Remember Monopoly money? It had less value(s) than the real thing. I think we have arrived at Monopoly society, presided over by Monopoly Government and reported on by Monopoly Media.
So now the solution to full jails (one may ask how the trend has not been noticed over the last 10 years, or the causes of it - both in terms of creating customers and failing to prepare to accommodate them) is to a) not put any more in or b) let some out. I must find a Gatso right away and speed past it, and then fail to pay the fine. I bet they'll have a mugger out before you can say 'the law is the law'.
Meanwhile, Ms. Jade Gobby is rewarded for her performance and contribution to race relations with an all expenses (if not salaried, and PR/TV crew in tow)-paid trip to the country she didn't seem to rate.
Well, let me state here and now that some Singaporeans don't take their turn at the washing up, and I wish she would. Also, do they eat with their hands (Ans: some do, (even Chinese ones, like my Missus) sometimes, as do a few Ang Mohs, if they are at a Banana Leaf restaurant)?
There. I hope you are all suitably offended. Now, me and the family would like to visit the rellys this summer, if you would like to put us up in Raffles and fly (sadly our 2 week holiday allowance precludes the QE2 or getting an oil company to sponsor us to drive there - but rest assured we will write a blog for the book tour and whack a palm in our back garden in time for it to croak come winter (or maybe not, way things are going)) us SQ.
I had to do that last bit to make it re:levant. But really it all is. If the guys at the helm can't set an example, is it any wonder we follow our leaders to the easy options?
BBC - Limit Jail Sentences
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Declan Does Davos
I'm just about to walk the boys to school (no e-smugness intended; we only live about a mile away, it's a nice(ish) morning and I need the exercise) and caught the tail end of BBC Breakfast's coverage of Davos.
So we have their cuddly reporter there, and to intercept reader's email challenges as to why everyone is flying in to discuss (amongst other things) global warming, a solution is to hand: Offsetting! Yes, Aunty is, along with all the rest, going to bung 13 quid into a bucket and throw it on the forest fire. That'll sort it then.
I would rather have hoped they might have sussed by now that such simplistic buy-offs are a little under the microscope; not just for what they don't do to help, but for the fact that they simply say 'keep on doing what you fancy', and by giving some guys in suits some cash it will all be hunky-dory.
For what it's worth, I think it obvious that major leaders have to meet, but it may be nice that they start erring on doing so in less poor ways environmentally (as well as rich financially), whilst propagating the D2AID2AIS hypocrisy (Sounds like a Robert Ludlum novel - ask me here if you want to know what it means).
BBC - Green Agenda
So we have their cuddly reporter there, and to intercept reader's email challenges as to why everyone is flying in to discuss (amongst other things) global warming, a solution is to hand: Offsetting! Yes, Aunty is, along with all the rest, going to bung 13 quid into a bucket and throw it on the forest fire. That'll sort it then.
I would rather have hoped they might have sussed by now that such simplistic buy-offs are a little under the microscope; not just for what they don't do to help, but for the fact that they simply say 'keep on doing what you fancy', and by giving some guys in suits some cash it will all be hunky-dory.
For what it's worth, I think it obvious that major leaders have to meet, but it may be nice that they start erring on doing so in less poor ways environmentally (as well as rich financially), whilst propagating the D2AID2AIS hypocrisy (Sounds like a Robert Ludlum novel - ask me here if you want to know what it means).
BBC - Green Agenda
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
And he'll fly anywhere he can to save the planet. Cheap.
I'm sorry, it's not quite fair (though well-balanced with the last left/right-wise), as I know our adsense can throw up the odd ad on site that is not what we'd wish.But these are booked banners.
I just love the irony.
BBC
It's all over. It isn't now?
Yet another award we have gamely gone in for.
I think one reason we do not often win is I can't resist posts like this.
Because today it's still be advertised, despite:
"The closing date for the first stage of entries is 19 January 2007. Successful entrants will be notified by the end of January"
I also love the irony of the ad next to it. I guess the snow is no longer any good in Europe, so Canada is now the place to go to ski... for those keen on saving the planet, and whocan afford to do so.
Shssssh, you don't know who
Another BBC Breakfast TV piece, another eyebrow-twitch.
This time it was about the power of supermarkets crushing small suppliers and shops.
At one point we had the usual bouffant and blonde 'interviewing' a besuited talking head from some ministry or body or whatever. So far, so pointless.
But towards the end, my ears pricked up when it transpired this guys did actually have powers to impose sanctions*. 'What are they?' asked the bouffant. 'I'd prefer not to go into that now,' said the suit, unchallenged. Er, why? Was it a secret? Seemed like the key point of the deal to me. Another media triumph. Meanwhile, back to the skateboarding duck...
*Reuters - Supermarket probe reports early findings - Or, not, possibly???!
BBC - there you go
This time it was about the power of supermarkets crushing small suppliers and shops.
At one point we had the usual bouffant and blonde 'interviewing' a besuited talking head from some ministry or body or whatever. So far, so pointless.
But towards the end, my ears pricked up when it transpired this guys did actually have powers to impose sanctions*. 'What are they?' asked the bouffant. 'I'd prefer not to go into that now,' said the suit, unchallenged. Er, why? Was it a secret? Seemed like the key point of the deal to me. Another media triumph. Meanwhile, back to the skateboarding duck...
*Reuters - Supermarket probe reports early findings - Or, not, possibly???!
BBC - there you go
Stereo-blooming-typical
There may be a link on their site later, which I'll add, but I have to post on this morning's BBC Breakfast TV 'piece' on urban 4x4s.
Seems they are, on top of all else, less reliable than other cars (more complex drivetrain? Ceratinly another eco, if not financial-nail in their coffins), which gave the producers the chance to throw two fighting cocks in the ring.
So we have a slick (in every sense), suited petrolhead who was allowed to claim, amongst other things, that they were safer (I thought they were more prone to fall over), pitted against yet another frizzy-haired earth mother from London ('No darlings, it's not a class issue (you bet, it's a 'we have decent public transport to do our thing, and sod the rest of you'. Here WE lead, and the rest of the country will follow'). Let's just say I didn't identify too closely with either.
In the great scheme of things, her rebuttals were plain daft, where she could have scored some points. And despite being waaaay too extreme in a few areas (and being allowed to get away with them), he made a lot more sense and came across a lot better.
Though aware of it so not a new point, as he asked: why indeed is so little being done to restrict the actual causes of more pollution and emissions, such as vans and trucks, as opposed to such divisive, spiteful, ill-informed and tokenistic campaigns?
And why is the media stoking them with such mouthpieces in the pro/con debates?
Answers please, on a ratings card.
Seems they are, on top of all else, less reliable than other cars (more complex drivetrain? Ceratinly another eco, if not financial-nail in their coffins), which gave the producers the chance to throw two fighting cocks in the ring.
So we have a slick (in every sense), suited petrolhead who was allowed to claim, amongst other things, that they were safer (I thought they were more prone to fall over), pitted against yet another frizzy-haired earth mother from London ('No darlings, it's not a class issue (you bet, it's a 'we have decent public transport to do our thing, and sod the rest of you'. Here WE lead, and the rest of the country will follow'). Let's just say I didn't identify too closely with either.
In the great scheme of things, her rebuttals were plain daft, where she could have scored some points. And despite being waaaay too extreme in a few areas (and being allowed to get away with them), he made a lot more sense and came across a lot better.
Though aware of it so not a new point, as he asked: why indeed is so little being done to restrict the actual causes of more pollution and emissions, such as vans and trucks, as opposed to such divisive, spiteful, ill-informed and tokenistic campaigns?
And why is the media stoking them with such mouthpieces in the pro/con debates?
Answers please, on a ratings card.
Monday, January 22, 2007
Public Swervants
I am writing to David Miliband this week on a few issues (it will be interesting to see the response, if any, that is generated), and again the notion of Kismet pops into my head as I am provided yet more fuel to my fire. A few weeks ago I wrote to the Central Office of Information (COI - who place all the ads telling us what to do, and engage the agencies and media to do it in) via their online site resource:
I am writing on behalf of Junkk.com, which is a website devoted to improving the public's understanding of, and engagement with environmental issues.
I'd would be grateful for the contact of someone at COI Communications to discuss how we could further mutually rewarding synergies.
Someone has now kindly replied, but I'm not sure if he quite realised (or realised all too well), how it would go down:
Your email was forwarded to our digital Media team and their response was if they have a requirement in the further they will be in touch but for now they don't think it's something they would use.
You might want to consider approaching either the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (http://www.defra.gov.uk/) or the Sustainable development Commission (http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/).
He was polite and most helpful and responsive. So I hope my reply was fair in the circumstances:
Thank you for taking the time to reply and the advice given.
I am glad that your colleagues in digital media will be in touch if required, but it's disappointing, not to mention a tad hard to see how a free resource promoting environmental issues is 'not something they would use'. In all my time in agencies, such a gift horse would have been both welcome and enthusiastically embraced on behalf of my clients, in this case taxpayers. I do hope they do not mean to infer it is fruitful to deal with those who would charge like wounded bulls. For my part there was a lot I am sure they could have helped me with in terms of information, press releases, etc.
I am aware of the other two opportunities and they, I presume, in us, having been in touch before. But will persevere.
This is a country in crisis. And a government in disarray, run by self-interested empires with public service and actually doing anything very low on their daily career path targets. Something must change. Or be made to.
I am writing on behalf of Junkk.com, which is a website devoted to improving the public's understanding of, and engagement with environmental issues.
I'd would be grateful for the contact of someone at COI Communications to discuss how we could further mutually rewarding synergies.
Someone has now kindly replied, but I'm not sure if he quite realised (or realised all too well), how it would go down:
Your email was forwarded to our digital Media team and their response was if they have a requirement in the further they will be in touch but for now they don't think it's something they would use.
You might want to consider approaching either the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (http://www.defra.gov.uk/) or the Sustainable development Commission (http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/).
He was polite and most helpful and responsive. So I hope my reply was fair in the circumstances:
Thank you for taking the time to reply and the advice given.
I am glad that your colleagues in digital media will be in touch if required, but it's disappointing, not to mention a tad hard to see how a free resource promoting environmental issues is 'not something they would use'. In all my time in agencies, such a gift horse would have been both welcome and enthusiastically embraced on behalf of my clients, in this case taxpayers. I do hope they do not mean to infer it is fruitful to deal with those who would charge like wounded bulls. For my part there was a lot I am sure they could have helped me with in terms of information, press releases, etc.
I am aware of the other two opportunities and they, I presume, in us, having been in touch before. But will persevere.
This is a country in crisis. And a government in disarray, run by self-interested empires with public service and actually doing anything very low on their daily career path targets. Something must change. Or be made to.
A Kracking Kornucopia of Kismets
Now what could get me so alliteratively inspired?
Well, as I rush to get out the January newsletter, replete with 'the two most important letters I have yet written?' (previous blog), what should pop into my inbox than this:
Junk or treasure?
Before you bin anything, stop! Find out if there is another use for your junk, and save money, time and the planet. Or maybe you have some suggestions for what other people can do with their junk? Browse some whacky ideas at http://www.junkk.com/
For more practical advice, competitions, quiz and discussion forums see:
www.foe.co.uk/living/
Nice of them. Especially as they are one of the activist groups I have more time for. And as is the way, a shall now pop them in my news by way of a dorsal delicacy of thanks. Along with that link above. See how easy it can be:)
But.. whacky???! Us!!?
Well, as I rush to get out the January newsletter, replete with 'the two most important letters I have yet written?' (previous blog), what should pop into my inbox than this:
Junk or treasure?
Before you bin anything, stop! Find out if there is another use for your junk, and save money, time and the planet. Or maybe you have some suggestions for what other people can do with their junk? Browse some whacky ideas at http://www.junkk.com/
For more practical advice, competitions, quiz and discussion forums see:
www.foe.co.uk/living/
Nice of them. Especially as they are one of the activist groups I have more time for. And as is the way, a shall now pop them in my news by way of a dorsal delicacy of thanks. Along with that link above. See how easy it can be:)
But.. whacky???! Us!!?
I take it back. THIS may be the most important question I have asked so far.
You Ask The Questions
Next week: David Miliband, Environment Secretary
Send your questions to: myquestion@ independent.co.uk
Mine:
"Why is it so hard to get serious suggestions on reducing our environmental impact - which may not need cost the taxpayer very much at all (if anything) - a serious hearing and if necessary financial backing, whilst it seems vast overlapping empires are constantly created to consume most funds on their own infrastructure and apportioning more according to self-serving targets and endless, often dubiously-valid ‘communications’ efforts than tangibly-beneficial environmental, much less cost-effective ROIs?"
Next week: David Miliband, Environment Secretary
Send your questions to: myquestion@ independent.co.uk
Mine:
"Why is it so hard to get serious suggestions on reducing our environmental impact - which may not need cost the taxpayer very much at all (if anything) - a serious hearing and if necessary financial backing, whilst it seems vast overlapping empires are constantly created to consume most funds on their own infrastructure and apportioning more according to self-serving targets and endless, often dubiously-valid ‘communications’ efforts than tangibly-beneficial environmental, much less cost-effective ROIs?"
We're sincerely flattered
Campaign aims to reduce the mountains of waste. Oddly, they seem never to of heard of us. We've written to put that right.
"Dear Michael McCarthy, Martin Hickman and Geneviève Roberts,
Got article. Good direction.
Anything we can do to help? And maybe you us?
I guess our specialty comes in trying to find ways to reuse what can’t be avoided.
Our own website has already started a similar effort to yours: we’re happy to share. Quite a few negatives ready to log, but we prefer to stay positive if we can. Makes them more eager to change if there's profit in it.: £, PR, CSR.
I also attach two visuals of a before and after ad I drew up for Tescos to show what we could do for them.. over 2 years ago. Oddly they seem to have decided it was a good idea now. I wonder what's changed?"
"Dear Michael McCarthy, Martin Hickman and Geneviève Roberts,
Got article. Good direction.
Anything we can do to help? And maybe you us?
I guess our specialty comes in trying to find ways to reuse what can’t be avoided.
Our own website has already started a similar effort to yours: we’re happy to share. Quite a few negatives ready to log, but we prefer to stay positive if we can. Makes them more eager to change if there's profit in it.: £, PR, CSR.
I also attach two visuals of a before and after ad I drew up for Tescos to show what we could do for them.. over 2 years ago. Oddly they seem to have decided it was a good idea now. I wonder what's changed?"
The most important letter I may have written yet
To this guy, because of this: Are you getting warmer or colder on the climate front?
"Good one. As a fellow minority (though I'd say it's more accurate to say 'noisy minority' on behalf of a sadly silent (cowed) majority), it's nice to locate a fellow who has noticed the extremes capturing the headlines, and initiatives from lazy press and pols, at the expense of a sensible and potentially productive middle ground. I have been banging on about this in my site's blog for years now.
And I fire off a salvo daily to the media blogs of left and right (or activist vs. commercial-with-an-interest) agenda-dripping organs, trying to get debate sensible, facts on the table and opinion as objective as possible, free from undercover lobbyists and PR folk pretending to be 'an engineer/climate scientist form Bootle (don’t mean to be rude, but I’ve left that in as it is by coincidence the town I use in my catchphrases. Kismet?) . It's lonely. Ratings and column inches and TV op-eds are to be had from conflict, not co-operation, so I don't get much support.
I'd love to talk more. As an ex-Civ Eng. grad (a few years ago, and only granted on the promise I would not try and build anything), I can handle ROIs, both financial and eco, and like to get a grip on what's being pitched before I commit. And as an ad-man with some measure of success (my own multi-national agency for one) understanding brands and the power to influence the conumer, I can assess what's a waste of time and what Joe Public may go for better than some.
You'll be copping some feedback (dare I guess from deniers and activists, lauding and decrying) for the latter half of your piece.
I don't won't to go there. I see no point. Is there warming? Is there not? Is it man-made. Is it not? Is it man-worsened... let others waste time chewing on that. I have bigger deserts to scorch (I do often have Climate or Carbon opinions you may disagree with).
My mission is to reduce waste. As an engineer ineffciency offends me. As and ad-man I see no profit in it (in fact I see/saw greater profits in not doing it, with PR and CSR inc., a long while ago. Hence Junkk.com). And as an environmentalist and parent I see it as a direction better taken than not. Just in case.
I need help, because what I am doing is big, getting bigger, and I can't cope. And I can't fund it any more.
I've tried government, and will keep on. These guys are morons, seeking career-makers based on draft targets and short-termism.
I've tried NGOs, and will keep on. But these guys have salaries and pensions in mind, and that means building empires first, not solutions. And charities like keeping it extreme to maintain income fighting the enemy on 'our' behalf.
I've tried commerce. But they are so complex now I can't get through to a guy who can commit, even if he/she would. Gatekeepers. Strata. Focus groups. Matrices. Marketing. PR. Production. CSR. All vying for turf.
And I've tried the media. News wants extremes. Enviro wants the game to themselves (The ‘green elite’ is a nice handle, and ticket to a Bali global warming conference – oh, the irony). Business needs me to make (MySpace)) or lose (Boo!) a fortune before they'll meet me in the Ivy.
Fancy trying to DO something together on a basis we both seem to agree on?
Or at the very least can I chat with you about what I think the common man and woman and child feels about all that's being 'done' in our names. You may agree; you may not. But at least hear me out and feed what you will to those you have access to."
I hope he is sincere. I hope he agrees. I hope he writes back. I hope we can do something.
"Good one. As a fellow minority (though I'd say it's more accurate to say 'noisy minority' on behalf of a sadly silent (cowed) majority), it's nice to locate a fellow who has noticed the extremes capturing the headlines, and initiatives from lazy press and pols, at the expense of a sensible and potentially productive middle ground. I have been banging on about this in my site's blog for years now.
And I fire off a salvo daily to the media blogs of left and right (or activist vs. commercial-with-an-interest) agenda-dripping organs, trying to get debate sensible, facts on the table and opinion as objective as possible, free from undercover lobbyists and PR folk pretending to be 'an engineer/climate scientist form Bootle (don’t mean to be rude, but I’ve left that in as it is by coincidence the town I use in my catchphrases. Kismet?) . It's lonely. Ratings and column inches and TV op-eds are to be had from conflict, not co-operation, so I don't get much support.
I'd love to talk more. As an ex-Civ Eng. grad (a few years ago, and only granted on the promise I would not try and build anything), I can handle ROIs, both financial and eco, and like to get a grip on what's being pitched before I commit. And as an ad-man with some measure of success (my own multi-national agency for one) understanding brands and the power to influence the conumer, I can assess what's a waste of time and what Joe Public may go for better than some.
You'll be copping some feedback (dare I guess from deniers and activists, lauding and decrying) for the latter half of your piece.
I don't won't to go there. I see no point. Is there warming? Is there not? Is it man-made. Is it not? Is it man-worsened... let others waste time chewing on that. I have bigger deserts to scorch (I do often have Climate or Carbon opinions you may disagree with).
My mission is to reduce waste. As an engineer ineffciency offends me. As and ad-man I see no profit in it (in fact I see/saw greater profits in not doing it, with PR and CSR inc., a long while ago. Hence Junkk.com). And as an environmentalist and parent I see it as a direction better taken than not. Just in case.
I need help, because what I am doing is big, getting bigger, and I can't cope. And I can't fund it any more.
I've tried government, and will keep on. These guys are morons, seeking career-makers based on draft targets and short-termism.
I've tried NGOs, and will keep on. But these guys have salaries and pensions in mind, and that means building empires first, not solutions. And charities like keeping it extreme to maintain income fighting the enemy on 'our' behalf.
I've tried commerce. But they are so complex now I can't get through to a guy who can commit, even if he/she would. Gatekeepers. Strata. Focus groups. Matrices. Marketing. PR. Production. CSR. All vying for turf.
And I've tried the media. News wants extremes. Enviro wants the game to themselves (The ‘green elite’ is a nice handle, and ticket to a Bali global warming conference – oh, the irony). Business needs me to make (MySpace)) or lose (Boo!) a fortune before they'll meet me in the Ivy.
Fancy trying to DO something together on a basis we both seem to agree on?
Or at the very least can I chat with you about what I think the common man and woman and child feels about all that's being 'done' in our names. You may agree; you may not. But at least hear me out and feed what you will to those you have access to."
I hope he is sincere. I hope he agrees. I hope he writes back. I hope we can do something.
Badly Drawn B... Conclusions
Saw an opp to get noticed by another mainstream columnist. In answer to his question whether hiring cartoonists to relieve stress at multi-nationals was a good use of dosh:
"Probably not. But a lot less wasteful than some other PR measures masquerading as staff initiatives that I get to see in our in-box from our bl...green-chips these days. And such as Heinz can afford to splash it about when guys like WRAP give them a few million of taxpayers' money to save costs seeing if they can make their cans lighter. That would be less raw materials to pay for, in the name of saving the planet. You'd have thought as a commercial company with fairly deep pockets they could do that themselves. ps: Here's one I doodled on MS Word a while ago on my PC whilst at at the Daily Mail Ideal Home Show Last Year (stated theme (to get saps like me to join in): 'Green'. Out of 700 odd exhibitors, mostly such as patio heaters and teak out-door jacuzzis, there were about 5 actually trying to promote good eco-practice and/or products). I must say I did feel better for it as a stewed for a month."
Shedding some light
I'm rather proud of thast headline, inspired by this: Home front
To which I wrote this, direct to author and on blog:
"The question then arises: "is there any carbon offsetting to be had", is a good one, as that seems to be the point to any useful reduction measure.
And from all your useful discussions and valuable research for the article... is there?
Or at least a lead on someone who can advise us, factually and/or objectively? I find it hard to believe in this computerised age there is not a model that can easily assess domestic and work usage patterns to derive a pretty good answer, and in a lot less than three years.
Otherwise this bill is a waste, if not an exercise in futility, like so many headline* (if not vote) -catching 'green' issues (potentially good or bad on the various ROIs one can try to apply) before it.
ps: Thank you, Walt OBrien, for a truly useful new fact (to me at least) that I will now add to our site's archive and campaign for things that actually 'do' something."
* I could have added 'Headline-creating, too', as these things often are only used in the negative to make a quick dig and are then left to be ignored. I, for one, would truly like to know the situation to be able to have a proper view on it.
ADDENDUM: Stuck in a dark age
To which I wrote this, direct to author and on blog:
"The question then arises: "is there any carbon offsetting to be had", is a good one, as that seems to be the point to any useful reduction measure.
And from all your useful discussions and valuable research for the article... is there?
Or at least a lead on someone who can advise us, factually and/or objectively? I find it hard to believe in this computerised age there is not a model that can easily assess domestic and work usage patterns to derive a pretty good answer, and in a lot less than three years.
Otherwise this bill is a waste, if not an exercise in futility, like so many headline* (if not vote) -catching 'green' issues (potentially good or bad on the various ROIs one can try to apply) before it.
ps: Thank you, Walt OBrien, for a truly useful new fact (to me at least) that I will now add to our site's archive and campaign for things that actually 'do' something."
* I could have added 'Headline-creating, too', as these things often are only used in the negative to make a quick dig and are then left to be ignored. I, for one, would truly like to know the situation to be able to have a proper view on it.
ADDENDUM: Stuck in a dark age
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Bin there. Posted that.
Bored. Saw a chance to plug Junkk. Took it: In praise of... wheelie bins
"I have often looked at these things with wonder as I travel outside our fair county (we don't seem to have them here - black bin liners for the once a week nasties and two blue RE-Boxes for the dry (paper) and wet (cans, bottles - no plastic) weekly kerbside collection. I have to say they are, in comparison, huge, and frankly both ugly and daunting, but obviously necessary if collections are less regular. Why is there no national standard?
But as space created will always be filled, I do wonder at their size. They are monsters.
We compost most and haven't thrown anything else out in a few years. I like to make things out of some stuff and am storing the rest until I can figure out what can be made of them too... or the missus figures out what is in the loft. It's amazing looking at a few hundred Pot Noodle containers slotted together, and surprising how little space they occupy so stacked No, I’m still stumped on these).
So let’s not forget another option: re:use (try http://www. Junkk.com to find, or indeed suggest ideas around that we can all share - if I can make a rucksack out of an old vacuum cleaner, anything is possible).
And if all else fails, there is one final option (almost said solution... oops). We could always try to use... less.
Recycling is awfully spiffy, and much better than not, and meets all sorts of targets and stuff. But it's still not that high of the waste hierarchy ladder, sadly. Wheelie and truly."
"I have often looked at these things with wonder as I travel outside our fair county (we don't seem to have them here - black bin liners for the once a week nasties and two blue RE-Boxes for the dry (paper) and wet (cans, bottles - no plastic) weekly kerbside collection. I have to say they are, in comparison, huge, and frankly both ugly and daunting, but obviously necessary if collections are less regular. Why is there no national standard?
But as space created will always be filled, I do wonder at their size. They are monsters.
We compost most and haven't thrown anything else out in a few years. I like to make things out of some stuff and am storing the rest until I can figure out what can be made of them too... or the missus figures out what is in the loft. It's amazing looking at a few hundred Pot Noodle containers slotted together, and surprising how little space they occupy so stacked No, I’m still stumped on these).
So let’s not forget another option: re:use (try http://www. Junkk.com to find, or indeed suggest ideas around that we can all share - if I can make a rucksack out of an old vacuum cleaner, anything is possible).
And if all else fails, there is one final option (almost said solution... oops). We could always try to use... less.
Recycling is awfully spiffy, and much better than not, and meets all sorts of targets and stuff. But it's still not that high of the waste hierarchy ladder, sadly. Wheelie and truly."
There's snow business like no snow business
Charles cancels ski trip to back green pledges
Why does this not seem so depressingly predictable? And so pathetically pointless? And leave one with a slight sense of besuited spinmeisters digging their master's next hole.
'Chaz no mates' gives up something that is no fun any more, and may not be able to be done quite soon (What's the snow like there? I overheard a mobile conversation last night where a guy had phoned his mate from the ski holiday to say there was no snow - something to reflect upon on the flight home).
I'm impressed. Not.
Why does this not seem so depressingly predictable? And so pathetically pointless? And leave one with a slight sense of besuited spinmeisters digging their master's next hole.
'Chaz no mates' gives up something that is no fun any more, and may not be able to be done quite soon (What's the snow like there? I overheard a mobile conversation last night where a guy had phoned his mate from the ski holiday to say there was no snow - something to reflect upon on the flight home).
I'm impressed. Not.
Daring to speak its name?
I'd hesitate to infer too much or indeed any of it was a consequence of what I wrote (deliberately vague, because a) I don't have a satisfactory solution to hand and b) am a coward), but looking back at subsequent comments to mine in the Newsnight blog referred to in my last post there were some very interesting ones there. And, to my mind, both moderate and balanced too.
Usually such discussion, where it rarely takes place, quickly degenerates into something rather nasty, with anyone making a simple factual point accused of promoting some kind of Final Solution in defence of Lebensraum. Or at best a rather murky set of exchanges on Malthusian theory.
Hence I found what had been written there quite informative and worth pondering, to factor in. It is indeed odd that so many cultures are so worried about population slow down, and its consequences on economic growth, and that they don't seem so concerned with the other side of this: increased consumption, pollution and... well you can see where it leads.
As I say, I don't have ready answers, and hence don't want to go to far 'there'. I have two kids. Is that balance or excess? They are half-Chinese, and that leads to an interesting point. While I'm sure I need to research it a lot more to be sure of my facts, I do believe that in the face of some of the more excitable pro-population expansion (or at least population consequence discussion) censors, this country has quietly been maintaining a policy of control for some time now. I wonder how they did/do it, and why it has attracted so little attention?
Usually such discussion, where it rarely takes place, quickly degenerates into something rather nasty, with anyone making a simple factual point accused of promoting some kind of Final Solution in defence of Lebensraum. Or at best a rather murky set of exchanges on Malthusian theory.
Hence I found what had been written there quite informative and worth pondering, to factor in. It is indeed odd that so many cultures are so worried about population slow down, and its consequences on economic growth, and that they don't seem so concerned with the other side of this: increased consumption, pollution and... well you can see where it leads.
As I say, I don't have ready answers, and hence don't want to go to far 'there'. I have two kids. Is that balance or excess? They are half-Chinese, and that leads to an interesting point. While I'm sure I need to research it a lot more to be sure of my facts, I do believe that in the face of some of the more excitable pro-population expansion (or at least population consequence discussion) censors, this country has quietly been maintaining a policy of control for some time now. I wonder how they did/do it, and why it has attracted so little attention?
Friday, January 19, 2007
Three times lucky!
I like Newsnight, One of the few progs with teeth. Just watched last night's on the PC.
And lo, the blog allowed me to kill 3 birds (is that a PC-accepted phrase anymore?) with one email ('scuse the BB repetition; it's been a busy week).
"Just watched the programme on my PC – nice feature, well done (which has a bearing on the first of today’s topics).
Licence Fee
I was transfixed by Ms. Wark’s interview with, one presumes, the guy who signs her pay cheque. But at least one of them had figured out who funds it. I’m afraid I don’t think he came off too well on this. Without rewinding to review again, I came away with two main impressions. One is that the choice is seen by him to be between ‘quality’ and toys. While they are a factor in the former, I’d have also thought numbers of bodies, how efficiently they deliver ‘product’ to consumer and what they get paid to do so would be worth looking at too. It may have helped to swing those of us not on indexed-linked salaries with competitors at every turn, and who wonder why it requires a UK reporter (and crew?) to go to the other part of the world where there is BBC representation, to film a 30’ filler on global warming. It is classic civil service ‘empire-build first, delivery later’ thinking at its worst. We then come to the matter of salaries and bonuses, especially at the top. What is the point equating the BBC with the private sector? It operates totally differently. And I’d imagine anyone going into it at executive level would know that. The compensation for not dripping in cash is (was) security and the chance not to dig through the barrel base further and further in search of the ratings to justify one’s fiscal worth in comparison with the private sector. As with ‘stars’ such as Ross, Moyles, etc, I simply just don’t buy the argument that you have to compete by playing ‘this any price talent’ game. Working for the BBC gives you access to a whole country in developing the skills (and in terms of stars, audience) upon which to forge very nice careers internally or onwards. It’s lazy management, and nothing less, that leads to clinging on to existing staff no matter what, when a simple ‘Sorry, we’ll miss you’ could suffice. And don’t come back with that ‘we need to attract top talent’ argument. It’s out there. You just have to stay on top of where it is and be ready to move.
Big Brother
I normally wouldn't give this a microsecond's thought, let alone commit to keyboard, but as our nation's finest pols, NGOs and media have decided it is more important than anything else (unless a tornado whisks the BB house to Oz), why not me as well?
I have two words to offer: AGENDA and EDIT.
From the media company that sets this up, to the media that feed on the controversy so set up (as if they didn't know), how anyone with a brain can assign any significance to the words and actions of a vetted and selected and manipulated group of human extremes is beyond me. It's like watching a show called BIG BOMBER and getting in a lather because all the guys with (I'll avoid any potentially un-PC or pejorative descriptions here) huddle around in one corner discussing hair bleach and exotic dinner ingredients whilst looking ominously across the room at the lone US Marine popped in to see what happens.
And should things not quite work to the full requirements of the AGENDA, there is always the EDIT. You can leave in, or out, what serves your needs best. Leave to simmer, and serve.
The day people don’t notice and discuss differences (I’d prefer celebrating them rather than trying to homogenise us all) between each other is when we are all clones, and even then I’m sure we’ll still do it.
Pathetic. Shame on the whole sorry cabal involved and feeding off it all. Including those rushing to be offended, preferably on a guest slot.
Green
Gosh, dilemmas. I don’t envy that poor chap from Innocent. I wonder if he imagined he was running into the same kind of deal as the DG? Here to stick it to Tescos (maybe not: they are a supplier, after all) and find oneself lumped along with them in the nasty capitalist expansion stakes. Not quite the same, or fair, to be so simplistic. but Ms. Wark did raise some pretty critical issues.
If we really are serious about this planet saving thing, we to grasp that there are lots of us, getting to be more and more, most of whom have little else to do than earn, aspire, and hence purchase in an upward spiral that has only one end point that I can see, if left unchecked. So while oodles better than a Tesco air-flown mango I’m sure (if a few aisles apart), as a clearly ethical business that started in a fair stall and now is expanding globally, making and distributing and all that stuff, it must be hard to weigh the various considerations.
I myself suffer the same daily concerns with my business (it’s very hard to create anything new without adding to the environmental costs), and often find myself shy of the ideal by demands of family and immediate, vs. far, future. But I do try and avoid getting hit by my own boomerang and mouthing off too much on what others should do whilst not doing it myself (a long, growing and depressing list developing in this regard), and so far have managed to produce a service and, with luck soon, products that actually serve to reduce or reuse when they hit the marketing stream. And not a target in sight!
Finally no, I didn’t rush into carb-con offsetting either, but fear that the essential wisdom of something like this has been tainted in the public’s eyes by some much-ballyhooed efforts being poisoned chalices or schemes designed more to serve agendas and salaries than any decent, global (Kalahari bushmen breathe the same air we’re thinking of trading) environmental ROI.
Back to work:)"
And lo, the blog allowed me to kill 3 birds (is that a PC-accepted phrase anymore?) with one email ('scuse the BB repetition; it's been a busy week).
"Just watched the programme on my PC – nice feature, well done (which has a bearing on the first of today’s topics).
Licence Fee
I was transfixed by Ms. Wark’s interview with, one presumes, the guy who signs her pay cheque. But at least one of them had figured out who funds it. I’m afraid I don’t think he came off too well on this. Without rewinding to review again, I came away with two main impressions. One is that the choice is seen by him to be between ‘quality’ and toys. While they are a factor in the former, I’d have also thought numbers of bodies, how efficiently they deliver ‘product’ to consumer and what they get paid to do so would be worth looking at too. It may have helped to swing those of us not on indexed-linked salaries with competitors at every turn, and who wonder why it requires a UK reporter (and crew?) to go to the other part of the world where there is BBC representation, to film a 30’ filler on global warming. It is classic civil service ‘empire-build first, delivery later’ thinking at its worst. We then come to the matter of salaries and bonuses, especially at the top. What is the point equating the BBC with the private sector? It operates totally differently. And I’d imagine anyone going into it at executive level would know that. The compensation for not dripping in cash is (was) security and the chance not to dig through the barrel base further and further in search of the ratings to justify one’s fiscal worth in comparison with the private sector. As with ‘stars’ such as Ross, Moyles, etc, I simply just don’t buy the argument that you have to compete by playing ‘this any price talent’ game. Working for the BBC gives you access to a whole country in developing the skills (and in terms of stars, audience) upon which to forge very nice careers internally or onwards. It’s lazy management, and nothing less, that leads to clinging on to existing staff no matter what, when a simple ‘Sorry, we’ll miss you’ could suffice. And don’t come back with that ‘we need to attract top talent’ argument. It’s out there. You just have to stay on top of where it is and be ready to move.
Big Brother
I normally wouldn't give this a microsecond's thought, let alone commit to keyboard, but as our nation's finest pols, NGOs and media have decided it is more important than anything else (unless a tornado whisks the BB house to Oz), why not me as well?
I have two words to offer: AGENDA and EDIT.
From the media company that sets this up, to the media that feed on the controversy so set up (as if they didn't know), how anyone with a brain can assign any significance to the words and actions of a vetted and selected and manipulated group of human extremes is beyond me. It's like watching a show called BIG BOMBER and getting in a lather because all the guys with (I'll avoid any potentially un-PC or pejorative descriptions here) huddle around in one corner discussing hair bleach and exotic dinner ingredients whilst looking ominously across the room at the lone US Marine popped in to see what happens.
And should things not quite work to the full requirements of the AGENDA, there is always the EDIT. You can leave in, or out, what serves your needs best. Leave to simmer, and serve.
The day people don’t notice and discuss differences (I’d prefer celebrating them rather than trying to homogenise us all) between each other is when we are all clones, and even then I’m sure we’ll still do it.
Pathetic. Shame on the whole sorry cabal involved and feeding off it all. Including those rushing to be offended, preferably on a guest slot.
Green
Gosh, dilemmas. I don’t envy that poor chap from Innocent. I wonder if he imagined he was running into the same kind of deal as the DG? Here to stick it to Tescos (maybe not: they are a supplier, after all) and find oneself lumped along with them in the nasty capitalist expansion stakes. Not quite the same, or fair, to be so simplistic. but Ms. Wark did raise some pretty critical issues.
If we really are serious about this planet saving thing, we to grasp that there are lots of us, getting to be more and more, most of whom have little else to do than earn, aspire, and hence purchase in an upward spiral that has only one end point that I can see, if left unchecked. So while oodles better than a Tesco air-flown mango I’m sure (if a few aisles apart), as a clearly ethical business that started in a fair stall and now is expanding globally, making and distributing and all that stuff, it must be hard to weigh the various considerations.
I myself suffer the same daily concerns with my business (it’s very hard to create anything new without adding to the environmental costs), and often find myself shy of the ideal by demands of family and immediate, vs. far, future. But I do try and avoid getting hit by my own boomerang and mouthing off too much on what others should do whilst not doing it myself (a long, growing and depressing list developing in this regard), and so far have managed to produce a service and, with luck soon, products that actually serve to reduce or reuse when they hit the marketing stream. And not a target in sight!
Finally no, I didn’t rush into carb-con offsetting either, but fear that the essential wisdom of something like this has been tainted in the public’s eyes by some much-ballyhooed efforts being poisoned chalices or schemes designed more to serve agendas and salaries than any decent, global (Kalahari bushmen breathe the same air we’re thinking of trading) environmental ROI.
Back to work:)"
Green. Greener, Greenest.
I think we need a new colour: Greener than green?
It's hard to keep up with it all, much less make much sense of it. Maybe that was the intention?
As I listen to last night's Newsnight (can't believe Ethical Man's piece has been called 'Costing the Earth') on the same subject, here's a selection to choke on along with me as I try and digest it all:
Guardian - You've checked the price and calorie count, now here's the carbon cost
Telegraph - How sinful is your shopping basket?
BBC - Tesco boss unveils green pledges
Indy - Tesco's entrance takes the climate change campaign on to another level altogether
Indy - Tesco invests £500m to create 'green consumer revolution'
Interestingly, as I write, I listen to one of Innocent's top bods struggling to defend their ethical stance that they actually exist to sell more and more, which causes more and more carbon. Interesting dilemma. I wonder if he felt it worth appearing.
Finally, I note that Tescos are planning on selling half price energy light bulbs.
I add here an ad (and their les than green original) I worked up and sent their marketing people over two years ago with a pitch for Junkk.com. I guess this is their reply... nick it.
Talk to the man himself
I'm going to try: Tesco Chief Executive - Your Questions
Here's what I wrote:
"What about supporting other areas of environmental good practice, such as repair and reuse?
There are sites such as http://Junkk.com which are trying to find second uses for your products as they are now in the first instance, and maybe later on could encouarge you to build in (or ask your suppliers/brands to do) second uses to the design.
And the best part is, it could add a new attraction to the product for almost no extra cost!"
Here's what I wrote:
"What about supporting other areas of environmental good practice, such as repair and reuse?
There are sites such as http://Junkk.com which are trying to find second uses for your products as they are now in the first instance, and maybe later on could encouarge you to build in (or ask your suppliers/brands to do) second uses to the design.
And the best part is, it could add a new attraction to the product for almost no extra cost!"
A right Royal...
He's at it again (putting one's size nines in one's gob, don't ya know).
Taxpayers see green over Prince's flight
Who will rid us of these troublesome, self-appointed celeb/pol/regal mouthpieces of planet saving, who almost all make me want to buy a Hummer to drive to the airport to fly to Australia to plant an oak in the desert and then get surprised when it croaks and lets off methane decomposing.
I think I was a tad more polite in the post:
"At least at the bottom of this post there are some carbon-offset (one presumes legit and effective) ads and, rather wonderfully, Tiger Moth flights & Queen's 80th £5 coin sales. At least at my cycle of reading . Buy 19 of them and she can hand the keys to junior and he can get there on his own!
It’s all a matter of degree.
I hope he feels his advisers are worth the money they cost us, and his standing as an eco-spokesperson. Tony Blair has already blown his cred (and that of the govt. he heads and whose messages we are meant to heed and follow) to prep his next career's travel requirements hypocrisy-free. And I'm sure Mr. Yeo has a good explanation for his private flight enthusiasm not so long ago, and the entire Lib Dem party are flogging their big cars (to keep on pumping out the gas in new hands) and buying new ones (to add still more).
Meanwhile the rest of us are to take what exactly from such examples, and do what by them?
What they say. Not what they do. Apparently.
I think we need new, and more credible role models.
I think of course HRH is entitled to fly. How else to do his job? But I think for such a thing he should do at his own expense and slap down such silly spin from his munchkins (most of whom can stay at home rather than trying to jump on a jolly) to try to justify it. And I think to gain some credibility back for his beliefs he needs to weigh the positive promo of such awards (or any other eco-adventure) to the negative such bad publicity inevitably attracts if it’s not well structured. It's a fact. Like having an Aston and a Prius. It's going to happen, Assess the bigger picture. Or maybe the chance to schmooze with celebs like Al is just too hard to resist vs. setting an example?"
Indy
BBC - note a slight similarity in the reporting?
Telegraph
Taxpayers see green over Prince's flight
Who will rid us of these troublesome, self-appointed celeb/pol/regal mouthpieces of planet saving, who almost all make me want to buy a Hummer to drive to the airport to fly to Australia to plant an oak in the desert and then get surprised when it croaks and lets off methane decomposing.
I think I was a tad more polite in the post:
"At least at the bottom of this post there are some carbon-offset (one presumes legit and effective) ads and, rather wonderfully, Tiger Moth flights & Queen's 80th £5 coin sales. At least at my cycle of reading . Buy 19 of them and she can hand the keys to junior and he can get there on his own!
It’s all a matter of degree.
I hope he feels his advisers are worth the money they cost us, and his standing as an eco-spokesperson. Tony Blair has already blown his cred (and that of the govt. he heads and whose messages we are meant to heed and follow) to prep his next career's travel requirements hypocrisy-free. And I'm sure Mr. Yeo has a good explanation for his private flight enthusiasm not so long ago, and the entire Lib Dem party are flogging their big cars (to keep on pumping out the gas in new hands) and buying new ones (to add still more).
Meanwhile the rest of us are to take what exactly from such examples, and do what by them?
What they say. Not what they do. Apparently.
I think we need new, and more credible role models.
I think of course HRH is entitled to fly. How else to do his job? But I think for such a thing he should do at his own expense and slap down such silly spin from his munchkins (most of whom can stay at home rather than trying to jump on a jolly) to try to justify it. And I think to gain some credibility back for his beliefs he needs to weigh the positive promo of such awards (or any other eco-adventure) to the negative such bad publicity inevitably attracts if it’s not well structured. It's a fact. Like having an Aston and a Prius. It's going to happen, Assess the bigger picture. Or maybe the chance to schmooze with celebs like Al is just too hard to resist vs. setting an example?"
Indy
BBC - note a slight similarity in the reporting?
Telegraph
Thursday, January 18, 2007
Time and Place
A long time ago, a very good (but not so good I can recall the actual name) newspaper ad on TV (go figure) involved a series of versions of the same incident from a different perspective. A yoof is running to an old lady. Is it to rob her? Or, as it turned out, to push her out of the way of a falling object.
I was pondering this as I uploaded the next bit of citizen journalism in so many days.
Depending on where you are in the world, it has been a bit blowy here today. And here I have captured the aftermath of a lovely silver birch suffering the consequences in the Church Yard as I walked to get the boys from school.
'Bloomin' Global Warming', I thought, as I reflected on the 2 (out of 4) similarly sized and aged trees that have fallen in our garden since we moved in. Assuming we are not as a family fatal to large trees, it had to be the only explanation.
But, need it? The clue to my thinking (unproven, I grant you) is the age comment above. Trees do not live for ever. Maybe it was just their time, and the high winds tipped the balance, along with the tree itself.
Just a thought. At least we're OK for firewood, not that we dare burn it. At least until the Russians cut our gas off. Time to look at high-efficiency wood stoves, I think.
ps: One irony is that, I believe (and this does need confirming), a wind turbine would need to be locked down to avoid self-damage. As I write this the next day, it would be hard-pressed to light an LED.
Telegraph
Indy
What goes up... should have a good reason
Like most folk, I bought Stephen Hawking's 'A Brief History of Time'. One chapter tops, and it was on the shelf. And it didn't get me any extra girlfriends by being there.
But he's smart cookie, and so it's worth paying attention when he adds his t'pennyworth: Hawking warns: We must recognise the catastrophic dangers of climate change
Amen. However, much as I agree with him, I really hope that he will see this laudable view as less than compatible with the report I read, if true, of him hitching a ride on a tourist space rocket.
They don't use bio-diesel.
BBC
But he's smart cookie, and so it's worth paying attention when he adds his t'pennyworth: Hawking warns: We must recognise the catastrophic dangers of climate change
Amen. However, much as I agree with him, I really hope that he will see this laudable view as less than compatible with the report I read, if true, of him hitching a ride on a tourist space rocket.
They don't use bio-diesel.
BBC
Carb-con
For the first time in a long time, I read a piece that seemed to pretty much say what I've been eyebrow-twitching, if not saying, for a while, and in quite calm, lucid and pragmatic terms: Planting trees won't offset jetting to the sun
I had to write:
'There's a certain irony to this headline as I watch my garden head to Oz (and I don't mean Botany Bay - great cartoon by Matt in The Telegraph on just this point, by the way).
Just wanted to say I agree with you. Which for a pretty committed 'green' may sound surprising. I see this issue as too much 'Carb-con jobs for the boys', and not enough doing what's necessary, right and fair.
I also like to see the issue(s) put as factually as possible, and in terms most if not all average folk can appreciate. Well done.
The rest of what you say is less easy to applaud, by simply being so true and unpalatable.
We do need leadership. Strong leadership. And by example (I'm almost afraid to point you at this). Plus we need sensible media support. This is the first I've seen in a while.
Thank you.'
Now, I wonder, will the 'Anon' dogs of PR and lobbyists appear from to savage this debate into further deadlock and inertia?
Indy: Carbon offsetting 'can be harmful'
BBC
I had to write:
'There's a certain irony to this headline as I watch my garden head to Oz (and I don't mean Botany Bay - great cartoon by Matt in The Telegraph on just this point, by the way).
Just wanted to say I agree with you. Which for a pretty committed 'green' may sound surprising. I see this issue as too much 'Carb-con jobs for the boys', and not enough doing what's necessary, right and fair.
I also like to see the issue(s) put as factually as possible, and in terms most if not all average folk can appreciate. Well done.
The rest of what you say is less easy to applaud, by simply being so true and unpalatable.
We do need leadership. Strong leadership. And by example (I'm almost afraid to point you at this). Plus we need sensible media support. This is the first I've seen in a while.
Thank you.'
Now, I wonder, will the 'Anon' dogs of PR and lobbyists appear from to savage this debate into further deadlock and inertia?
Indy: Carbon offsetting 'can be harmful'
BBC
Interest Groups
Davos 07: what everyone's talking about
Love the post YouCant. This thread is running at about 4 (as I type) to how many on the other, 'BB blog' channel on this site (sorry, I had to contribute there too)?
And, really, to all you other guys, good points all as well.
But careful what you wish for (I posted elsewhere the notion of a show called BIG BOMBER... as a joke... to make a point), whatreallyhappened. I suspect the forces of PCs know (or can find out) where we live and may feel it's easier to make a target-ticking point with us than try and find anyone doing anything actually illegal.
Love the post YouCant. This thread is running at about 4 (as I type) to how many on the other, 'BB blog' channel on this site (sorry, I had to contribute there too)?
And, really, to all you other guys, good points all as well.
But careful what you wish for (I posted elsewhere the notion of a show called BIG BOMBER... as a joke... to make a point), whatreallyhappened. I suspect the forces of PCs know (or can find out) where we live and may feel it's easier to make a target-ticking point with us than try and find anyone doing anything actually illegal.
Moderate Views?
The topic of media moderation has been raised: Pulling Blogs Is Bad Policy
"As with all things, the devil is in the details.
I commend the Guardian (and my own, immodestly - on Junkk.com since you didn't ask, but hey, why not try for a plug?) for its immediate upload which, looking at the talk policy in the box above as I write 'will remove posts that contain racist, sexist or offensive/threatening language, personal attacks on the writer or other posters, posts that exceed the maximum length, and posts that are off topic.'
Trouble is, in a few of those cases the definition is a bit vague, and the media controller becomes all powerful in setting an AGENDA by the way they EDIT (a point I have noted in another blog on this site about, of all things, the Big Brother farce).
But obviously something is better than nothing, and I guess we work on trust and faith in those we engage with.
I love the seemingly sound connotations behind words like 'managing' or 'moderated'. But, playing Devil's advocate, and shooting myself in the foot a tad, I could see why a blog may need to be pulled, if I'm unsure why for "legal reasons", when the comments became too ferocious.
I was recently in one such where I was praying for the site owner to intervene as an 'Anon' poster, who knew exactly who I was, drifted into very dark territory.
I agree that the debate can emerge somewhere else, but it's not that easy to track where unless you are determined or don't have a life.
The range of different voices may usually balance the debate, but I have my doubts how well it produces a well-rounded discussion. In my area of interest, the environment, when it comes to major media (though I often wonder how many actual readers there are outside the chattering classes who probably meet in the Ivy for lunch every day anyway) I often sense the dark arts of media professionals and lobbyists keeping things to extremes. Yes, that may on average seem like balance, but not useful debate, to me at least, especially when blogged ‘information’ can be less than verifiable.
And that is where a moderator you trust can be quite useful. I've moderated out very little on my site, but always attempted to put things that are more contentious or open to subjective interpretation at least in some context based on my experience and knowledge. Then at least the reader can assess context.'
Guardian: The world is watching them
"As with all things, the devil is in the details.
I commend the Guardian (and my own, immodestly - on Junkk.com since you didn't ask, but hey, why not try for a plug?) for its immediate upload which, looking at the talk policy in the box above as I write 'will remove posts that contain racist, sexist or offensive/threatening language, personal attacks on the writer or other posters, posts that exceed the maximum length, and posts that are off topic.'
Trouble is, in a few of those cases the definition is a bit vague, and the media controller becomes all powerful in setting an AGENDA by the way they EDIT (a point I have noted in another blog on this site about, of all things, the Big Brother farce).
But obviously something is better than nothing, and I guess we work on trust and faith in those we engage with.
I love the seemingly sound connotations behind words like 'managing' or 'moderated'. But, playing Devil's advocate, and shooting myself in the foot a tad, I could see why a blog may need to be pulled, if I'm unsure why for "legal reasons", when the comments became too ferocious.
I was recently in one such where I was praying for the site owner to intervene as an 'Anon' poster, who knew exactly who I was, drifted into very dark territory.
I agree that the debate can emerge somewhere else, but it's not that easy to track where unless you are determined or don't have a life.
The range of different voices may usually balance the debate, but I have my doubts how well it produces a well-rounded discussion. In my area of interest, the environment, when it comes to major media (though I often wonder how many actual readers there are outside the chattering classes who probably meet in the Ivy for lunch every day anyway) I often sense the dark arts of media professionals and lobbyists keeping things to extremes. Yes, that may on average seem like balance, but not useful debate, to me at least, especially when blogged ‘information’ can be less than verifiable.
And that is where a moderator you trust can be quite useful. I've moderated out very little on my site, but always attempted to put things that are more contentious or open to subjective interpretation at least in some context based on my experience and knowledge. Then at least the reader can assess context.'
Guardian: The world is watching them
Hell in a handbasket
The other day a reader asked me to mention the perverse travesty of the situation in Burma being ignored whilst so much of less import gets coverage and debate and public outrage in support. I replied that I would love to (and now have - it is an issue I have felt strongly about since I lived in Asia. Indeed one of the songs I wrote with my wife for her highly-acclaimed debut album was called 'Shadow of a Hero', about Aung Sung Ki ('scuse spelling)), but really I didn't feel it possible or right for the Junkk 'brand' to err too far, too often from our core area of interest.
Well, sod that.
I have just woken up to the farce that is Big Brother, our political establishment, and the sorry state of this country's chattering classes, the media they serve and read and, sorry to say, a large chunk of my fellow (wo)man.
As I watch the River Wye come up the highstreet, my dustbin head to Aberdeen, my breakfast juice (please let it be squeezed in situ and shipped over) freeze-dried in Orange County, I'd say there were a few other things a tad more important.
Animal Farm
"I normally wouldn't give this a microsecond's thought, let alone commit to keyboard, but as our nation's finest pols, NGOs and media have decided it is more important than anything else (unless a tornado whisks the BB house to Oz), why not me as well?
I have two words to offer: AGENDA and EDIT.
From the media company that sets this up, to the media that feed on the controversy so set up (as if they didn't know), how anyone with a brain can assign any significance to the words and actions of a vetted and selected and manipulated group of human extremes is beyond me. It's like watching a show called BIG BOMBER and getting in a lather because all the guys with (I'll avoid any potentially un-PC or pejorative descriptions here) huddle around in one corner discussing hair bleach and exotic dinner ingredients whilst looking ominously across the room at the lone US Marine popped in to see what happens.
And should things not quite work to the full requirements of the AGENDA, there is always the EDIT. You can leave in, or out, what serves your needs best. Leave to simmer, and serve.
Pathetic. The whole sorry lot of you."
Telegraph
Indy
Indy - a good analysis of several issues
Mad - good to kick a ball rolling!
Guardian, subsequently. I was going to add... 'Especially those making hay out of being 'offended'. Reminds me of when I was in Hong Kong, and all white non-Chinese were dubbed 'Queilos', which wasn't meant as a compliment. Or response? Well, we didn't run around wailing and trying to get a slot on tlak shows. We just figured, 'Hey, why not?', and started calling ourselves that. Kinda took the sting out of it. A lot of maturity is missing here. And commom sense. The day differences between people are not noticed, and commented upon, is when we are all the same clone. And then I'm sure ways will be found to set us apart even then. Learn to swim before you try and tell the tide to stop.
Telegraph, subsequently, for crying out loud. More than you ever will want, or need to know.
Telegraph, ditto
BBC - Jade to donate her TV fee to charity - The classic 'get out of jail free' response to such things if you get caught these days. I wonder what her fee to the News of the World was, and where it went?
GuardianCiF - A very good comment by a guy called Waltz
Indy - India grits its teeth as Jade prepares to jet in - As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
Well, sod that.
I have just woken up to the farce that is Big Brother, our political establishment, and the sorry state of this country's chattering classes, the media they serve and read and, sorry to say, a large chunk of my fellow (wo)man.
As I watch the River Wye come up the highstreet, my dustbin head to Aberdeen, my breakfast juice (please let it be squeezed in situ and shipped over) freeze-dried in Orange County, I'd say there were a few other things a tad more important.
Animal Farm
"I normally wouldn't give this a microsecond's thought, let alone commit to keyboard, but as our nation's finest pols, NGOs and media have decided it is more important than anything else (unless a tornado whisks the BB house to Oz), why not me as well?
I have two words to offer: AGENDA and EDIT.
From the media company that sets this up, to the media that feed on the controversy so set up (as if they didn't know), how anyone with a brain can assign any significance to the words and actions of a vetted and selected and manipulated group of human extremes is beyond me. It's like watching a show called BIG BOMBER and getting in a lather because all the guys with (I'll avoid any potentially un-PC or pejorative descriptions here) huddle around in one corner discussing hair bleach and exotic dinner ingredients whilst looking ominously across the room at the lone US Marine popped in to see what happens.
And should things not quite work to the full requirements of the AGENDA, there is always the EDIT. You can leave in, or out, what serves your needs best. Leave to simmer, and serve.
Pathetic. The whole sorry lot of you."
Telegraph
Indy
Indy - a good analysis of several issues
Mad - good to kick a ball rolling!
Guardian, subsequently. I was going to add... 'Especially those making hay out of being 'offended'. Reminds me of when I was in Hong Kong, and all white non-Chinese were dubbed 'Queilos', which wasn't meant as a compliment. Or response? Well, we didn't run around wailing and trying to get a slot on tlak shows. We just figured, 'Hey, why not?', and started calling ourselves that. Kinda took the sting out of it. A lot of maturity is missing here. And commom sense. The day differences between people are not noticed, and commented upon, is when we are all the same clone. And then I'm sure ways will be found to set us apart even then. Learn to swim before you try and tell the tide to stop.
Telegraph, subsequently, for crying out loud. More than you ever will want, or need to know.
Telegraph, ditto
BBC - Jade to donate her TV fee to charity - The classic 'get out of jail free' response to such things if you get caught these days. I wonder what her fee to the News of the World was, and where it went?
GuardianCiF - A very good comment by a guy called Waltz
Indy - India grits its teeth as Jade prepares to jet in - As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Up in smoke?
This is one for the dilemma file (or ITanic Vs.).
Cremation or burial?
Despite most in the eco-sphere on this topic surrounding casket design (Cardboard, bamboo, etc), I must confess to having treated it as a bit of a niche thing, despite death, along with taxes, being a bit of a growth industry, along with the global population.
And that is a key consideration. Because if there's more and more of us standing on top of the earth, there's an ever more limited series of places to stick folk under it. And once we start fighting with the guys planting bio-fuel crops, it could get ugly.
Of course it already has to an extent. When I lived in Singapore over a decade ago, large numbers of ancestors were quietly, if rather unceremoniously JCB'd from their eternal slumbers and popped in an urn in a wall if they were lucky.
So pretty much my whole experience, including personally with my Dad, has been cremation.
But in the whole dental filling (mercury) pollution and simple combustion products (heat, gas) scheme of things, is it a good idea?
I'll have to go find out.
Cremation or burial?
Despite most in the eco-sphere on this topic surrounding casket design (Cardboard, bamboo, etc), I must confess to having treated it as a bit of a niche thing, despite death, along with taxes, being a bit of a growth industry, along with the global population.
And that is a key consideration. Because if there's more and more of us standing on top of the earth, there's an ever more limited series of places to stick folk under it. And once we start fighting with the guys planting bio-fuel crops, it could get ugly.
Of course it already has to an extent. When I lived in Singapore over a decade ago, large numbers of ancestors were quietly, if rather unceremoniously JCB'd from their eternal slumbers and popped in an urn in a wall if they were lucky.
So pretty much my whole experience, including personally with my Dad, has been cremation.
But in the whole dental filling (mercury) pollution and simple combustion products (heat, gas) scheme of things, is it a good idea?
I'll have to go find out.
Following In Jeremy Clarkson's Footsteps!
Well, apart from the height. And the money. And the cars.
And less-than-eco attitude. And, for that matter, the job.
Because I was going to say that like him, I today became a local newspaper journalist.
Thing is, he was hired and asked and paid, and I wasn't but offered and wasn't. However I see it as a milestone of sorts. And a good sign (except the STILL doing things for free bit - I need an agent). I have of course written op-eds before, but this seemed like my first real bit of citizen journalism.
The occasion was a council meeting to discuss getting hydro-power in Herefordshire.
The rest you can read here.
What is also worthy of note is that in that spread above, there were at least 3, maybe 4 other stories about the environment. It sis getting BIG! I hope we can play a part.
ps: The lights are mentioned in the article. It was good to see huge chandeliers with low-energy bulbs. At least someone is walking as they talk
A dish best served cold
If you go back in these blogs a fair way, you'll find I was less than impressed with the way SKY's Big Idea competition was handled.
I took part in the online Forum for a while with similarly unhappy contestants, but when it got a bit nasty (either a resident psycho or, more likely, production house minion, PR or lawyer) decided to move to more fruitful areas.
Today the OFCOM paperwork arrived. I'm going to enjoy this. We may even yet profit.
Especially when I read this the same day: ITV Play rapped over 'unfair' quiz
It's a bit broad, but 'rule 2.11 of the broadcasting code, which states that "competitions should be conducted fairly".' And if they can be nabbed on this, then I'd say we're looking even better.
I took part in the online Forum for a while with similarly unhappy contestants, but when it got a bit nasty (either a resident psycho or, more likely, production house minion, PR or lawyer) decided to move to more fruitful areas.
Today the OFCOM paperwork arrived. I'm going to enjoy this. We may even yet profit.
Especially when I read this the same day: ITV Play rapped over 'unfair' quiz
It's a bit broad, but 'rule 2.11 of the broadcasting code, which states that "competitions should be conducted fairly".' And if they can be nabbed on this, then I'd say we're looking even better.
The right behind the write
As readers will appreciate (as in 'know', not 'you're a bonzer dude, mate', sadly ) I trawl a lot and get sent a lot each day. Some of which I share. So it's always nice to see others finding what I have found interesting equally so.
My interests are eclectic, but obviously take in the eco, design, invention, ads, media, etc. One I have just surveyed (I will leave it nameless), which I do open as it is useful, had a monthly round-up. However I was moved to write to them (and those they quoted):
"I am enjoying and valuing the summaries that pop into my in-box from you guys. Such as:
A BURGER AND A CUP OF ETHICS, PLEASE
McDonalds tries to surf the ethical tide and up its green credentials with a rainforest connection. As of January 9th all of its 1,200 outlets in Britain will sell only coffee from growers certified by global non-profit organisation the Rainforest Alliance.
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jan2007/gb20070109_958716.htm?chan=globalbiz_europe_companies
http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/news.cfm?id=mcdonalds
......................................................................................................................
MARKS OFFSETS ITS SPARKS
UK retail giant Marks and Spencer launches its £200m, 100-point eco-plan to inject environmental responsibility into every layer of its business and make it carbon neutral by 2012.
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/01/15/ap3328593.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6261939.stm
While it has to be welcome that organisations are moving in a better direction, it is also sad that often the hype is not matched by the subsequent realities. The jury is still out on the above, but even after a few days caution is advised.
I, too read about the McDonalds story and was impressed. However, a qualification and Fairtrade reply I saw tucked away in the Business letters page of the Sunday Times has made me more circumspect.
Equally, after its first flush, the M&S story bears further scrutiny. According to the Telegraph today they have put no numbers to it which, if true is very noble for a such a marketing-led company."
I'd like to think that I here, and we at Junkk.com do try our best to not just take what we're served and pass it on, but cock an eyebrow at least at everything, and where the situation demands add our own take and, if necessary, doubts.
There really is a tad too much these days being served up and taken as given, when a few questions may not hurt before passing on.
My interests are eclectic, but obviously take in the eco, design, invention, ads, media, etc. One I have just surveyed (I will leave it nameless), which I do open as it is useful, had a monthly round-up. However I was moved to write to them (and those they quoted):
"I am enjoying and valuing the summaries that pop into my in-box from you guys. Such as:
A BURGER AND A CUP OF ETHICS, PLEASE
McDonalds tries to surf the ethical tide and up its green credentials with a rainforest connection. As of January 9th all of its 1,200 outlets in Britain will sell only coffee from growers certified by global non-profit organisation the Rainforest Alliance.
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jan2007/gb20070109_958716.htm?chan=globalbiz_europe_companies
http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/news.cfm?id=mcdonalds
......................................................................................................................
MARKS OFFSETS ITS SPARKS
UK retail giant Marks and Spencer launches its £200m, 100-point eco-plan to inject environmental responsibility into every layer of its business and make it carbon neutral by 2012.
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/01/15/ap3328593.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6261939.stm
While it has to be welcome that organisations are moving in a better direction, it is also sad that often the hype is not matched by the subsequent realities. The jury is still out on the above, but even after a few days caution is advised.
I, too read about the McDonalds story and was impressed. However, a qualification and Fairtrade reply I saw tucked away in the Business letters page of the Sunday Times has made me more circumspect.
Equally, after its first flush, the M&S story bears further scrutiny. According to the Telegraph today they have put no numbers to it which, if true is very noble for a such a marketing-led company."
I'd like to think that I here, and we at Junkk.com do try our best to not just take what we're served and pass it on, but cock an eyebrow at least at everything, and where the situation demands add our own take and, if necessary, doubts.
There really is a tad too much these days being served up and taken as given, when a few questions may not hurt before passing on.
All that's Green... need not be?
I was interested in a new travel initiative called Greenbee, from John Lewis Partnership, for whom I have a high regard on several counts.
Sadly, it was not what I thought it would be. Tap in environment to the search, and this is the closest you get.
Interesting name, though. I wonder what lies behind it?
Sadly, it was not what I thought it would be. Tap in environment to the search, and this is the closest you get.
Interesting name, though. I wonder what lies behind it?
Well, he did ask.
So where are the new ideas?
'...Here, for one.
And if the party's environmental record so far, and even the tangibles behind the 'bold new thinking' is anything to go on, it's a shame the current system/regime is incapable, or unwilling, to genuinely try and find them in new places, and support them if they have merit.'
For once, a short answer (though it need a lot more) to a short question.
ADDENDUNM:
The author has kindly replied, thanking me for my input and suggesting it needs reflecting upon. To which I have followed up (you never know):
'As will many of us, I'm sure. I just hope we have the time to do so before inactions reap unfortunate consequences.
I am of course politically and even corporately (if not commercially) naive, but having embarked upon a one-person effort to DO something about our environmental future, using the skills at my disposal, it can be frustrating to find those that who one thought were claiming and indeed tasked to help were in fact dedicated, either through ignorance, inefficiency or ambition, to thwarting one's efforts at almost every turn. I am currently looking at a govt.-funded quango - to whom I took my business plan for support 3 years ago - now moving into an area of direct competition with me! And this after they claimed no interest in what I was doing 'because it was commercial'. They now have 'sponsors' logos on their site, which is an ad where I come from.
In my 'job' I read a lot, and have done so daily for several years, and the number of times what is said ever gets done at all, much less as claimed originally, makes for a sorry state of affairs. But even most major media are complicit in allowing such short-termism to succeed and flourish.
The system is not working, yet it is still growing and hence becoming ever more complex, which only makes the chances of restitution and repair more difficult. But we must try, if only as individuals, though it would be so much better to do so in concert. An empire of minions between the top and reality can be very comforting for a while, but when there are no more beans to count, or manage, because the bean-makers have been depleted and worn out then even those with index-linking and gold-plating may yet starve. Trouble is, perhaps not in their (career) lifetime.
So it can be hard. I was at a '3rd sector' gathering last year, which claimed to be about improving creative thinking, innovation and pushing social entrepreneurship with private types like me. In my view it failed on all counts, and was almost designed to maintain the status quo behind a facade of hype by the composition of invitees and structure. Pity.
I will keep trying to engage, indeed in some ways for selfish reasons (if there's money I will try and bag some), but really it is not often worth the effort. So we end up with 'us' and 'them'... again.'
'...Here, for one.
And if the party's environmental record so far, and even the tangibles behind the 'bold new thinking' is anything to go on, it's a shame the current system/regime is incapable, or unwilling, to genuinely try and find them in new places, and support them if they have merit.'
For once, a short answer (though it need a lot more) to a short question.
ADDENDUNM:
The author has kindly replied, thanking me for my input and suggesting it needs reflecting upon. To which I have followed up (you never know):
'As will many of us, I'm sure. I just hope we have the time to do so before inactions reap unfortunate consequences.
I am of course politically and even corporately (if not commercially) naive, but having embarked upon a one-person effort to DO something about our environmental future, using the skills at my disposal, it can be frustrating to find those that who one thought were claiming and indeed tasked to help were in fact dedicated, either through ignorance, inefficiency or ambition, to thwarting one's efforts at almost every turn. I am currently looking at a govt.-funded quango - to whom I took my business plan for support 3 years ago - now moving into an area of direct competition with me! And this after they claimed no interest in what I was doing 'because it was commercial'. They now have 'sponsors' logos on their site, which is an ad where I come from.
In my 'job' I read a lot, and have done so daily for several years, and the number of times what is said ever gets done at all, much less as claimed originally, makes for a sorry state of affairs. But even most major media are complicit in allowing such short-termism to succeed and flourish.
The system is not working, yet it is still growing and hence becoming ever more complex, which only makes the chances of restitution and repair more difficult. But we must try, if only as individuals, though it would be so much better to do so in concert. An empire of minions between the top and reality can be very comforting for a while, but when there are no more beans to count, or manage, because the bean-makers have been depleted and worn out then even those with index-linking and gold-plating may yet starve. Trouble is, perhaps not in their (career) lifetime.
So it can be hard. I was at a '3rd sector' gathering last year, which claimed to be about improving creative thinking, innovation and pushing social entrepreneurship with private types like me. In my view it failed on all counts, and was almost designed to maintain the status quo behind a facade of hype by the composition of invitees and structure. Pity.
I will keep trying to engage, indeed in some ways for selfish reasons (if there's money I will try and bag some), but really it is not often worth the effort. So we end up with 'us' and 'them'... again.'
Selling beans. No longer counting them. Apparently.
A few days ago I noted the coverage of the M&S green announcement, and felt this was one that needed time to settle.
Happily, others are still paying attention: No figure on M&S's green payback
To whom I felt moved to write (plus a ps on EDF snitching on pot growers):
"Thank you for your piece today, which will make a nice counterpiece in my blog to the mostly uncritical gush that has been accorded this announcement in other quarters.
It has not been my experience that anyone in marketing, especially retail, has not put a price, first, and as high as possible, on anything they do. This has to be a new one.
However, with this new found hue, maybe my little organisation, which does no more than offer free (with paid ads if they want to push something genuinely, planet-savingly, consumer-benefittingly green they sell or do - only not going 'carbon neutral' because, as you say, they should have done ages ago and it really only helps their own bottom line, PR and CSR at AGM time) opportunities for them to upload their product data for reuse and recycling info purposes (which one would have assumed a savvy marketer would see as a possible ADDITIONAL sales opportunity), as has such as ecover, maybe they may feel like getting back to us after 3 years trying to get through the minions, using such e-dm as our Folda-Holda.
We cost them nothing and could make them money, after all. But maybe looking good is more important and needs more attention than actually doing good.
Rgds, Peter Martin
ps: Shining a light on EDF's true role in joint supply-side issues
I was recently at a seminar at the Science Museum where one of my co-presenters was extolling the virtues of hemp as source of textiles, etc. In eco-terms it is even way ahead of bamboo for instance. However all our enthusiasm for the potential (myself included) was dampened slightly when the speaker was asked how we grew it at home... you know the rest.
Still if EDF does feel like making a contribution to global warming in synergistic areas, it may be worth looking at!"
Happily, others are still paying attention: No figure on M&S's green payback
To whom I felt moved to write (plus a ps on EDF snitching on pot growers):
"Thank you for your piece today, which will make a nice counterpiece in my blog to the mostly uncritical gush that has been accorded this announcement in other quarters.
It has not been my experience that anyone in marketing, especially retail, has not put a price, first, and as high as possible, on anything they do. This has to be a new one.
However, with this new found hue, maybe my little organisation, which does no more than offer free (with paid ads if they want to push something genuinely, planet-savingly, consumer-benefittingly green they sell or do - only not going 'carbon neutral' because, as you say, they should have done ages ago and it really only helps their own bottom line, PR and CSR at AGM time) opportunities for them to upload their product data for reuse and recycling info purposes (which one would have assumed a savvy marketer would see as a possible ADDITIONAL sales opportunity), as has such as ecover, maybe they may feel like getting back to us after 3 years trying to get through the minions, using such e-dm as our Folda-Holda.
We cost them nothing and could make them money, after all. But maybe looking good is more important and needs more attention than actually doing good.
Rgds, Peter Martin
ps: Shining a light on EDF's true role in joint supply-side issues
I was recently at a seminar at the Science Museum where one of my co-presenters was extolling the virtues of hemp as source of textiles, etc. In eco-terms it is even way ahead of bamboo for instance. However all our enthusiasm for the potential (myself included) was dampened slightly when the speaker was asked how we grew it at home... you know the rest.
Still if EDF does feel like making a contribution to global warming in synergistic areas, it may be worth looking at!"
Suits who, Aunty?
In my time I have had occasion to doubt, and take issue with the BBC's ability to remain objective. Or, more and more, the provision of free ads to those who may or may not deserve it. While one presume no money changes hands, one can only wonder what happens 'in kind' (I challenged a piece a while ago that devoted 30 minutes to cosmetic tourism, where a full crew had a week at one resort in South Africa showing little more than slappers having their t&a jobs to great acclaim, and doubtless ratings. No mention of any other options, or indeed the risks).
As it does cross into areas of enviro-concern (suit-miles, local trade, etc), I took issue (in the form of some questions) on its complaints/Newswatch site (which seems to have melded):
"I realise there is a continual fine line being walked in sharing items of consumer interest, but what is it, who sets it and who polices it?
Take this morning's Breakfast TV item on cheap suits.
While it could have been a legitimate piece on outsourcing, global trade, consumer demand and ethical practices, I felt it was little more than an ad for a one week store promo, for which the BBC happily provided free air time. I got the price, how long, where, and that they were machine washable. Even vox pops of impressed shoppers. At no stage were any of the other issues, or indeed alternatives mentioned more than in passing.
Some poor UK craftsperson's venue was used (at least in the slot I saw) to make the commercial, but at no stage was he offered an opinion on quality, etc.
Is my licence funding major supermarkets’ marketing now?
No wonder our retail industry is heading to out of town megamalls with such assistance."
As it does cross into areas of enviro-concern (suit-miles, local trade, etc), I took issue (in the form of some questions) on its complaints/Newswatch site (which seems to have melded):
"I realise there is a continual fine line being walked in sharing items of consumer interest, but what is it, who sets it and who polices it?
Take this morning's Breakfast TV item on cheap suits.
While it could have been a legitimate piece on outsourcing, global trade, consumer demand and ethical practices, I felt it was little more than an ad for a one week store promo, for which the BBC happily provided free air time. I got the price, how long, where, and that they were machine washable. Even vox pops of impressed shoppers. At no stage were any of the other issues, or indeed alternatives mentioned more than in passing.
Some poor UK craftsperson's venue was used (at least in the slot I saw) to make the commercial, but at no stage was he offered an opinion on quality, etc.
Is my licence funding major supermarkets’ marketing now?
No wonder our retail industry is heading to out of town megamalls with such assistance."
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Green and bear it?
This just in from the Green party: Rip up your Npower contracts!
No guys, don't hang back; say how you feel.
Actually, it's nice to see a line that isn't honed to PC-perfection for once.
As there's no link, the full Monty is below.
Wasn't Juice once available via Greenpeace?
Guess it isn't any more.
------------
Green Party Principal Speaker Dr. Derek Wall today urged consumers to rip up their RWE Npower contracts, in light of the companies continued attempts to dump toxic fuel ash from Didcot power station, in Radley Lakes near Oxford.
Massive local opposition to the destruction of the last two remaining lakes at Radley has been ignored by power company RWE npower, and the decision to fill these lakes with toxic ash, despite opposition from Green Cllrs, has been rail-roaded through by Tory dominated Oxfordshire County Council, and subsequently backed by Ruth Kelly, Secretary of State for Local Government. (1)
In July, The Save Radley Lakes group handed in their own 11,500-name petition to npower at Didcot, and currently squatters are occupying an empty house at Thrupp Lake, as part of the protesters campaign.
Dr Derek Wall, Green Party Principal Speaker today said: "Despite concerns about pollution and flooding issues, and effects on the Lake's ecological and recreational value, Npower are determined to do irreparable damage to the environment and go ahead with their toxic waste plans.
"RWE npower Chief Executive Andy Duff claims to recognise the impact his companies activities have on the communities in which they work, and says he is 'committed to carrying out our business with a sense of responsibility.' (2)
"But Npower is behaving in a gravely irresponsible manner, ignoring the concerns of local people and experts. Clearly Npower's belief in corporate responsibility and environmental sensitivity go out the window when it comes to the crunch.
"Anyone concerned about the environment should not believe the hype surrounding Npower's so called green strand 'Juice', rather they should look to source their electricity from suppliers who put their money where their mouth is."
(1) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/5168232.stm
(2) http://www.npower.com/About_npower/Our_responsibility.html
Air Head
Lest I be accused of party bias in my coverage of the government and its officer's rather parallel perception of policy vs. actions (or, hypocrisy) in matters airborne, this may do something to redress the balance, if not one's faith in what exist beneath their skins: Planes, trains and the conscience of Tim Yeo
And though nothing to to with it specifically, and referring to another branch of government (reminder: those we pay for to lead us) I'll just add this one in for good measure as it is still pertinent: Rebuilding trust in civil servants
And though nothing to to with it specifically, and referring to another branch of government (reminder: those we pay for to lead us) I'll just add this one in for good measure as it is still pertinent: Rebuilding trust in civil servants
The person has spoken
I may be erring on a Mea Culpa here: Residents back 'gas guzzlers' bid
Whe it broke, I was not keen, and didn't like what was behind it. In mitigation, the background the survey is a little vague. Without being a research expert, or knowing how it was conducted, if one spent an hour in a council estate and asked all you met 'Do you think all those rich sods should flaunt their 4x4s?', maybe the results would be skwed a tad. Who knows? It wasn't asked. I guess BBC reporters live in North London.
I do note that 'a majority thought the extra charges for second car permits were "too punitive".' So having a 4x4 is bad, but driving two cars is good? Hmmn.
What is encouraging, and where I will go along, is where the poll suggests two out of three residents would consider changing to a cleaner car to avoid the higher charges.
Especially as these proposals differ from Chancellor Gordon Brown's transport taxes, which the BBC says (suprisingly up front I feel) have made money for the Exchequer without reducing emissions. These mean less revenue for the council, but lower levels of greenhouse gases.
Whe it broke, I was not keen, and didn't like what was behind it. In mitigation, the background the survey is a little vague. Without being a research expert, or knowing how it was conducted, if one spent an hour in a council estate and asked all you met 'Do you think all those rich sods should flaunt their 4x4s?', maybe the results would be skwed a tad. Who knows? It wasn't asked. I guess BBC reporters live in North London.
I do note that 'a majority thought the extra charges for second car permits were "too punitive".' So having a 4x4 is bad, but driving two cars is good? Hmmn.
What is encouraging, and where I will go along, is where the poll suggests two out of three residents would consider changing to a cleaner car to avoid the higher charges.
Especially as these proposals differ from Chancellor Gordon Brown's transport taxes, which the BBC says (suprisingly up front I feel) have made money for the Exchequer without reducing emissions. These mean less revenue for the council, but lower levels of greenhouse gases.
Good news from the East?
It may not be Kyoto (maybe that's a good thing), but I'll deem it a plus: Asian states sign key energy deal
Not just spin... this is M&Spin
And so the game of who is greener, quicker continues between the nation's retailers. I think I will reserve personal comment a wee while until I have had a chance to digest fully the slew of 'stuff' being issued, beyond saying that something is probably better than nothing. I just hope it is all sincere. Certainly it will be interesting to see what happens to the missive I will soon be sending - again - to senior management in these organisations. Maybe some gatekeeper minion will not pop it in the 'oo-er, too tricky' basket this time.
Here's a small round up of the last 24 hrs:
AP via Forbes: M&S Aims to Become Carbon-Neutral by '12
BBC - M&S Rose goes green in pursuit of profit
Indy - Take a close look at the produce on offer
Indy - slight fly in the ointment, though I thought they were in earlier with 'something' - Tesco follows M&S with climate change move
BBC Newsnight - Ethical Man
I merely note for now that aims are always good, if vague. As is 'much of'. And while there is some cautious welcome from commentators across business and eco-disciplines, there is also a fair bit of... warranted... eye brow twitch ready and waiting. A lot of this, like Tesco a while ago (and again, here) is merely housekeeping to boost internal profits. Not much of real value to the consumer. I also take the point about lumping ethical and eco together to get some rather murky mix of what is 'good'. The question is for whom?
Here's a small round up of the last 24 hrs:
AP via Forbes: M&S Aims to Become Carbon-Neutral by '12
BBC - M&S Rose goes green in pursuit of profit
Indy - Take a close look at the produce on offer
Indy - slight fly in the ointment, though I thought they were in earlier with 'something' - Tesco follows M&S with climate change move
BBC Newsnight - Ethical Man
I merely note for now that aims are always good, if vague. As is 'much of'. And while there is some cautious welcome from commentators across business and eco-disciplines, there is also a fair bit of... warranted... eye brow twitch ready and waiting. A lot of this, like Tesco a while ago (and again, here) is merely housekeeping to boost internal profits. Not much of real value to the consumer. I also take the point about lumping ethical and eco together to get some rather murky mix of what is 'good'. The question is for whom?
It's just not hockey
A little archive update courtesy of Dave from Solarventi, regarding the ‘hockey stick’ graph so loved by both pro and anti global warming protagonists a while back.
Keeping the pot bubbling was debate surrounding the apparent lack of a dip that should have been there to reflect the ‘little ice age’. He has forwarded a New Scientist article from November last year that effectively mirrors the same conclusions.
And so we fiddle on.
Keeping the pot bubbling was debate surrounding the apparent lack of a dip that should have been there to reflect the ‘little ice age’. He has forwarded a New Scientist article from November last year that effectively mirrors the same conclusions.
And so we fiddle on.
Monday, January 15, 2007
Re:prieve for Re:pair?
There's hope:
I've written to the author: On the mend
"I was very interested in your piece today, and as re:pair is very much in our re:mit, would like to follow up with you. By karmic synergy we are also based in Herefordshire, just like John Harris.
And we are starting to build up a good selection of those, near and further, who can and will fix things. Or the tools and techniques to do it at home. Ask and we may have an answer.. or be able to get one.
And even if the vacuum can't be fixed, there's always re:use."
I've written to the author: On the mend
"I was very interested in your piece today, and as re:pair is very much in our re:mit, would like to follow up with you. By karmic synergy we are also based in Herefordshire, just like John Harris.
And we are starting to build up a good selection of those, near and further, who can and will fix things. Or the tools and techniques to do it at home. Ask and we may have an answer.. or be able to get one.
And even if the vacuum can't be fixed, there's always re:use."
What goes up...
...Looks like it stays there.
And interesting snippet from the Sunday Times Travel Page Reader's rants.
Seems a reader booked a holiday with an agent back in May. Now the same outfit has decided to 'scrap' fuel tax, but will not refund those booked before Dec. 22.
There were reas.. excuses given, but somehow they didn't... wash.
And interesting snippet from the Sunday Times Travel Page Reader's rants.
Seems a reader booked a holiday with an agent back in May. Now the same outfit has decided to 'scrap' fuel tax, but will not refund those booked before Dec. 22.
There were reas.. excuses given, but somehow they didn't... wash.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)