Quality of Debate

It's not just what you say, or how you say it. It's also between whom: Talk about Newsnight

I just watched the piece on my PC, and sit amazed at the docile and polite Mr. Paxman I saw.

What troubles me slightly is that I am still not clear as to whether what was written was as presented in English as stated. Mr. P said it was; and the headteacher said it was not, albeit in a less than coherent or convincing manner. Mind you, that seems to have served our current crop of politicians pretty well lately. Deny, deny deny. And eventually they'll give up asking and move on.
'
If it is the case that this text was/is as claimed, I can only wonder if such things remain permitted by selective access to and teaching from 'certain chapters' to be acceptable, as, grudgingly, claimed. I can see our more liberal leadership finding that one may be a slight dilemma. Imagine George G or our Ken popping over a copy of 'John & Jim Go Down On The Farm' from our primary kids' sexual equality indoctrination courses, to the British Councils in the Middle East.

I'm also curious as to the choice of 'balancing guest' to such an issue. Sure she seems to be some kind of Govt. foot-in-mouthpiece, but might I suspect her faith may have made her attractive to spice things up?

Surely a less contentious representative could have been located, especially to answer key


Times

I'm angry all right

Are you an angry motorist?

I this an attempt to help, or capitalise? My mind is clear:

'Oh, lor, is this what it's coming to?

Ignoring all the pros and cons of car-related issues, and the feelings they may or may not inspire, the sheer illogicality of 'expressing' anything relevant to those who make policy via the suffering of a poor sod just getting through their day a million floors below beggars belief.

Such an outrage can only backfire on any efforts to question some of these issues, so as all you conspiracy theorists and media vultures circle and feed, have a play with the notion that everything can be manipulated these days to suit the agenda.

I hope we can see calm, dedicated policing being done, allowed to be done and seen to be done in getting the culprit.

So I simply now await the truth no one can know, no matter how good for ratings is the discussion.

And once it is discovered, justice being done.'

ADDENDUM:

Well, I should have know my point would be missed/ignored. And what will this media do with all this feedback?

I tried this, too:

I don't know whether they are motorists who are angry, or just people pushed too far, too fast by too many rules that are not well thought out and seem to have other agnendas than those stated, but I just went to that link above and it looks like it's gone past the 3/4 million mark. Now what?

No Answers.

One thing is for sure, there is very little trust or patience left around.

Chip & Pain

New e-passport may not travel well

Devilish detail, indeed. I watched this on TV this morning.
And I think I have identified the latest fudge word du jour: 'likely'.
Or in this case, 'not likely', as in the non-answer to the question as to
whether these things will last more than two years, what the US
immigration will do by way of a knock-back if it gets bust en route with
the friendly skies (if not destination), and if not who pays for the fix.
Now, when I buy something, it's good for a year. 3-5 on extended
warranty (surely this is not what they're planni... no, couldn't be). This
is because actuaries have assessed the viable lifespan of the product.
So... for this item I am forced to get, why the 8 year discrepancy? And
why the fudge? Trust is in short supply guys. If you really want to be
sure of that index-linked, gold-plated pension, I'd suggest you make
things work, and have real answers ready if not. Otherwise, what are
you for?

But will it fly?

Sharkride

This is indeed an interesting concept, and good luck to them.
It certainly addresses the 'charge time' negative that applies to such vehicle options. And, standing ready for electrical engineers to correct me, there may also be some benefits with the energy loss in charging by not requiring a myriad, not-so-efficient domestic points both for charging and transfer of electrical energy. However....
I wish people would not label electric cars as no-polluting, as the exhaust pipe is just in another place, unless we are talking nuclear, which has its on set of issues.
Plus, on the day the EU fudge on vehicle emissions due to 'lobbying' (what is that? We know where your kids go to school, or what?) by major manufacturers, I'd have to say we'd need to wait a while before they can be made to agree, with the cooperation of governments and utility/station providers, on what battery, where it goes, how it comes in and out in a standard way, how safe, who pays.....
But we can dream:)

It's a con

This http://www.breathingearth.net/ from Dave at Solarventi.

With my recently reminded nudge on attribution I would point out he was sent it, and sent it to me. I don't know when I'll get the time to discover its attribution (other than Dave tends to know about such stuff, and cares about science) and hence accuracy, so view it in this light.

All I can say is, for now, in the great climatic prof and con scheme of things, it's a striking example of a very bad con. And I don't mean that in a good way. See how words can be played with?

Mixed Messages?

In light of the BBC's avowed commitment to the need for solutions to mitigate and/or address climate change, what do you think?:

South African Tourism teams up with BBC World for marketing drive


Meanwhile, on a piece in the same slot about passports, the commentator excused his travelling by air constantly, because 'that's my job'. A notion, I suspect, all business travellers could apply.

Business is business, I guess.

I'll grant you. But not you.

This is one of my broad brushstrokes. Take as such.

At Uni, I was broke. The problem was I had middle-class, middle-income parents. So when it came to largess, their generosity went pretty much on the fees and stuff. Hall bar tabs didn't make the cut. That was what van driving was for.

However, I did notice that there were those who seemed to be first in and last out, 12 pints of subsidised Red Barrel later, without recourse to alternative sources of income. Oddly, they were from two extremes. There were the rich, connected kids who just didn't need to worry about much as it was all sorted. And there were those from lower income families who were on full grants, including 'living expenses'.

I've noticed funding is a bit like that, with the extra quirk that the rich guys also get money they don't need simply by being connected, and the poor guys get helped to find anything that can get thrown at them by rich guys paid a nifty cut from the pot to do so.

Meanwhile, Malcolm in the middle struggles on.

Every little bit helps..

... but it doesn't half make it hard when the big bits keep on hindering.

This morning was cold and crisp. As I left the house with the boys, I glanced back and felt a small surge of pride that the roof slates were still thick with frost, despite the central heating cranking up for the last few hours. All that investment in insulation was paying off.

However...

As I strolled back through town, I could only wonder how much energy was going out of a few stores' open doors. All I think, from chains, whose marketers will have paid a consultant to go to a conference that says this will bring in more customers. I believe all the local shops had, either through self-interest on the thermal or financial front, or simply common sense, closed theirs.

In this era of joined-up government, kids getting fined for putting thew wrong piece of paper in the bin, etc, I wonder what 20% who is doing, and how they think this is keeping it real.

Helping others... do what, exactly?

I'd like to think, mainly because I asked and paid folk who said/say they know and know how, that our site is a good as it gets for being legal and looking after people's rights and protections, etc. We certainly try, not just for derriere-covering self-interest, but simple good marketing reasons. Trust us and you will use and stay with us.

So, although we don't yet, if you opt in you may get told of various things by 'suitably vetted partners' of offers that may be of interest to you'. Click or delete at will. We are a commercial, ad-based medium after all. Free, mind you... don't forget, all for free.

Now I don't wish to become all Charity-bashing here, but I just got this:

**** supporters revealed

****, the international **** project, is offering its list of more than 15,000 supporters for rental through ****. The organisation is a charity dedicated to providing ****. Their programmes have helped rebuild lives. The list comprises people who have made a donation to the charity. They majority are aged 50 and above and have donated via a mailshot.

Now I'm not sure how these things work, and maybe the folk on the list have opted in, but does this mean I could decide that **** supporters are just my kind of folk and buy in? Not quite the way I'd like to think it is.

Charity begins at... where... now?

I am not against charity. I am not even against the obvious fact that to get goodwill (in whatever form) from donor's pocket to beneficiary takes an inevitable amount of wheel greasing and admin.

But I am starting to think things have gone too far and, typically, 'management' (today's buzzword) has decided on the obvious solution: throw money at a campaign. In my various ad and marketing e-wsletters there were several accounts changing hands in the sector just today.

Trouble is, while some brilliantly conceived and executed award-winner will sail over my head, the following will resonate in my mind for much longer: I should never have offered farm aid to Africa Along with my own experiences offering free resources at the time of the tsunami to a shower of yahoos more keen to get to the free pop concert being held 'to help' than actually work on the problem.

I just wonder who will suffer first.. the executive salaries, bonuses and pensions, or the poor they exist to help?

Read it and weep

Further to my post on middle management doing little except exist in paralysis to maintain the status quo, which at best means not going down, career-wise, maybe it's simply how it is at every level: Miliband is charming, clever and ill-informed.

I'd take issue with one thing, and that's the headline. He may be charming, but he's not ill-informed. Just clever enough to know that having a clear view is not what gets you ahead personally. Process, not product. And the media are complicit in this destructive game.

And here I am about to post a letter to him asking him let me know what he can do about something.

I don't know how you can stand for office when you are unable to take a stand on anything.

My note:

Dear Mr. Carr,

Clever enough to be well informed yet opt not to say anything helpful

On a day when we have a report on middle management in paralysis and costing this country dear, I now have clear evidence it extends far further.

I'd thank you, but this is the man to whom I am writing to at least ask for the answers to some questions, and maybe even the chance of coherent, high-ROI action.

God help my kids' futures. They can't live on charm alone.

What we need is more reasearch, obviously, to avoid making any decision on this

Pushed a few buttons: David Brents 'are costing us £220bn'


Just think what such management is preventing us from making.
At my company have another view of these folk, which is not meant to be that complementary: gatekeepers.
If carried out correctly, it is a very necessary process of assessment and filtering, but all too often can mean barriers of self-interest, concern for being wrong and plain desire to maintain comfortable status quo that prevents innovation and competitive development: paralysis.
In my own area, the environment, I’ve lost count of the instances we’ve experienced or have been told of, where innovation has hit brick walls within public and private organizations more interested in process than product.
I’m obviously happy with the report’s finding in support of this, but have to say doubt the solution is in the engagement of more blame-shifting and/or shoring trainers or consultants to further muddy the decision-making process.

Why not Jade Goody?

All that lies behind this is just too depressing to do any more to than share the piece: Is anyone a natural to replace Attenborough?

Troubel is nobody's looking like fixin' it. Quick or otherwise.

One from Dave of Solarventi: Warning on quick fix for climate change

While I'm the first to endorse not doing something that makes things worse - my enviROI principle - what I do concern myself more with is guff like this:

'The commission sets seven stiff tests for policymakers drawing up proposals, including ensuring climate policy is consistent with a healthy economy and does not involve a piecemeal approach. "Knee-jerk regulatory responses to the climate change challenge and announcements of measures in a piecemeal fashion should be avoided. ''New initiatives should be evidence-based, add value to the existing climate programme and make clear which market imperfections they are seeking to resolve."

What I don't see is a clear statement that the most important aspect is these things should save the planet first, and quickly, before we start worrying about anything else, such as healthy... short-term national advantage and associated political, NGO & carbcon-trading careers.

Pick a number.

Sport is usually pretty clear on numbers, at least between 1 & 3.

So the gold for today's 'Ok it's not enviro, but it's how joined up government isn't working in other areas as well, and explains a lot that doesn't happen to save the planet' award is: Olympics funding 'not worked out yet'

What was the pitch we won then? When I did them for ad work they gave us a budget and we said 'for this, you will get this idea, with this great media deal'. Bingo. One second late or a penny over on dleivery and we were toast.

What was to stop us going in with 'every country's athlete will be personally carried in a diamond-studded litter by Ken, Seb, Tessa and Tony, and showered with champagne as they run about - we'll figure out how we'll do it and pay for it later.'

Glad I'm not a London ratepayer. Or play the lottery. Thing is, Junkk.com may be a good cause it's supposed to help.

Nil points.

Driving Monsieur Crazy

Sorry. Rotten picture. Hard to read.

The headline says something like 'Dirty great 4x4. but it's a hybrid. So no one will complain. Eevn if you don't need it.' Or something.


It's inspired by this: EU chief causes stir by choosing hybrid Toyota

Other than 'causing a stir' by getting another sort of dirty great big new car, I really liked this bit: It is the refusal by the Commission to practise what it preaches that is causing most amusement.

A not so funny thing happened on the way between forums

Hilary does Davos.

I may ruffle some liberal feathers here, but this came across to me waaaaay too 'I'm in and can. You're out and can't'.: What I found at the forum

'Not to detract from the many fine things that doubtless get discussed and maybe even achieved by you and your colleagues (and media camp followers) as you move on from Davos and the (WSF), but to me these were just dates in the political calendar, and some very long and boring periods spent online reviewing posts.

Speaking for this part the UK’s less well funded, as I get invited almost daily to conferences about similar issues of great concern, I could do with receiving immediate and unstoppable support as I rally at the registration pages demanding to be let in for free. But it seems endless staff and budget-bloated NGOs are making it a pretty good industry for the conference organisers, airlines and hotels, especially accommodating organizations who can run to co-coordinators of trade programmes. I just wonder who gets to go, who pays, why and the ROI’s being derived.

Frankly there DOES seem to be something like a World Social Forum every day, and they are all having a real impact as vast hordes shuttle between them.

Just... maybe not the one intended?'

I'm all for talking if things get done that offer a return of value, but the massive grant support for these talking shops does not seem worth it if this is what we get.

Shame the example had to be the FoE, but really, how much gets spent where it's needed, and how much on... other stuff?

An Inconvenient Blog

I picked up on this for obvious reasons: GORE - A Nobel warrior

The blurb was suitably 'Uh-huh', but it was only when I got to the posts that I realised the value of reading blogs. Yes there are some extreme positions taken, and entrenched views, but you do get offered some great little facts you never knew.

Take it or leave it

As I still fight with the Times Online's rubbish new system, I have prised one key link out following my Sunday read in the conservatory (there is a certain pleasure in turning a page and not have the thing go slow, crash or whatever).

It was from their IT webwatch section: First steps in saving the planet

Now it does say 'First steps', so I'm hoping there may be more and, unlike the Indy, they may seem some value in mentioning us, as I mention them here. What used to be Doors, their IT section, is well aware that we exist, after all.

As with all lists, it is a collection of valuable information, and a certain amount of commentary you can take or leave if you agree or not.

But one has to wonder, if this odd collection are the first steps, what on earth will be the last?

I really must return soon to 'plug' us under a nom de plume, as it looks like the one promising thing this new system allows is per topic comment. Not that anyone there actually reads 'em. But we may yet score a mention.

ADD:

At last I got one in:

'Thank you for some more than worthy and interesting websites to check out.

However, if Katherine Hammnett is at the forefront of the fight (First steps in saving the planet) I rather fear for what is lower on the list.'

A right.. wrong 4th estate of affairs

I've often wondered about journalistic qualifications. What exactly do they teach you for a few years, and then demand to get a professional qualification and membership of some guild or club or whatever? The right way to hold a notepad when asking how a bereaved parent felt when told of their kid's demise?

It seems I should know, because Junkk and, as its principal scribe, me are heading more and more from am to pro-am status as journos.

And in some masochistic manner, the more I do, the more I am getting to truly loathe pretty much all about it as a profession and its 'professional' protagonists and their employers. With very few exceptions.

And reading this it is small wonder: A law unto themselves

What is still necessary, but has passed as a noble calling, has pretty much ceased to have any moral authority or value anymore.

No one trusts what they see, hear or read any more, so why would anyone bother to try and ensure what gets fed to the media is in any way accurate if it is not convenient to be so? Allegedly.

Priority Systems

Ok, you can ask why I was looking, and why I wrote, but this is depressing:

I Hate Macs

I made a point in there about priorities with the world going down the toilet (how many reply to an eco-post vs. this?), but no one could be bothered.

When in doo-doo, does it matter that others are deeper?

Our site is held together by spit and sawdust by today's standards. And it cost a fortune 3 years ago to get it to such a fine state. So I know how it felt to be the record producer offering us a deal on his (5 years' before) state of the art £1/2M suite when I looked around and said 'we can do all this on our £3k Mac and some plug-ins'.

Speaking of Macs and websites, do I tear my hair out or smile smugly that the Times has relaunched its site and I can't even surf it much less access or blog post any more.

This is a problem as it is one of the majors I use to check out stuff.

Maybe they want me to buy the paper again?

Guardian
Mad - Still theirs did only cost £10 million!!!
Times -



"New and improved, your lime-green on-screen Times"

New. Yes. Lime... yes.
Improved.... getting there.


I was one who rather unfairly (it is free entertainment after all) rushed to critique, having spent a very bad day at launch trying to do anything at all, let alone at snail's pace.

With fingers crossed it is now kicking in.

I'm getting used to finding stuff in different places, and liking finding new bits. This feedback opportunity is one.

Wish I'd had £10M to develop my site.

RE:view a review

There is something I wrote to, though it is nearly impossible to access and I doubt my post made it:

I like AA Gill's writing. It's funny and usually skewers just what needs skewering. He's also rather handsome in a tall dark and well-decked sort of way. So you'd think he'd be on screen more. Interestingly, whenever I've seen him he comes across as a tongue-tied dork, so I think he's prowling the most fruitful territory for his talents.

Which is how I stumbled across this, and had to reply: AA Gill


Hands off Ray. As your mate JC has pointed out, he’s not a real ‘hero-‘hero, but he’s the non-tabloid equivalent if we can ever think of an appropriate word. I’ve told my missus that my one true dream is to spend a year with him (not, perhaps the best way of putting it to my spouse, on reflection), mooching about the world learning what to do after the revolution has come. That’s when nature revolts, by the by, which I’ve been told in all the papers for one day last week (BB got a bit more coverage as I recall) is in ten years’ time. The moment I knew he was ‘the one’ was when your paper asked him to review a new 4x4, and he didn’t like it because you could no longer replace damaged wheel hubs with baked bean tins. That’s the kind of pragmatic planet-saving mixed message I can go with (JC is cool with the whole end of days scenario in his car review, though, so that’s OK)

As to Top Gear, all I can say is they have a very big shed. And a wadge of Wonga I can only envy. My sons and I stood transfixed in Woolies this weekend as Billy Bob Colletrouge reduced a brand new Prius to the world’s biggest colander with the content’s of his Hummer’s Glock box. And I tell them off for shooting their Action Men with BB guns as it may break them and be a waste.

Which brings me, in sequence, to Holiday Watchdog. Didn’t see it, but in light of the whole 10 years to Armageddon thing, from your review I can only hope that George M might also have popped in something about those socially inept tribespersons possibly getting to the point of having better things to worry about than uninvited visitors, as a consequence of film crews, eoc-elites en route to a climate conference in Bali and then finally tourists lobbing up by air to see them suffer. Mind you, as they could probably teach Ray a thing or two, maybe they will be the ones visiting what’s left of us in a few decades.

Note the picture. Even Junkk.com gets more readers!

D2AID2AIS

Not about the environment, but a further example of a trend to very mixed messages, defended with complete and utter nonsense, most likely played up and promptly forgotten by the media:

This Government won't let you take action against criminals

I will watch tonight to see if this is as described.
Assuming it is...
This man still has a job?
This government is still in office?
This will stay in the media... and public... consciousness for how many days?

Meanwhile, I await further news on the kid who has been threatened with fines for not putting the right recycling material in the box while the minister who did the same seemed to be allowed to be confused.

BBC

You are who you eat

Meet Daisy the cow – global climate’s enemy number one.

"To the person who gets this far to read this (if it is not moderated)... good Sunday morning! It's glorious here in Ross. Let's enjoy such weather while we can.

The ICCP report came out 2 days ago. I have just conducted an interesting (well, to me), analysis of coverage since:

http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/02/10-years-and-human-race-is-screwed-but.html

On the day in question, Newsnight devoted itself to the issue. There was Ms. Watts' (great name, all things considered) slot, with Mr. Milliband 'talking' about the need for 'action'. No change there, then.

And then, to round up on the day we are told we are 10 years from catastrophe, we have a slot on... cow farts (tee -hee). And the conclusion is, well, 'it's not really for me so back to the burgers.'

What next? 'Actually those low energy bulbs are expensive, don't last as long and are dimmer, so bring back the 100W pearlies!!' (Justin - Where did you get the low-energy LED halogen-effect spotlights in your kitchen, by the by?).

Anyway as we're on meat, and turkey (looks like Dan was spared a fate worse than sneezing to death) is off the menu (if not all the front pages) for a while I guess, let's get onto what apparently really matters at this juncture in our planet's survival.

A lot of folk seem to think man is at odds with nature, in the same way as a lion defending his territory to the death is ok, but my owning property 'is theft'.

Well, without getting too theological, we kinda stemmed from the same design-shop, and it's looking like we're pretty flawed.

We've done what (forgive the pun) comes naturally for a while now, and there's quite a lot of us. No more space to stand on and grow stuff, but we're still populating away, whilst merrily turning the growing bits into sources of fuel for our dear leader to gad about on the lecture circuit.

Speaking of what's not practical, Justin's reversion is not so surprising, because another aspect to the design flaw is that 'we' (even those who don't by choice) are omnivores. Not a mandatory by diet, but certainly a powerful force by programming (as is making things, trading them, boldly going... etc).

Trouble is, in addition to being told by 2500 of the world's finest (and the media, if only until yesterday), that we're screwed in 10 years if we go on as we are, I'm not seeing any great sense of cutting back on the LCD purchases, Vista upgrades, trips to study the impact of GW on whales (what used to be called a 'holiday' for the public, or a 'jolly' for the green elite).. or the filet mignon.

Which may be a bit of a problem soon, as the guys with the cows fight it out for space with the guys growing biofuels. I'm guessing bread will be history by then.

So, to this carnivore at least, as we're not doing anything yet about population, and the lobbyist power plus short-term political survival instincts (at least until the gold-plated, index-linked retirement is over) has meant that the commercial/governmental fudge on all things manufacturing and travel will continue, we better sort those dastardly bovines out right now. At least to buy some more time to fudge a bit longer.

As an ex-scientist, the numbers seem clear. If we are talking about nutritional ROI on our available land, we should all go veggie (I'm never to clear on the 'arian/egan' thing - one seems doable, the other a good way to fit into those size 0's) asap. It's just what is eventually all that will be sustainable. And even then it is just another delaying measure if other issues are not addressed. Though Avian flu may end up as a nifty, natural, Malthusian correction. Temporarily.

But as we'll doubtless conquer that (assuming it hasn't been created to sort out a few of the other problems by guys like Hugo Drax - have fun googling that. If it's true can I have the antivirus for sussing it out, please?), I have only two words for you, and as a guy who just turned 50 my hand shakes as I write them: Soylent Green."

10 years and the human race is screwed. But first, Kylie has been dumped!

OK. Here's Saturday (that I could track in terms of influential major media information and commentary):

BBC - How Green is my Auntie?
Times - New fears on climate raise heat on leaders
Times - Damning report seeks to end debate over global warming
Times - Bush takes his place on the bandwagon
BBC Newsnight (which seems to have closed already as they didn't add my comment) - How green should we be?
Telegraph - Scientists: Only man can stop climate disaster
Telegraph - The changing face of the planet
Guardian (nice to see a power co. will stick a tree in for you) - Worse than we thought
Guardian CiF - A call to arms on climate change
Guardian CiF - An unforgivable truth
Indy - Global warming: the final warning
BBC - Miliband in climate 'action' call
BBC - Humans blamed for climate change

BBC Newsnight - See if they add my comment

And here's today:

Telegraph (wonder if they'll post my comment)- Carbon omissions
Telegraph - IPCC puts it bluntly on global warming
Telegraph - The next few years are critical in the fight for the climate
Times - The greening of business
Indy (this is so sweet) - Green: They are. Are you?
Indy - Chirac leads calls for new UN body to save the environment
Indy (always worth repeating, so make that a final, final..) - Global warming: the final warning
Observer - We cannot let the Kyoto debacle happen again

No tabloids that I can see. I doubt Richard and Judy got too excited (esp. with Kylie 'n all). BBC Breakfast has moved on. Andrew Marr didn't mention it in his preamble earlier (though I have yet to watch). It certainly has moved off the front pages.

Politically, it seems saving personal skins (more immediately, missing the point that all skins could be at risk pretty soon) may be higher on most agendas, though it looks like one Minister was called upon to say something. Which he did. I believe the 'word' is 'action'. Moving quickly on...

Oh, and case you're really worried, here's Kylie.

Didn't take the few who did pay attention long to lose interest, did it?

I think I'll just get back to Junkk.com duties now.

However, looking at Supermarkets discover shoppers hate excess packaging as waste campaign gathers force whilst I still can't get a peep out of said supermarkets, relevant government bodies or much support from the media for our free, non taxpayer-funded, reuse website still rankles.

But first, the (more ratings driven?) news

We cannot let the Kyoto debacle happen again

Well... golly.

Shame it doesn't seem to warrant the same front page attention as, say, bird flu, which the nice virologist on Breakfast TV says is 'nothing to worry about' (though a global pandemic would be a fairly effective Malthusian correction by Mother Nature to what's probably the biggest issue facing us).

Errors of...?

Carbon omissions

'Well... golly.

"...the situation we face is potentially extremely serious" That would be serious planet-wide.

Yet, speaking of omissions, it doesn't seem to warrant the same front page attention as, say, bird flu, which the nice virologist on Breakfast TV says is 'nothing to worry about' (though a global pandemic would be a fairly effective Malthusian correction by Mother Nature to what's probably the biggest issue facing us).'

Navel Re:view

And so it rumbles on: How green should we be?

"I always have trouble with these blogs because there are the questions asked in the headline. Then those asked in the body. And then those answered and asked in post replies that can be arriving in a moderated scenario out of sequence, if at all (system permitting)

So on the day of the ICCP report, in answer to the headline at the top, I’d say ‘as green as you can be, realistically!’.

That last word immediately sets up a whole can of worms. What is realistically? You are a public broadcaster. How do you best serve the public. With information and facts? But whose? Offer both sides and if you err on a view then you can be accused of bias.

And then there is the sheer volume of fact AND opinion, multiplied by blogs. I have almost given up trying to cope with all just on the Newsnight one alone about this issue, much less the BBC and then on to the major media. My blog (accessed via my site above) has tried to list all the competing majors, with more to be added.

And it can all get sidelined by trivia.. if with
some validity. Jeremy makes a pretty gutsy stand, with fair points, and then we have by way of response that he may have not switched his monitor off, so who’s he to talk? Helpful?

I’d agree with the poster who is a tad surprised that you don’t feel its your job to save the planet you are standing on.

Just make sure that if you do it, you do it for the right reasons and in the right ways..

That’s an even bigger can of worms I’m debating with some sincere, smart cookies on my site now.

I hope I’ve offered enough to fulfill your needs here for now."

So little rare. So little well done.

Another reply to another featured link: Science forward, Bush backward

"I can comment little on the ICCP report, etc

Maybe tomorrow we'll avert it. Today we'll get parents heated up about kids getting heated up about heating up. If there is more debate tomorrow I shall return perhaps better informed but I doubt with some forming views much altered about the issue, and how the various protagonists (gov, med, interest/activist groups and biz) have, are and will treat it. Even in blogs. Who knows what lobbyist, PR or press officer lurks behind a "Clarkson for PM' or 'Green of Bristol moniker'.

...etc.

At least the trains will run on time. If there are any.

One climate post was this: What the world needs now is a green fascist

I had to write:

"Dear Mr. Carr,

I have been meaning to write before, most recently on a good commentary you passed on joined up government, and the media’s role in reporting it – The rising tide of generalisation.

This one has at last moved me to get finger to keyboard in good order.

I do hope what you meant was a 'good authoritarian'. While he skirted pretty close, having lived in Singapore for several years Lee Kwan Yew 'got things done' under that mantle, and got away with few applying the fascist accusation either internally of externally. Indeed the PAP seems to sail along, fairly democratically, under his watchful eye still.

Which is more than I sense happening here (as in this country): http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/02/this-is-very-likely-one-of-more.html

As you arch an eyebrow at Ms. May's suggestion, so I have, do and will ask how much will be consumed (if not wasted) throwing good money into the globally warming inferno, and to what effect.

I am currently writing to Mr. Miliband and his many other co-green ministers to ask why one of his vastly funded enviro-quangos a) never helped me when it could and should, and b) now seems to be competing with me, using my business plan and taking 'sponsorship' (ie: ad money) to do so, when they originally said they couldn't help me because I was commercial (whilst being free to all, at the same time as funding Tesco and Heinz, when the last time I looked a tin of beans wasn't).

This is one social entrepreneur who is fearing for his sanity, along with his kids' and their kids' chances."

This is very likely one of the more important posts you can read here...

..to date.

For a start, I am going to say little, because not only have I not read the ICC report yet (if ever, at least in its entirety), I have not thoroughly read all these reviews. So maybe an even more important post is yet to come.

For now... enjoy (or not, as the case may be - I'm certainly not looking forward to all I have to wade through this weekend):





BBC - Humans blamed for climate change
Guardian CiF - Science forward, Bush backward
Guardian - Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study
Indy - What the World needs now is a green fascist
Indy - Alan Johnson: Children must think differently
Indy - Ten years left to avert catastrophe
Indy - All pupils to be given lessons in climate change
Reuters - U.N. panel says global warming man-made
New Scientist - Blame for global warming placed firmly on humankind
DEFRA - Debate on climate change science is over - international political agreement now urgently needed/Climate change film distributed to all secondary schools
Telegraph - Man's guilt for global warming clear

I have chosen as the visual today's Indy cover (I would have liked to have used for its awesome irony the pop-up ad I got of a Land Rover on top the world, but didn't hit page capture before it disappeared). I do so because I note no other has taken this as the lead, and indeed nor has the Indy, which is odd when we have a headline on offer that reads Ten years left to avert catastrophe

Maybe tomorrow we'll avert it. Today we'll get parents heated up about kids getting heated up about heating up.

I have to say that if I was a minister of indeed sub-editor, as a parent as well I'd be more inclined to go the route of 'We must help kids get informed and inspired in the best ways to engage with the challenges of CC/GW'. As it reads what I see smacks of nanny and big brother or, god forbid, another total waste of funds on a 'campaign' by target-hitters whose only knowledge of pushing kids' buttons is by fining 12 year olds for putting the wrong type of paper in the bin.

I'd go for fun, education and re:ward, with such as Junkk.com. What are the chances of that? Or there is support from well-known kids' reads such as broadsheets like the Indy, who still can't bring themselves to mention us (much less get in touch in reply to our outreach) in their campaign on packaging.

You get the picture and [fill in dis-organisational gov, media and biz entities here] ... you deserve.

Bon. Mais.. cinq minutes!

I wrote about public building illumination recently, so this caught my eye:

Eiffel Tower turns light off to signal climate risk

I know there's safety and all, but what is the symbolic message here? And is there a better one? Off during the week? Hour earlier? On hour later? Low energy bulbs? Make it a thing to come to see once a year?

Son mais pas d'illumiere.

Charity begins, at 17.5% of spend

At least it used to when I ran my agency, unless you did a deal and waived the media commission on top of doing the creative and production for free (which we did, but usually on the understanding we could really go for it with the concept).

Save the Children overhauls marketing

This is a story in a specialist publication about a specialised industry, but the numbers and the players (and numbers of players) makes me queasy at what actually may be going on here.

I know it should be as simple as getting money from a donor to a worthy recipient, but no longer can be. And I know 'marketing' is a legitimate part of making that match. But... how many people are feeding off the money before it even arrives?

Mad - On the plus side (not sure about the media)

Let the (blame) games begin!

I don't play much sport. I watch even less. Especially now that the whole thing has become a business on one side and I can appreciate the abilities of most sportsperson no more than the money spent on training and success at finding new, legal 'aids'.

However, I am now a (poor, in every sense) student of cause funding, and I do not like what I read here: Good causes miss out as Olympics soaks up half a billion in Lotto funds

As I bang on about specious ROIs being used, even trumpeted in the environmental world, I should not be surprised that the small matter of setting a budget and sticking to it seems to have been neglected.

A lot of Pols these days (have to) start of their interviews with 'I'm not in the business of blaming anyone'. Well, I'm afraid I think we need to get back to this a lot more. Every inefficient, egotistical and especially corrupt individual who is engaged in a project and cocks up, especially because of self-interest, should be named, shamed, fired and not compensated.

Can we now move on? Clearly.

This Man's guilt for global warming clear seems pretty, er, clear.

Though I would wish that headlines and facts tallied more closely, to avoid Achilles Heels that others can exploit:

Scientists are now overwhelmingly confident...

The exact phrasing of the report... was still being negotiated by scientists.

The best estimate is that...

This is expected to mean...

If it is as alarming as experts predicted...

'Scientists' or 'experts' are pretty catch-all terms, and I think need to be put in context much more clearly and up-front to establish credibility.

And those disclaimer terms seem to be the work of a person trying to steal a march. Wait until you know, and then state it loud... and clear

Finally, without sounding like a denier, I am not sure if Man's guilt for causing GW in totality is proven, but there seems a clear case for us making it lots worse and hence needing to do something about making it better. Again, I hope creating an opening for such semantics will not in turn lead to more pointless debate.

Some get more airtime than others...

...which, in a media-driven age, means they end up more equal.

I had to pitch in to this: No Special Treatment

'This seems a game with no winners, except maybe those who create conflict and those who feed on it.

I think all parties playing it, especially some press, needs to assess the creation, acceptance and status accorded 'community leaders'.

Are they elected? If not, who says they speak for anyone other than themselves and their own agendas? Interviews with these guys (and gals) seem at best lazy and at worst ratings-driven (to extremes) reporting. And it’s frustrating to be fed a politician or ‘leader’ claiming to speak for the majority, when the only credible evidence of any frequent contact they do have is with a news channel researcher’s speed dial.

I watched one such 'representative' yesterday given national news coverage to demand, it seemed, that he be involved in the police investigative process from the outset.

If granted, can I please sit in on meetings where speed cameras get sited in my area?'

If only because it happens so often in the environmental debate. 'The people of the UK want..' gets bandied about by both sides, when I suspect (how can I do any more without asking 60M people?) most wish they'd all shut up and go away and leave it to those who are trying to do something to just get on and help make things better.

When blogging goes bad

Blogs can be great. But the system can frustrate both poster and readers, as highlighted by this from a Newsnight post I took part in (and couldn't resist answering):

Ref: vikingar

Or... it might be the system is not working too well.

Calm down, dear, it's only a cock-up.

Usually after posting you get an immediate return to the board with an acknowledgement. These days 2 out 3 I have tried (I used to and still do make the same mistake) either result in half an hour of the spinning pizza of death (I have a Mac - maybe the cause?) and/or eventually a failure sign.

So you retry later. Well, YOU don't, but some of us do because we don't know if it has been received or not. It has and is happening all over the board.

That said...

As it is moderated one wonders why the moderator can't just lop out the duplicates?

And I agree that of all major media I appreciate most the immediacy, reassurance and openness of the Guardian system. Though I have seen a few folk complain they have been removed with no good reason (must take something pretty egregious). The Telegraph is very good - or bad, depending on your view - at moderating out stuff it doesn't fancy, which in a free press is editing that can rather make one doubt their commitment to balanced debate. Despite the BBC’s rather unique status this one is pretty good, but again I have seen folk complain they are not being heard and can only wonder why. Maybe that's why Duncan editted down to repost later?

ps: I'm a MORON - that's Middle Of the Road, Outside Nomenclature – and proud of it. I find political labels (or any mild pejorative, such as 'denier' or 'mentalist' in the enviro debate) to be often inaccurate and lead to further name-calling. A view is a view and you can span the political spectrum without slavishly adhering to one doctrine.

We're sincerely flattered #2

Dave of Solarventi has nagged, and when he nags I have to move quicksmart.
So...

"This one is a definite must ... …. for inclusion on www.junkk.com – crisp bags as CD covers!"

He is, of course, right. It's nifty.

And I have suggested he 'homage' it on our Suggest page.

And readers are welcome to peruse our Ideas pages for something to send in, as nothing with Junkk's or my name on it will get a showing.

For instance, in a similar vein that I use the liner from cereal packets as lunch bags for the boys, often sealing them with one of those pocket heater gizmos.

Time to don my Batman outfit

First Tesco Tel; now this. Who do I have to nobble to get us noticed?

Today in the mail was this book. It's a nice little selection of eco-websites in the UK, and while we know almost all of them (and a few more besides) it's a 'sure, why not?'.

Thing is, we're not in it. Not under the Re's or even packaging. And at last I am seeing how it can be hard as a journalist to remain truly objective. Rest assured, I must be:)

The next slot in the newsletter is taken, but I will review it, as that is what I presume it was sent to us for (unless it was a very expensive way to rub our noses in it). And I will also note that its publishers are Eden Project, who we drove to visit a few years ago to see how we could help each other. Sadly, they (or at least their PR folk) were too busy saving the planet to want to deal any further with us, having dragged us to Cornwall to see them.

It can all... test... you at times.

OK, tell me how to get past his genius gatekeepers

Terry Leahy: Don't blame us: we can't get rid of all packaging

"As we work to reduce our environmental impact on every level, we will continue to look for ways to cut excess packaging and offer our customers rational choices."

I'd say we are one. I've been trying for 3 years. And M&S. And Boots. And Morrisons...

I've just written to the Indy's Editor:

Dear Sir,

"As we work to reduce our environmental impact on every level, we will continue to look for ways to cut excess packaging and offer our customers rational choices."

I'd say we are one. I've been trying for 3 years to get through. And M&S. And Boots. And Morrisons...

Can you help us get past the pen-pushing, bean-counting, career and hence profit-obsessed minions inbetween initiatives like ours and Sirs Terry and Michael, etc and their new-found green commitments. Or indeed Ministers like Miliband, Bradshaw, etc, as they keep churning out more 3rd sector, we must engage with social entrepreneur guff?

Our site is free. It gets good editorial. The public likes it. It makes the environment fun. And it needn't cost anyone (biz, gov or tax/ratepayer) a penny. In fact, by finding ways to reuse packs and packaging it may even add to the marketing, PR and CSR stories of these businesses in a very non-greenwash manner.

When are people going to stop talking long enough to listen to others outside their elite circles who may have complementary solutions on offer.

If you can help I'd be grateful.

BBC - Ask Tel

Enough already.

I've had to write to Newswatch.

"Though there is an objective news aspect, I think we can agree that BBC Breakfast also serves a few agendas, some worthy and some self serving, but certainly including a social one.

On the day Jeremy Paxman publishes a critique of 'mixed messages' in the Times, I wonder how the BBC reconciles placing a slot advocating, indeed selling, space tourism (RyanTrek?) next to one with a celeb selling the latest planet saving effort.

While a why not/better than nothing, this seemed more of an ad for Toyota's Prius, inaccurately stated as the solution to all car-related eco-issues (it is not). And the fact that he was gushing next to Mr. Blair, whose record on eco-cosistency is chequered at best was laughable."

Are you Hello! or a informative news source with decent analysis?"

OH. MY. GOD!

I just watched the piece on BBC Breakfast TV with the bouffant and the blonde gushing over the latest Celeb, Josh Hartnett, who with many other celebs met Mr. Blair to discuss green issues.

Plus side. There is another website to 'make a difference': globalsomething (oddly the URL not mentioned).

Down side. What was mentioned, twice, was that you should buy a Toyota Prius to save the planet. I don't think so.

I doubt they'll publish this either: "One appreciates Josh's sincerity, but Mr. Blair as a role model? And rather than being an complete ad for Toyota Prius (twice), it may be worth pointing out that it may not be the best car to save the planet in certain non-urban circumstances."

ADDENDUM:

I have added several of these posts to Newsnight's blog. Annoyingly they have taken them selectively and /or out of sequence. Here's my latest.

After the piece selling a contest for space tourism, we now have on TV this morning Hollywood star Josh Hartnett, who with many other celebs met Mr. Blair to discuss green issues... as above.

In addition to my comment on the irony of these two items being back-to-back, on top of Jeremy's comments in the Times today, I doubt they'll publish this either: "One appreciates Josh's sincerity.. as above"

There's doing. There's seen to be doing. And there's simply doing what's right and works.

It would be good if the major media could help us decide on the basis of objective information and not ratings-driven hype.

BBC - Josh goes globally cool
Express - Concert

Oh, the irony..

No sooner do I note the piece in the last blog, inspired by a piece in the Times, look what I came across a bit further on...

Praise for bubblewrap could get you into space

I'll pass for now the issue of consistency on the Times' part (though they will argue they are only here to pass on the news), but.... bubblewrap!!! There are a lot of other much better ways to pack things that don't use plastic, guys!

Trouble in paradise?

I was once a star copywriter at an agency, responsible for the vast majority of the won pitches and work that went through. So when I felt things were not being run as well as they could, I felt secure in sharing my wisdom. Which is how I ended up founding my own agency. No one is indispensable.

Which is why I must envy someone who obviously is: You're wasteful hypocrites on being green, Paxman accuses BBC bosses

Maybe he has read my blog on some of the inconsistencies we have, are and doubtless will be seeing between what they say and what they do.

Like the Breakfast TV programme I currently watch as I write. Just saw a piece about a contest to become a space tourist (I don't think NASA has quite yet got the bio-fuel thing cracked yet). Ironically (to me at least, though I doubt they saw it themselves), this was followed immediately by a promo for a piece about a major Hollywood star who is going green, billed as 'saving the planet'.

I doubt they'll publish my comment: "I take it you have not read, taken on board (excuse the pun) or agree with, one of your colleague's views on the BBC's consistency of message as regards climate change and ways to mitigate it"

I merely observe, whilst being relieved I do not take it upon myself to impose:

From the Newsnight blog (and Indy):

"Imagine my surprise this morning opening my copy of The Times to read that my esteemed colleague Jeremy Paxman has offered a devastating critique of the BBC's failures to be Green enough, failures on recycling, failures to cut power consumption, failures to help save the planet.

Great stuff, I thought. Then imagine my surprise because in the BBC office Jeremy and I share with Kirsty and Emily, the computer and monitor (which we also share) were left switched on all night. The culprit? Hmmm. Who could it possibly be wasting all that electricity? Well, the last log-in that I could discover was "Paxmanj." Any ideas? "

Couldn't resist:

Though Mr. Esler refers it in the blog intro this afternoon, I'm guessing guessing Mr. Paxman wrote it yesterday, and this seems the only place to offer an opinion, if not answer, to his question:

The biter bit? Next thing we'll be hearing people are dropping folk in it for fines by leaving stuff with their names on in bins. Imagine if the nanny state figured that was enough to convict?

As a slight attempt to help JP in mitigation should he be 'guilty', there is the notion that some hi-tec PCs need continual updates. Another is that the hardware decay from shutting down and rebooting is actually worse eco-wise than spinning. I'm still deciding, but err on monitor and printer off, CPU on standby... for now.

It's all about being green. Not always black and white.

Still, it again proves a point I often try to make. One knocks, and the comeback is often a bigger 'two wrongs make a good knock' back. Doesn't help the planet much, though, does it?

BBC - How green is my Auntie?