worst provide some additional ammunition to trace, track and build cases aginst consistnetly offending vehicles. Meaning more police effort: 'Chris Grayling, the Tories' transport spokesman, called for greater use of police patrol cars, rather than cameras, to deal with the menace of "rogue drivers".'

This would contribute to the cause of safety. If the human rights case proves successful, it will mean no further, or at least much reduced, revenues. It will be interesting to see whether the authorities maintain their enthusiasm for our safety if there is no money it.

Incoming!

I have been persuaded to allow comments on my blog.

I had originally decided against, as I really don't have the patience, skin-thickness, time or willpower to resist getting embroiled in, at best, passionate debates, or at worst flame wars.

But I have been shown the comment moderate option.

This will not spare me from beiung lured into civilized discourse, and hence will be dangerous to my already woeful time-management. But it will mean that anything I don't fancy, and/or which looks like going in a fruitless direction, won't make the cut... just like the BBC, Telegraph and a few others (The Guardian possibly not, unless they don't have a swear filter).

So if you feel like pitching in, feel free. Just remember that I hate waste, and do have a nice big, virtual red pencil I'd hate to have to wield. Oh, and a family who like me to get away from the keyboard on occasion. So while I may allow a post. I may not reply. No offence meant.

First, offer a viable alternative

Missed me? I'd like to say that the lull in my posting has been a result of a well-earned rest, lazing on some sunny beach, but sadly it's merely a case of 25-hr days... most of which have been spent in a traffic jam.

Let's get out of the way straight away that I am in a car because I have no choice. Either it would be impossible to get from Ross to where I'm meant to be (and, more importantly, back - too many calls to the missus to pick me up at Swindon to drive us both to Gloucester to pick up my car) or too expensive (Ignoring the joys of lugging demo kit on a rush hour tube, I can still get to London and back for about £25 in fuel plus £10-20 parking, which is about half the cost of even a pre-booked train and often having to wait a few hours to get the cheap rate. I like seeing my kids.

Any road up (if you'll excuse the pun), I have been on (as opposed to moving along) waaaay too many of the things, and it is not an experience I'd wish to repeat, given the choice.

In addition to incredible roadworks decisions (like taking out most of London's Euston road last night at the tail end of the rush hour), listening to the radio is like getting intel on new minefields as you barrel across the desert. The other day I was headed for London (again), when first the M4 was 'closed', so I dived off onto the A40, only to learn that the M40 ahead was also shut down, prompting a detour back to the M4 past the other mess.

And as I listened to Radio 2 on other journeys I was amazed how daily entire major arteries were literally taken out of commission all day for a jack-knifed lorry or overturned caravan.

Now I fully endorse everything necessary being done to secure the safety of those who may be injured in accidents, or to render dangerous situations safe, but I cannot recall in the past this requiring such swingeing over-reactions of such durations. What on earth is going on? Are they simply trying to make the process of road travel so miserable that people no longer try? Most are already having such horrible time it can only be of necessity, so they obviosuly have no choice.

And I am sure it is not helping the planet to have all those vehicles sitting in a 15-mile tailback on idle.

Here comes the sun. There go the bills.

At the weekend I made my first venture into free energy, thanks to Dave and his solar-powered dehumidification system, Solarventi (he's more than happy to help us for helping him, so until we sort out proper click throughs, please tell him you came via us so we get a credit!).

He kindly came along to brief me on the system and also help with the installation to maximise its effect. We were lucky that the weather was lovely, so a few pounds were shed as a few pounds' worth of potential was bolted on to the house.

I'm planning to do a full feature review as soon as a few twiddly bits are tidied up and I've had a chance to assess its effect, which I'm looking forward to. We have a big, damp cellar, and with luck it will soon be dry... for ever... for free!

If something worth doing...

I'm at it again! A post by the BBC Newsnight head honcho covering a few topical issues, from sugar-coating negative, major issues, to the potential cop-out of dumbing-down with gameshow techniques to generate interest from an apathetic (or plain overwhelmed?) audience has prompted my reply:

"Sugar coat, no. But the notion of incentivising, rewarding or at least boosting people's tendency to engage by whatever means work - is an interesting one, and one I happen to subscribe to.

Take my personal area of interest and activity, which is the environment. You have mentioned as a big issue climate change, and today was a good example. Some depressing stuff on the front pages, and grabbing the broadcast leads too. Your very own Ethical Man gracing my screen as I was rapidly losing my appetite for breakfast (not due to him, I stress, but the storyline itself, combined with a slight concern as to where my strawberry-dappled muesli and coffee actually came from).

Even with his noble example as inspiration (though I was struck by the intro piece that mentioned his [family's] efforts were (just) for a year - all back to 'normal' thereafter?) it came across as a bit 'doom & gloom' and 'well if that's the best we can manage taking it to the barest of bones, we're pretty screwed anyway'.

What struck me was how it came across overall as a pretty negative rough ride, and such benefits as there were erred more on the warm fuzzy, 'doing the right thing' feelgood variety, and not terribly much tangible on the personal front.

And when it came to the major problem areas that overhwelm the personal efforts, caused or overseen by business or government, it didn't seem too encouraging at all.

But maybe, just maybe, there are little pockets of proactive, positive hope that can cast light on a few trees in the woods, and where relationships can be established that do help, the environment... a bit... to serve to inspire, motivate and maybe even reward the individual, and just possibly can as a consequence be made to appeal to the short-term beancounters or pols who really can only see to the next fiscal or election.

Not all can afford a hybrid as a 3rd car or a solar panel. Low-energy bulbs, yes, though the fittings are an issue (and the bulb guys are coming up with adaptations daily... yay!). But while reusing a plastic bottle cap as Scout Woggle may not solve global warming overnight, if someone gets their head around having a bit of fun making rather than buying, repairing than disposing, and saving a bit of dosh and maybe a bit of time whilst doing something to save the planet rather than just talking about it, then that's a small step worth taking. Not to mention popping as many of such possibilities into storylines to help redress the balance what can often be some pretty heavy and hopelessness-inducing big issues can be worth it too.

So we'd love a mention for the likes of Junkk.com should you feel disposed. Making a very small positive difference to a big negative issue, and at the very least not costing anyone anything. How feelgood is that? "

The short and long of it

I'm a glutton. No sooner do I recover from the disappointment of the big idea heats hurdle fall than I get all excited by the next award that I really have a hamster in a shredders chance (for those not reading the daily eco-pages of the tabloids, one did survive, so I'm hedging my bets) of winning.

However, in my guise as a designer, and with the obvious need to get back to the day job to earn a crust to keep junkk.com in the limelight, I entered this rather dubiously-named effort: Designers Are Wankers

And lo, it seems I am on the shor... long list. Not quite six of nine (how Next Generation is that?) but better than not being on the list. And with £5k in the kitty, well worth a goat sacrifice or two.

Even nearer...

No, not a diatribe against food miles. Though, mind you...

Anyways, Junkk.com maintains its roller-coaster ride of fortunes and emotions, and after the major downer of the weekend's end, it's nice to be able to sahre a nice upward turn again.

A wee while ago I read about a new website called Green & Easy. Nice name, nice site, nice people and... nice and near!

Becuase it turns out they are just up the road, and I am not long back from a lovely morning in the company of David and Jackie. And as it turns out they read my blog... hi guys!

All we really did was chat as neighbours, but I am hopeful that soem synergies may evolve. There really are few areas of overlap between us, and we even agreed that if there were areas where we might be seen to be competitive, then so what... it's all making the green cause stronger!

So near...

Sunday was my big chance at The Big Idea.

It was a roller-coaster of a day. I got through the first round but sadly fell at the next.

Lord Bilimoria was quite charming and seemed very taken with the concept. I showed how his beer bottle caps could be made into a waste bin, and he noted the one I had chosen was from his wife's homeland.

Ruth Badger was surprisingly supportive as I'd been told she could be pretty fierce. She was the only one to ask a question about revenue, and seemed satisfied. So I had two votes.

Craig Johnston loved the idea, but reckoned it could not count as an invention, so it was looking like he would defer. But then he changed his mind, which was nice... and a relief.

At this point I was over the moon. They had all been very positive and as the day progressed it seemed I was one of the few to get 3 votes.

I was then called to the next round, with a shortlist of nine from whom six were chosen. Sadly this was where I didn't make it any further. It was a bit odd, as there had not been any further opportunity to present, so I am not sure what they did subsequently to decide one way or the other. As I was the only one who didn't have a patentable device I fear that may have been it. I'm now wishing I'd shown an invention I'd created via Junkk.com, but as the patent is not registered I couldn't. Know any cheap IP lawyers?

I can't pretend it was not a huge disappointment. In addition to the money, I was looking forward to working with some business brains to complement my creative talents. Junkk.com flounders a lot for the lack of such a team. Most others had the inventor, money man and sales brain. Plus of course the public exposure of the series as it progressed wouldn't hurt build our audience.

We will get some I hope with the first episode (maybe all, as I wore a lab coat and they asked me to do a series of thoughts on life in the future - see pix), as the crew really took to the idea, me and the family and filmed a lot of vox-pops. Whether they make the final edit is another matter.

For Junkk.com all I have left to target in the near future is the Guardian Social Entrepreneur of the Year Awards. Fingers crossed!

The thief of time

In addition to procrastination, and I don't know if it was just time that was stolen, but blogging (reading others and posting) certainly was taking a major chunk out of my day (and night). So having experimented with routing the majority of the daily feeds to the trash, and hence restricting the urge to comment on tons of stuff (mostly climate spats), I have tried to focus more on making Junkk.com work harder in areas it is stronger.

To this end I recently typed our name in Google and was frankly amazed at the extent and breadth of places we have been mentioned and, I'm happy to say, positively, if not in glowing terms. Time to upgrade our media section under 'About' on the site!

Not to mention our PR folder.

Because, by way of more good news the next few weeks will see me heading off, having got through some heats (how woo-hoo that achievement is remains to be seen, but it's better than a 'Dear Peter...' letter at the first hurdle) to be briefed on the next round of a) the Guardian Social Entrepreneur of the Year Awards, and b) SKY TV's 'The Big Idea'. Neither are insignificant opportunities (financially we're talking £20k and £100k prizes respectively, but also both will extend our reach to a much wider audience). In both cases some considerble 'heft' was also accorded to getting media coverage and, of course, any contribution to the environment. I think we can tick those boxes.

Now all I have to do is stop staring at this screen and figure out just what I take to show and what I tell in the brief few moments I'll get to pitch Junkk.com Wish me luck!

Demand and supply

They're to mean to post it free, and I'm too mean (well, broke) to pay to access it in its entirety, but here's something encouraging from the Indy today: Supermarkets in pursuit of the green pound.

The bit worth getting encouraged about (at least for Junkk.com): "it would be misleading to put these revolutions in the grocery and retail sectors down to political pressure. Something substantially more powerful is at work. What we are witnessing is a new trend in consumer demand."

Missing the points.

Two ads from the same magazine this week.

One is certainly a 'better than nothing'. The other seems slightly at odds with its aims, though.

It would appear that Clubcard points can range in hue.

Art. Life. On Reflection.

Still having trouble resisting the odd punt into the blogosphere, as in the case of this from Newsnight's Ethical Man. Before my wife clouts me, in mitigation there is an opportunity to get the URL across to the media (and, currently, 12 fellow posters, which seems a very small number all in all) such that they may wonder what we are and say hi.

I have had a few eyebrow twitches before on how the life of an 'I'm from the BBC' reporter, whose paid job this year is to be ethical, can mirror an average Joe trying to assess and install a multi-thousand pound sustainable energy system. Lack of film crew can seriously affect the way a supplier, council or local population treats you.

But in this case I thought the piece, and options, accurately reflected reality. Though it did seem prompted, as was my first thought when reading it, by the 'no car/arrived by car' question posed by an earlier poster. Anyway, as always, in case I do get edited, here's my offering:

"This well illustrates that not everything green can be painted in black and white, and almost any effort of this nature will inevitably be an exercise in compromise.

For those who wish to try, it does seem possible to exist in an urban situation without owning a car, but when it comes to needing one it would be nice to have the salary or expense account to enjoy when necessary the option of getting one on demand.

As a countryside homeworker I guess I could use public transport. However I am not sure how long I could sustain bearing the costs, especially those of transit time which I doubt any client will be prepared to support.

Equally, I'm sure if Ethical Man needs to do a far-flung piece, there may be some questions around the office water-cooler, HR and indeed by licence payers should he be away too long by sailing there.

But the importance of this feature is that one gets introduced to, and an appreciation of the options, from the personal to the professional to the environmental (which sadly can be conflicting), and assisted in making informed choices.

Hence in this case, as car was the chosen option for perfectly valid personal reasons, I was interested and impressed that a purely tokenistic vehicle choice was not made rather than barrelling down the motorway lugging a battery. The fantastic makes better copy than the mundane, with many in the media playing a part in keeping things overly idealistic and free of financial consequence (not all, including the BBC it seems, can swing a freebie or loaner from a PR dept!), impractical and hence beyond the abilities of many average families to embrace, no matter how keen they are to do their best.

At least DOING something is better than nothing."

Doing the right thing for the right reasons... in the wrong way

I have littered about the place a hefty collection of essentially worthless grey boxes. Partly it is because I have this odd notion that I may one day have a use for an extra 1GB of storage lurking in an entire CPU, but mainly I am still unsure what to do about them.

The ideal of course is that I get some money. Well, forget that. For a start, as mentioned, they are essentially worthless. So next up is that they get reused. Or at very worst recycled. These latter involve donation, which I am happy to do, but then we come to a bit of an issue, and one that is more than a tad topical: security.

This of course has provoked a response from those with a vested interest in the business of discarded IT. One such we have just been happy to print on our very own pages, reassured by the defence of its service (noting in passing the double-edged sword of Google Adsense, which has ads on the same page for services that may or may not be as worthy - caveat emptor).

But one thing I do note is that to get the reassurance one needs, you need to pass off in excess of 20 units.

Now most idividuals, and even small SMEs, do not have such numbers. What can one do? Is there a similar service for single units? Is it as secure? Can it be sustainable for the reuser without being financially prohibitive for the disposer? And if not, is the council 'bin' any more secure?

Quite an issue.

One notion I have is using the localisation capability of Junkk.com to pool diverse individuals in a coalition of the willing that builds to the trigger level, at which point the units are pooled (centrally would involve storage, at least temporarily, and possibly transport commitments) ready for collection.

Turkey is a dish best served cold

I'm still weaning myself off the surfing and the blogging, but it's not easy.

However, some things are helping me see the wisdom of the effort.

Take today's Guardian Online. I have captured a block of three topics, topped by the one that almost sucked me into its lair: 'Why do newspapers hate us bloggers?'

They don't hate you... er... us! They love us! Look at that figure in red below. Over a hundred comments before elevenses. Chock full of extreme and diverse opinion, quotes and links. Sure the readership number is trivial, but the source material is gold-dust. If you are a hack or commentator (or are they the same thing?) who is paid to read this stuff and write about it, who needs research?

Sadly, I am now having to find more profitable ways to spend my hours, so wading through such material, much as I'd like to, is no longer an option. And in any case, these days even if I do see something of interest, I have no faith in whether it's accurate or the time to check.

Sadly, it looks like the media I used to trust to discover and report for me are not bothering much either.

Space... the final frontier

A few posts ago I had cause to tweak an eyebrow at some coverage in the Sunday Times magazine last week regarding an eco-artist who took pictures of people protesting about global warming... from his helicopter.

This week there is a similar airborne piece, which I felt was much more striking and justified.

However, despite the familiar, depressing and assuredly concerning pictures of retreating ice fields and glaciers, what was more striking to me was the percentage that were not so much to do with climate change (though it all has a contributory effect) as population expansion and the consequent demands on our planet's finite space to house and feed these ever-increasing numbers.

For every square meter of forest turned into housing, as economies develop you'll generate a whole new source of domestic waste, and demands for energy to light, watch TV, water, garze cattle, grow soy, provide cars, roads to drive them on and biodiesel to fuel them.

I can't help but feel that if this is not addressed (though I have no easy-PC suggestions how) as a priority, all the rest is rather trivial in comparison.

Bouquets & Brickbats

The other day our laser printer started making a noise like a dying buffalo. After 3 turbulent years I thought it had given up the ghost. With a purchase price just shy of £200 almost all its residual value is in the consumables, and with it gone they are useless, so I was keen on fixing it.

Initial signs were not good. Well out of warranty, I was looking at call-out fees alone approaching £100. Even lugging it in for an assessment was in the £50 mark.

So I managed to locate the initial sales folk and they said it was worth trying the manufacturer (Epson) help line (0870 44 3 77 66 - select 'sales' and then go with the flow). And I must say it worked out very well. I eventually reached a human after the longest voice menu drill down in history. And, with luck, tproblemelm has been resolved. A free repair advice that saved all round.

That's the bouquet. The brickbat is the status print.

Why on earth is it necessary to such so much ink out on that bar on the left? Surely if it's a roller test one can have a narrow lengthwise and vertical bar to test coverage?

Conspiration Constipation

'They' must be out to get me.

First up, no sooner do I start weaning myself off the vast amount of time searching, reading and too often fruitlessly responding to the flood of online blog static out there, I somehow now find myself seduced by a plethora of manhour-sucking awards and competitions.

Some involve money; some involve potential PR. And some the nirvana of hooking up with complementary talents to move things along. A few offer all of these. And so are too good to ignore.

I have just completed my application to Sky's The Big Idea. Literally a few days' worth of drafting, crafting and rushing around shooting a video pitch. But with £100k at the end, perhaps worth it. I just hope they buy my notion of Junkk.com as an 'invention' that has been created to help create an infinite number of other inventions.

But no sooner do I leave this one in the lap of the Gods of Ratings, than I come across a design competition for canny designs! Only due Friday, so I have, er, one day to not do what I was and devote to the slim chance of a shot at this. Oh, phew, it's 'members only'. And when once this would have me signing up I'm afrid that budget boat has sialed... and sunk.

And then there is this: profit@50. Not a great deal of dosh, but it scores big on the profile meter.

Just one problem. I am not... quite... yet... 50! I'm still embroiled in the thinking behind 'Must be under 30' Guardian cartoon competition (a few posts back), which I miss out on by being too old, and now this looks out of reach becausee I'm too young!!!!

Ever felt you were a square peg in a sea of round holes?

Still looking, but not finding

Another I couldn't resist pitching into, if only in the hope the mainstream journalist may read and wonder about my email address (I now see little other value in these things) and find out what a 'Junkk.com' is:

Wanted: a practical guide to saving the warming planet

"Debate on global warming, be it man-made or naturally-occuring, is really moot. So I agree the key things we must focus on are reducing consumption wherever possible (economical, political and a whole raft of other 'als' permitting), and certainly reducing waste. It is simply a matter of efficiency. Which surely must appeal to any 'conservative'.

Sadly, it's tricky whilst also worrying about natural conservation which, in any form, is going to be hard to achieve with an expanding global population. Most, myself included, shy away from going much further 'there'.

But I'm afraid a polar bear's few thousand acres will come second to a few thousand more voters' homes getting profitably bullt on an ironically water-starved South Eastern flood plain."

I'd read this with a hope that there may be an indication of what form this guide may take. Sadly it was again more debate on whether it was required or not, which I guess I added to.

But at least when it comes to guides on doing stuff that can help, there is at least Junkk.com to point to in mitigation.

Unfortunate Illustrations

Not really anything to do with matters 're' or even Junkk.com's adventures, but I have to post this from today's Guardian - Cartoon competition.

As a not bad cartoonist, I was already sharpening my HB pencil when I noticed: 'entrants must be under 30 on January 1 2007'.

Ooooo, so close. But then I noticed a significant percentage of the posters below had asked 'why 30?', to which I can only add my voice. It's not like it's a kids' competition. I'm even pretty sure it is ageist and as such possibly now (or at least soon) illegal.

No excuses. This may prove interesting to monitor.

ADDENDUM: Paranoia is knowing they are out to ignore you


I decided to pop back to see what's what a few days later, and as there was no reply or, oddly, further posts (read on) decided to have another go. As this letter to the original poster (and attached screenshot) shows, there seems to have been a glitch preventing futher discussion. I wonder why?

Dear Mr. King

As I have an interest in this issue, I returned to the site today to still find no answer to the postings regarding the age limit, and hence composed the following. Sadly it was not possible to upload (see attached). I'm sure there is a perfectly good reason for this, though the phrase 'Comments not allowed on this entry' is less than enlightening, and does in itself raise a few additional questions. So I remain interested. Maybe I'll have more luck sending this to you directly:

"A few days have passed, yet I still see no answer to the majority of posters' legitimate questions regarding the age limit. It may be ageist. It may be legal. It may be demographics. It may be marketing. It may be ethi... well, maybe not. But having asked politely, I'd just like to know the reasoning behind one not being able to enter a non-gender specific creative competition for post-student, working-age UK adults (I can understand the need for kids' versions to have an upper limit) by virtue of being over 30. Is it hoped by staying mute long enough we can all be relied upon to have Alzheimers? Or maybe you too have simply forgotten... to reply? You could of course let such senior citizens enter, and then make sure they don't win if they don't suit the profile. Like every other media competition."

The Plot thickens... well, a reply:

On 9 Aug 2006, at 09:17, Oliver.King@guardian.co.uk wrote:

Peter
I dont have any email in my inbox from your email address so I couldnt have
responded. I am forwarding your query and complaint to Ian Mayes the
Guardian reader's editor. I work for Guardian Unlimited - the website and
not the newspaper. I was asked to publicise the competition by colleagues
on the paper which I did. I didnt draw up the rules to the competition and
do not even know who did so Ian is the best person to contact neither drew
up the rules Please contact Ian Mayes the readers editor with your
complaint.
Oliver King.

And so I stay hopeful, though with eyebrow twitching...

Dear Oliver,

Thank you for your prompt reply.

I do appreciate and sympathise with your position, and apologise if my wording made my comments seem personally directed at 'you'. This was not my intention as I fully appreciated the fact that you were just the guy writing the post to advertise the competition.

I was simply interested in answers. And the blog seemed the best place for these to be forthcoming from those who initiated it (I was not aware of the level of distinction between the paper and website); not necessarily to me personally but to address all with similar questions on the blog.

Hence it was frustrating to find that further comment had seemingly been stopped and there remained no organiser's reply after two days. It is surely only to be expected that following such postings there is monitoring of responses?

Still, we are getting places. I will await feedback from Mr. Mayes.

Yours sincerely,

Peter Martin

You can be too mature, apparently

A follow up and, I guess, an answer at last:

"Ian Katz who drew up the competition said he was looking for undiscovered
cartoonists the paper didn't know about. He also said the age limit is
similar to the student journalism competitions the Guardian regularly runs
which offer short-term work as a prize. It was determined to follow similar
rules in this case."

Whether it is a satisfactory one is another matter, along with my having the righteous energy to pursue further. I could still wonder why undiscovered cartoonists the paper didn't know about 'must' be under 30. Do you become known, especially to them, when you're over that age? And 29 year-old students are a new one to me, too.

Funny how 'ist' the supposed organs of liberty and equality can be when it suits.

Meanwhile, at a supermarket near you...

Just read an interesting story about Wal-Mart (which may translate into ASDA here?) 'going green' in Fortune.

Overall it's encouraging, but again, contradictions abound. I just loved the bit about conservationists pitching to the bosses whilst scuba diving here and hiking there around the world. Nice work if you can get it, but I guess a small price to pay to swing the monolith in tangible green ways. And the CEO has traded his Beetle (!) in for a hybrid... er... SUV. Not sure if that was a step in the right direction or not.

But I think I am most focused on this claim: '[The] argument was simple: Wal-Mart could improve its image, motivate employees, and save money by going green.' Reads like our pitch to ASDA about 3 years ago. This has translated into tangibles: 'On Kid Connection, its private-label line of toys, for instance, Wal-Mart found that by eliminating excessive packaging, it could save $2.4 million a year in shipping costs, 3,800 trees, and one million barrels of oil.'

A lot of the inspirations to have hit these multi-million salaried execs seem a bit 'Well, D'uh', when they are reported as so excitedly coming up with initiatives, but at least they are not (always - there is that bottom line) saying no.

And maybe I have some guys to write to about Junkk.com. Can't hurt.

If you have something worth saying, say it!

As I start to look towards ad-land again as a way of keeping the family alive while the Junkk.com machine secures its foothold, I find my Creative Director juices flow when I see certain ads, and view them critically for strategy and message.

And I am starting to feel that the conveying of anything 'green', despite moves in the right direction, is still tending to draw the short straw when it comes to communicating in the same way and to the same effect as other brands.

Take this Lexus execution. It's a 4x4. But it's a hybrid. So it's evil (official). But also gets off the congestion charge (have to check - maybe not, as I'd have to presume they'd mention that for the Chelsea Tractor brigade's benefit). In fact it is a series of contradictions. But at the end of the day it's a dirty great big greenish SUV for those who still want to be up in the sky, lug half a dozen kids, look spiffy and deflect Greenpeace stickers

I'm not sure I get that from the headline. The subhead tells me it's a hybrid. The first line of copy waffles and then goes off into some very vague areas of fact.

As I dust off the porty, I am encouraged. However, much as I'd like to get such guys' ads on Junkk.com, helping shape them still rather requires me to reach them. And that is still proving... tricky.

If you have nothing worth saying...

... issue a leaflet and/or press release anyway (it may be so bad it gets coverage)!

An interesting snippet from the 'Prufrock' business gossip section of the Sunday Times, which is usually more concerned with which 'richer than god' mandarin is outsquandering another, and hence needs to invite the reporter along on their private plane/yacht/country estate to ensure it hits the presses. This one was more modest:

Eco rules for the jet set

I'm presuming that opting not to travel at all is another option they advocated (but I guess if your business is travel, then you may decide that is a step too far. At least sustainable is better than nothing).

But I have to say it does highlight how a lot of organisations are struggling to make the whole eco-thing interesting. While an undoubted good thing, switching the lights off in your resort room is, as pointed out, not exactly cutting edge. Some newsletters we're getting are looking decidedly tired. The non-commercial re-brigade are really scraping the barrel. There really is only so much you can re-hash. Guys like Grist still seem to be keeping things fresh, but the global warming debate is tending to circle now, too. What more can you do? I do still revel in Treehugger's news of innovations, but again there is now a plethora of folk selling eco-stuff.

As we try and get towards our next, second (ouch!) and hopefully vanguard of more regular newsletters, we really must weigh the best regularity (I'm thinking monthly to start, down to a maximum of weekly, perhaps with options of full text or summaries) and content balance. I'm hoping that between ideas, features and of course the odd blog I've penned, we will have enough to stay fresh maintain the interest of our audience.

Coke adds... data

Actually they haven't.. yet. But on a more positive note I'm hoping this ad, which pretty much shows what we're up to (if for a very different reason) is karmically encouraging. At least we know they have a caliper in the office!

What's odd about this picture?

All very noble 'n all, and yes it did get noticed, but as it isn't mentioned anywhere I have to wonder how they got there. And, indeed, how the shots (there are many - we are talking an international artist here - I guess he cycles around) get taken.

There may be hints in the words 'seen from the air', 'pay a flying visit' and 'aerial artist'.

Mixed message? Me, I waited 'til they stuck up a crane and then asked the operator to take some shots of our town ;)

Agenda Benders

Another lost archive, this time from when I was contributing to the BBC about blogs, and not a little miffed about editorial, if not censorship. Still worth sharing:

There is no doubt that power can turn the head of those who wield it. And there is equally no doubt that those who occupy any position of public profile in or for a major media organisation will inevitably find such a gift, and curse, bestowed upon them, willingly or merely as a consequence. And as will always be the way, such power can come in many forms, stemming equally from the way it has been wielded, from respect to to fear. With, in the case of media, perhaps one extra aspect, the desire to be heard. You may agree or disagree with someone who can lay claim to column inches or minutes of airtime. You may like or dislike them. But if you think there's the faintest chance that you may get to their audience by engaging with them in any way, it's worth the punt.

Until recently, access to the major media was quite simple. You were either part of the story-telling system, or part of the story. Now, with the advent of the forums and blogs sprouting everywhere, there is a chance at finding oneself as a potential profiled player in either, but most significantly the former, at least by temporary association. This can be heady stuff. And has been hailed as a new era in citizen journalism bringing a new dimension to the media fare we are served and/or can opt for.

But is it? With recent personal experience I can testify that what seemed to be a brave new world of equal access and freedom of speech can easily be manipulated by whomsoever controls the medium to meet their requirements, benign or otherwise.

For this reason I have now decided to try to avoid reading much less contributing to any other blogs, and concentrate solely on my own, using and quoting such information resources with whose provenance I have more confidence, at least historically. I will always have my own of course, and what I have written, and hence think, is there for all to read and judge accordingly, warts and all. And I think I will continue to avoid allowing replies, at least directly (I always welcome contact for personal discussion), to avoid any chance that what is on view (ie: from others) artificially adds weight to my own, inevitably subjective, viewpoints.

In short there will always be an agenda. It's silly to pretend, or believe, otherwise.

Me, myself... not

I have, it seems, a common name. First and last. Those Hugenots got about a bit. Hence I share it with quite a few folk. Some of note.

Usually this is quite fun. But then a Sunday Times journalist with my moniker wrote an expose of the Russian Mafia, so I was a bit concerned when any black cars with smoked windows drove past the house a bit too slowly.

And now this morning I was in front of the TV when Newswatch came on, pretty much starring in commentary and print... me! Only it wasn't. And this person's views were not mine at all. Now I have chosen to contribute to this programme before, and at the very least readers of this blog know it. So do most of my chums. Fortunately none of you are up at this time so it is not an issue.

But it did make me think. What was the point of the name? It could have been anyone. Even adding the town can still lead to a mis-identification of there are more than one of you.

I think it's mainly to ensure those that write in check to see if they have been mentioned, which at least means some sort of audience.

I certainly think that's true of the Telegraph system I have given up on since having a post edited (see recent previous blog). When I read the initiating article first thing there are no posts as the moderating (and editing) is taking place. But unless I have contributed I can't really be bothered to check subsequently.

Vanity, vanity, thy name is 'Cross of Ross'.

Asking for thirds

Just stumbled across some notes I took for my recent jaunt to London. Hate to waste, so here they are:

Did you know there a Third Sector? Until recently, I didn't. So it came as a bit of surprise to find we (Junkk.com) fall within it. It has an office. And a Minister.

And so it was that I was up at crack of dawn (and back in the wee small hours:( to attend an event snappily entitled 'Joint HM Treasury & Cabinet Office Review On The Future Role Of The Third Sector In Social & Economic Regeneration' in London, drearily.

Basically it's an outreach, recognising that there a bunch of folk 'out there' doing stuff that is quiet helpful to the social fabric, and that it wouldn't hurt to complement. I'd even go so far as to say 'they' had understood a bit of help, or at the very least reduction of hindrance, would go a long way to making things happy and happening.

It all kicked off with the inevitable speeches from the inevitable bevvy of pols, with the inevitable excuses for not hanging around beyond wishing us the best, Young Mr. Grace-style... 'you're all doing very well'. Ah well, busy folk, I guess, but it does strike one that for all the stories they tell of 'meeting real folk' you need to wonder when it is they actually do it. Actually a fairly sharp bunch, with a few young... so young. There was a nice balance of fresh enthusiasm, though already jading with trappings of power.

At least they are trying, which is why I committed to attend.

Was it worth it? Well, it was 15 unpaid/compensated hours of my life, plus car, return train and tube.

Basically it was two sets of workshops, where 'we' (social enterprisers) sat in groups and came up with answers to structured questions around themes such as:

* Promoting Innovation and Enterprise

* Future role of the sector in shaping and delivering public services

* Cohesive communities and building a voice for citizens

* Creating a sustainable resource base

It was all structured, which is necessary, but to me no so happily. Thanks to the schedules overrunning it was more important to do what we were meant to in the allocated space, rather than consider coming up with anything sensible. More process over product. I almost expected them to ask us to make sure we ticked the box and signed in.

But by some miracle a few useful discussions were had.

Plus a few 'debates'. I think I was a very lone 'commercial' social enterprise in a sea of NGOs, charities, etc, and all of whom knew this turf backwards.

I don't like being patronised by some smart-alek in a suit whose job and salary depends on dealing in process, when I have committed my whole being to product.

At least there was a nice buffet.

I have posted the thoughts I had on the site.

ps: On a small, but not unconnected note, for visual accompaniment I attach just some of the paperwork associated with it all. Note the natty folder. Now how much better had it been not immediately disposable, but rather had a second use? Just asking.

Data Overload. Answers underwhelming?

A while ago I had a request from some media initiative I'd signed up for, to help with some research.

Keen to help, I clicked the link and even got cracking, but when I saw the thing was scores of pages long I paused, and then when it transpired they were asking pretty deep rooted financial stuff about our business I stopped dead, not even midway through.

At least this thing allowed one to have a mooch forward to see what you were letting yourself in for, and even store entries 'to date' (which strikes a chord having just lost a mulit-page online application that did neither when my browser hung - the secret is just to whack in x's and nonsense numbers until the end (don't hit submit!) and capture the headings on a Word .doc to craft at leisure, and then cut and paste when you're ready). But it was still just too much, and I dropped it.

But it seems they knew where I lived, and did not want take 'waaaay too hard' as an answer, because I have just been reminded:

"We are now heading towards the end of our annual collection of data. Your input would be greatly appreciated to help provide an overview of the whole sector, and provide results that are useful to [the commissioners]."

As it seemed only polite, I was moved to write to explain why we are not participating further in this survey rather than just not responding:

"We are and have been keen to help and indeed support any initiative(s) of this nature, as they can be more than beneficial to our area and possibly our own interests. We in fact have benefited from support in the past.

However, we are finding ourselves bombarded with such requests, and frankly many are too extensive, intrusive or indeed too regular to cope with unless they are a requirement of a grant process (and even then I have had cause to request a qualitative person-based interview rather than a form-based one). I also have a real problem with such structured questionnaires as they often do not allow for context.

This one fell under the first two as far as we are concerned. I did try, but gave up when I saw where it was going (which at least it did. Some refuse to allow you to proceed unless you fill things fully and in a way designed to suit the acquisition system)."

No kidding. I get these requests all the time. And some on a very regular basis. Plus reminders. They can get very hurt that you don't feel like filling in their form, their way.

What really gets me is that few, if any of these forms have been structured in a way that I felt I was contributing meaningfully, or were trying to help me help them. So much needs context or an explanation. And too often saying 'don't know', or 'none of the above' or 'more than one' is rarely an option. Nothing gets me offside more than a form telling me I have not filled it in correctly before allowing me to move on, especially when it doesn't allow me to answer correctly (it is way worse when it is something serious, or involving money, when you have to put your name to it at the end). There is seldom a 'gave up becuase this is a stupid form' option.

So I have to question this research technique, how much it all costs and how meaningful the results ever can be. But I'm sure it all makes for lovely reports that no one will read.

Ok, so I'm a hypocrite. Now what?

Here's an interesting piece - Welcoming Homer the tree-hugger - sent to the BBC Green Room by an American writer.

Considering the provenance it is unsurprisingly funny, intelligent and irreverent.

But...

Despite enjoying every word, and agreeing with it all, by the end I was not terribly sure what more I could do.

Yes, 'we' need to cooperate. And certainly those on his list need to be brought on board. But join what?

How I wish I had the cachet of writing something like the Simpsons behind me to get published in such a major medium and simply say 'please join Junkk.com and use it. It's free, it's fun and may make a small difference'.

I guess I'll try. But will it get read in some niche area by anyone other than a bunch of hypocrites like me who will immediately discuss and criticise without even giving it a go?

We have had welcome support for Junkk.com form many areas. But what has amazed me is how few we can trace who have actually signed up and used it. Our best hope are those who just like the idea and want to play.

Back to the shed.

The Shirty Dozen

BBC's Panorama is one of the few true, old school investigative news programmes around these days, so when I came across an invitation to submit my blog (well, it was to anyone, so I hope they have a lot of staff) I thought 'Why not?'

So I composed the following, and it can't hurt to have it logged here:

The environment is BIG these days. There are lives at stake: a current and future planetful, by some accounts. There is also good, and bad, money to be made taking advantage of its problems. I have a few profound views that shape my blog’s content... My ‘Shirty’ Dozen:

1) The facts and/or causes of climate change/global warming are too often distracting, or used as such. What really matters is that there is no sense in wasting anything unnecessarily.

2) People are inevitably polluters. With a growing global population, all we’re really doing is buying time... and still not very well. But it’s still worth trying!

3) Hence any well considered, positive/proactive initiative is better than nothing, well worth supporting and applauding. But there always need to be SWOT analyses and ROI assessments built-in... with consequential contingencies.

4) Little that is green can be viewed productively only in black and white.

5) There is still waaay too much remote, high-level talk, and not enough individual action.

6) Where there is action, the demands of PROCESS too often hijack the aims behind the RESULT, making change much more difficult to apply.

7) Most everyday folk would like to do something, but few have the time or resources to find out or sift through everything out there (and often contradictory), much less engage. They must be reached on terms they can cope with, and in ways they can respond to.

8) The public are often poorly served by those - authority, activist and even the media - with what can look like pretty short-sighted, selfish or self-promoting agendas. Inefficiencies and hypocrisies need to be exposed and called into account

9) The ‘Green Elite’ can too often contribute to the problem rather than helping with the solution.

10) Green need not always be good, or be above question. If it doesn't make sense to me, it may not to others. So it's always worth asking why.

11) Positive results need to be promoted, and rewards and incentives favoured over nagging, scare tactics or threats.

12) It is possible to be an idealist. The tricky part is keeping pragmatic and practical along with it.

Enough Talk

It's a painful process, weaning myself of all this. I enjoy it. But it is an addiction, and like all such, can prove a negative infleunce on one's day.

But I was helped by yet another consumption of time and energy, again courtesy of the excellent Grist.

They had inspired a debate that was essentially about how best to deal with communications - Self-interest is the answer - and when words like 'cool' and 'brand are bandied about, it gets my attention. Having read all the comments I was ready to pitch in. But then... how much would I consume today on trying to write a well argued piece? And what, really, would it acheive?

Nah. Better to stay with trying to do something.

Not that it stopped my having a small input on someone else advocating doing something, this time by tapping into Geothermal.

I guess I just feel more comfortable with the notion of reducing waste rather than finding new ways of making and expending energy to make more.

The consequences seem less fraught with contradictions.

Too much. Too Often. Too late?

As I have mentioned, for the sake of all sorts of things that really need preserving, I am cutting down on the whole surfing thing, and even, to an extent, the commentating.

It really has been a case of 'too much, too often'.

And having read this - Media attacked for 'climate porn' - in one of the few daily 'must reads', the BBC, I can see I am not alone. The irony of this being more, if not the same, at least simply 'more' to digest, is not lost on me.

Or the fact that the most likely result of not a bad analysis is a lot more 'is!/isn't' exchanges as Rome burns (or will soon as the planet heats).

The piece also introduced me to a series of pretty neat articles i was not aware of until now, labelled 'The Green Room".

Maybe I'll contribute, but I have to say I think that in many ways it's simply too late, so there is little point.

Chilling

The information overload reduction process continues apace, as I divert more and more daily 'e-wsletters' to the Trash. Note that I can't quite bring myself to unsubscribe, which means they are still to be read and/or simply serve to clutter up my hard drive until one of my infrequent purges.

I'm having more trouble weaning myself off commenting.

Yesterday there was a piece on BBC Breakfast TV's business section, with the Jerry of Ben & Jerry's. I actually thought he was quite an engaging soul.

What surprised me was that there was the opportunity for an online chat via the blog of Declan, the host. More so that it wasn't 'under' the BBC but actually Blogger (like this) and had been going since April.

Anyways, I thought it a good opportunity to pitch in and maybe get some profile.

Boy, did I get thwarted. Despite being registered and all with Blogger, I was not with 'the Group', and it was all over before I could figure out how to join, which I still can't.

Maybe someone, somewhere, is trying to tell me something.

Baby Steps

Some more positive news to share.

A wee while time ago I applied us for the Guardian Social Entrepreneur Awards. Fair amount of dosh, a whiz under noses of some useful judgepersons and... major media coverage!

Well, we're through to the next stage. How's about that? OK, so probably a lot of other fine folk are too, but it's better than a 'Sorry, but..' letter.

Wish us luck in September when we (taking First Lady PJ who has a bit more chance of keeping us suit-friendly with the forms than yours truly) go to make the next level pitch.

Two cultures separated by... common courtesy

Just before the weekend, I wrote to two of my favourite e-media blogs/newsletters, Grist and Treehugger (about whom, and others, I plan to write an article, er... soon). And just before the weekend I got replies. Short, polite, helpful (as far as they could be) and... as you will gather... prompt.

They both hail from the USA. I pose a question whose answer I think we all know... would I have heard back in this way, or even at all, if it had been addressed to media of any form closer to home?

Spend, spend, spend

And another from the archive, still 'Lost in Space' :

The other day I was in London, haunting the corridors of power, mixing with the governing class... getting nowhere fast. Of this, more later.

It does coincide with this little piece, about amounts of money blown, poorly, on 'communications', a subject dear (in every sense of the word) to my heart: There are far easier ways to excite teenagers

Of course, I could not resist a thought of my own.:

"There's nothing difficult in spending oodles of taxpayers' money, especially when it is on 'communication'. What IS easy is avoiding being pinned down to a defined ROI for such an exercise, yet if challenged conjure up a result that 'meets target' by producing an increase in 'awareness'. Effecting the tangible result of real change is a tad more tricky. After years in the ad game, I would wish all clients were so generous with their money and oversight. But then, they usually have products designed to be actually bought."

What was good about yesterday was the seeming commitment to helping business help the community. It remains to be seen if the juicy plums of ad budgets as part of that process stay with an elite, and seemingly unaccountable, few.

Teacher's Pet Gift Ideas

Well, that's it, I'm going to have to stop going e-postal. Just found another blog I emailed last week that is now in the Bermuda hyperspace (at least the spelling should get better):

I am shamed. But my eyebrow also twitches. And it's all because of this: Teachers 'prefer ethical gifts'

Last Friday saw my kids break up for summer. The morning saw a mad dash to get a card drawn up and a quick rummage in the kitchen cupboard managed to locate, with relief, a box of (non-Fairtrade?) Maltesers left over from last month's birthday party. With many assurances that this would be replaced, it was duly donated.

Our one small tilt to enviro-considerations was wrapping it in newspaper. Mrs. Jones does run the eco-club as well, after all.

But I have to say that I did not for one second ponder going the full monty ethically, as suggested here. Mainly because it did not occur to me... and certainly not in time.

And while it all seems a plan, I just wonder what the basis of this research was. Guy from the educational media standing there saying 'Do you, a guardian of our nation's youth and future, think it better to get a nice box of All Gold or bottle of Merlot, or do you think it's your job to point the little angels even further on the path of righteousness?'.

Just asking.

A while ago I stopped to help one of my sons' mate's mums change a tyre. She dropped off a nice red subsequently. I'm not sure a goat would have been quite the same.

Confused? You will be!

It's not easy being green. Especially a lite one. You want to do what's best, but just when you think you're doing the right thing by doing what you're told, along comes advice that can often be completely at odds.

Hence, while not strictly green, I look at this from today's Mail, which is about energy, so it is pertinent:

The Government has urged energy customers to switch suppliers after British Gas announced further price hikes. It is the fourth price rise in less than two years and follows a 22 per cent increase in March.

Woo. The Government. And in the Daily Mail what's more. So it must be a good idea, right? On balance it seems to make sense.

But then.... you find something like this trots along from another direction, this time Martin Lewis' Money-Saving Expert (go to his site to get the full skinny):

British Gas Major Price Rise Don't listen to anyone saying 'switch supplier now!' - British Gas has just announced a 12.4% gas price rise and 9.4% electricity price rise effective 4 September. You'll read comments telling you 'switch, switch, switch', yet that message is pumped by companies with a vested interest in churning the market. Actually the sensible thing to do is sit tight!

I respect this guy, his sources and his advice a lot. So I think I'll stick with this.

But what about all the other 'official' 'You shoulds...' we get, especially in the e-area?

I don't want to be a Groucho, but...

... to quote Mr. Marx the eldest, I often feel 'I wouldn't want to join any club that would have me as a member'.

I have been meaning to write about the whole 'free eBay'/swap arena for a while, and may soon do a formal review, but this - freecycle: TM, and R.I.P. - in today's Grist (an e-letter well worthy of subscribing to... for free) has moved me to put digit to keyboard now.

It’s always sad when something so fundamentally ‘good’, such as anything that’s not just talking about trying to save the planet but actually doing something (I’m big on tangibles) gets compromised – to any degree – by... talking. But I guess we all can't resist having opinions. So I simply advocate the notion of ‘whatever works!’, which does not exclude constructive criticism.

Freecycle is a true phenomenon, and certainly already has a firm foothold here in the UK. It is also about the only serious such initiative around that I'm aware of - not counting our little JunkkYard.

I'm pretty sure all the corporate, legalistic shenanigans would and possibly could not occur here, but we'll see. Academic anyway, as it hardly affects anything.

The issue seems to be cultural. Personally I had trouble (hey, ours is not perfect and we're always working on it... funds permitting) coping with the system Freecycle used/s and have given up with it. But a lot do. So if asked we will happily advocate trying JunkkYard AND Freecycle (and now a few others this post has made me aware of, if they are over here). Why not? They're both free, not exclusive and achieve the same result. And we gain from being helpful all round, so with luck will get revisited. So what is being defended here?

As a consumer you go where you feel comfortable. In the UK I sensed the same 'clique' tensions creeping in. When I could be bothered to read the vast numbers of daily emails, there'd often be sniping going on. Why so heavy? Who needs it?

For sure we're keen to create a community, and there is a Forum for people to engage, but mostly it's just a tool. Like some others mentioned, our model is much more Google or eBay. Donor/Beneficiary. Post/Surf. Offer/Collect. Beyond providing the matchmaking mechanism (and enjoying passive exposure to the traffic created) what other involvement is required?

We opened from day one with our hearts on our sleeves... well, our business model up there on our banners.

Much like Anita Roddick's sale of Body Shop, if you start as one thing, you can probably expect to cop some flak when you try and change the fundamentals. Especially having established with a super-ethical ‘no money involved’ stance, to trying to turn a buck, even if it’s just to keep funding the whole shebang. And moving from voluntary to sponsored will put a few supporters' noses out. Sadly the whole e-movement can be quite ‘purist’ in approach when it comes to making green, and beyond grubby money, standards of hotly advocated 'best practice' (who decides?) can also often alienate those who are a lighter shade and lives to get on with.

Frankly I can't quite see what’s the problem (being commercial that is). However, being uber-precious and especially getting the shark suits involved does not seem productive. I wonder who funds this aspect? And why? Does this suggest a another, possibly more financially-aspirational agenda?

If it is, consumer preferences and market forces will decide. Welcome to the club.

What you say may not be what you've done (or said)

Having posted on a forum/blog (see last post) this morning, I have come back to find a very active series of exchanges (mine's in there somewhere). It was interesting to note (and worthy of separate comment), that when I posted the board was still a blank canvas, though obviously many had been posting well before me, which can lead to unfortunate disconnects, especially if referring to another post.

I have tended to prefer such the Telegraph version to some other major media, because there is point in contributing beyond venting, as you do have the chance of a credit, and this can be of value. We have had sign-ups to the site as a consequence of my posting to these things in the past.

Now I am thinking of pulling back from these arenas, as explained by this subsequent post I have been moved to add (and may or may not get 'approved' at all, much less 'as is', despite the following: 'telegraph.co.uk does not monitor, approve, endorse or exert editorial control over information posted by users'. Which I had taken to mean what one wrote, so long as it followed guidelines, was what went up. But apparently not):

"It hadn't occurred to me until now that, despite having a few issues to cover and working within a stated limit, what one has contributed even to a Blog/Forum can be edited before sharing. And this of course can seriously affect context. Not to mention shape the direction of the piece in the direction of the media controller's agenda. It can enhance the pros or cons of an issue, or simply keep things bubbling ratings-wise by emphasising the best 'bites'.

This has added to my doubts about the value of such things, but in mitigation here at least I offer a 'big up' (or maybe it should be 'God bless') to the power of the blogging system and its participants. Thanks to some today, I realise I should have been much more concerned with discovering further substance on what the good Bishop may or may not have said, and done or not have done, before so enthusiastically endorsing a piece that was quite harsh on his words and deeds, at least as reported. As we're on a theological roll, to paraphrase Pastor Niemoller , 'First they selectively quoted the Bishops, and I did not speak, yadayada... and now they have selectively quoted me and no one had the time (or inclination) to delve any deeper to find out what I'd really said'.

Otherwise I think most of what I anticipated earlier has been almost all been illustrated in many posts."

Maybe what ended up on board was pithier, and hence my effort benefitedtted from the editorial input, but it was not what I had written. And I think it omitted some key aspects I thought important.

For that, at least I still have my own blog.

A point well made is a point well taken

A good blog in today's Telegraph - Ignore the bishop: enjoy your holiday - on a subject (actually a couple) about which I have commented before, have here (below) and doubtless will again. It will be interesting to see what replies she gets. Here's mine ( a bit fuller than online, as they 'only' allow 4000 characters, which to a windbag like me is a cruel constraint:

"Very good. Ignore the bishop. Enjoy the holiday. But please don't dismiss the message.

This is an excellent post, so long as one reads all of it.

I agree totally that one of the greatest impediments to promoting the benefits of responsible (the definition and scope of which is obviously still wide open) environmental practices by the individual, is the notion that everything green must be black and white. Nuances abound, and too often those that seek to effect positive (in a global warming sense) changes, for whatever reason (career to enhance, book to sell, viral to promote, consultancy to secure, pension fund to stock up... or possibly even genuine concern), have to think very carefully before taking a moral high ground and aggressively tackling a narrow topic, especially one that may be dear to their hearts. Especially from a position of relative privilege. And more so by the excessive use of comparative negativity. Because it can all too easily backfire, and while debate is great, I fear for effecting change when everyone is too busy pointing fingers at each other when they should be encouraged to just get on and do what they can. How much of the introduction to this post was strenuous rebuttal before the positive suggestions kicked in?

Things have to be debated, and I use the blog on my site (which tries to offer solutions, ideas and things to do to hopefully improve matters 'enviro') to do this a lot, and sometimes end up in some 'healthy discussions', which unlike here I prefer to conduct one-to-one offline, as things can get a bit flaming daft as the entrenched camps weigh in. Not long ago I tried to convince a respected media commentator that calling fellow petrolhead scribes 'selfish' (that word again) for their obsession with high speed exotica could have set in motion a confrontational situation that did not serve his point as well as adopting a less personal and reasoned approach might have, especially as he introduced his article as written on a plane to Australia.

My other concern was that he seemed to also be tipping the wink to groups who were engaging in 'more robust' commentary on the rights or wrongs of others to buy and use a legally and freely available consumer good. This cannot be a productive route, no matter what the frustrations. Now it seems it's a plan to spit in my farmer (they do wear suits and often visit the big city) neighbour's coffee, if a new anti 4x4 viral ad is to be emulated. I'm sure the making of this latter was carbon offset to the nth degree, but having been on a few shoots I very much doubt every aspect was totally 'environmentally sound' with no compromises to getting the job done on time and within budget. Cast and crew drinking water from a tap and not an spring water bottle in sight?

We have to accept the compromises of living in an overpopulated (and 'ing') world, with an infinite desire and ability to make new things and (at least in affluent countries) the means and desire to embrace them. People no longer stay in their village their whole lives, and the desire to travel is almost ingrained.

Hence better ways must be found to change behaviours, some of which look like being painful. And must be massive in scale. I only have to glance up at the contrails in the sky each day (or revisit BBC Horizon's Global Dimming documentary) to feel that air travel has to be to be a hefty influence in unnatural weather patterns. But reversing a global industry that employs millions, provides pleasure (accepting this is one instance when the journey is not part of the holiday) to hundreds of millions and brings in revenue to billions more is not going to happen easily. Especially when one looks at the rate of new airport construction in developing countries.

A start has to be made, somewhere, and as we cannot be unaware any more it may as well be at home. One can't really ask a neighbour to put their house in order when you have historically been trashing yours and enjoying the party up until now (and still want to). Examples must be set. Alternatives sought and offered. As suggested, subsidies to pollute need to be restricted, but incentives with rewards introduced wherever possible (the points on fuel tax and rail costs are well made). And such notions need to be (excuse the pun) aired. But by whom?

Hence pedestals should be mounted very circumspectly. And those who take it upon themselves - priest, politician, celeb, commentators... blog participants - to pronounce from them to others on what not to do should think very carefully on what qualifies them to do so. And before being too smug, ponder also what circumstances have allowed them to pontificate. I have read a lot lately on the 'Green Elite', and it is not a club, like many, I could easily afford - in money, time or opportunity - to join. So practice what you preach, and if you do preach what you practice please make it inspirational rather than critical. Nothing can compromise a message more than being accused of hypocrisy, which usually ends up distracting away from simply getting on and doing.

Say what?

A quick test of the blogging system to see if the emails are working again. The BBC has asked: Has the internet changed your life?

And I have replied:

"Email is invaluable. The net has given me affordable two-way access to the world, via my web-business/blog. And, via such as this Forum, an opportunity to voice an opinion in public elsewhere.

But...

...it's all now so vast it's but a babel of opinion, hard to substantiate (hence believe) fact, subjectivity and 'noise' - to which I have just contributed - that's almost impossible to absorb, much less cut through meaningfully to make any real positive impact.

Between just getting the invitation and writing my post, the entry pages jumped from 8 to 10. I don't have the time or inclination to read it all ( I will sneak a peak to see if I'm there) to assess context. What value is that?"

I must say I do wonder what the purpose of it all was to them. Will they have names they can use? Will it be for research? Will they glean some comments of use to further their knowledge base?

Or is it juts a major waste of time all round?

Well, they asked

There's a rather nice little website called Planet Science, targetted a younger audience, but does cover a fair mix of subjects in a user-friendly way.

Reminding me slightly of when my Civil Engineering degree progress hit my doing a Maths A level in 3 months (I once drew a cartoon of a climber hanging onto a cliff edge, entitled 'Another Failed Attempt At Scaling The Eigen Values' instead of answering a question about something I had no clue about), I would like to share their share by way of a a lighter break.

Not sure what the marking system at bottom right is, but surely the respondent did answer the question?

The wrongs of doing right

One night not so long ago there was a power cut, and I was deafened by the silence as hard drives and fans spun down around me. And plunged into the near pitch black as scores or red, green a blue lights faded along with monitor screen.

So it was I blogged a short while ago with approval on the proposal to 'ban' standbys. But I may have been hasty, at least in such total endorsement of it in the form proposed: Recipe for sofa rage if standby gets the heave-ho

As  measure to force couch potatoes to move from sofa to set at night's end it is a no-brainer, but there are obviously some pretty massive technological issues at stake here. Many, to be sure, stem from our addiction to technology, but that boat has long since sailed. You don't read this without both having a PC and doubtless a 24/7 router in the loft.

There is some room for optimism. From the absolutes  that are at the start of the piece, I started to read between the lines and sense that there were avenues that could be explored... if there was consumer will. If a set top box does not have an off switch then it surely could acquire one, surely. And if people don't like 'inconvenience', then tough. 

And the article helpfully ends with a helpful link that I in turn pass on to make the best of things for now:

PC Pro magazine offers realistic estimates of cost savings and more techniques you can apply today — without the need for government tinkering. Visit tinyurl.com/o4glo.