A rich seam as I return to the Newsnight blog. Usually I graze only at the Ethical Man section. But this about democratic citizen journalism (UGC), caught my eye, and prompted a thought: Go on, make TV history
"I have to share some of the same concerns that first poster Themos Tsikas has. Where there is any form of shortlist, agendas come into play, making both the process and the result immediately open to... 'concerns'. Even with no editing, what stays in and what is kept out shapes the story. Look at the fun on the Ethical Man blog about posts that are, are not, are, so there... 'Missing in Moderation'... It's a hoot."
Your comment has been received and held for approval by the blog owner. There may be a delay before publication - click here for more information.
Having seen stuff of mine chosen and not chosen, or if chosen changed to suit the editorial agenda, the notion of a free press is rather quaint. I just admire those who have a stance, admit it, and when they publish they publish it all. Or nothing.
At least they can't get rid of this... yet.
Junkk.com promotes fun, reward-based e-practices, sharing oodles of info in objective, balanced ways. But we do have personal opinions, too! Hence this slightly ‘off of site, top of mind' blog by Junkk Male Peter. Hopefully still more ‘concerned mates’ than 'do this... or else' nannies, with critiques seen as constructive or of a more eyebrow-twitching ‘Oh, really?!' variety. Little that’s green can be viewed only in black and white.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
In with a chance?
I'm getting moderated out a lot these days, so let's see if this one to Newsnight - The ethics of radiator valves - makes it through.
'The plumbing, ethical, financial and environmental bits are pretty much covered. Despite the £300, I’d say go for it.
I needed to upgrade my system a while ago, so bolted on the rad valves to the boiler upgrade, as a lot of the costs were in the flushing of the system anyway, and the guys were there. Saves a trip cost. More of a dilemma when it’s just for the valves.
Maybe combine with the annual service? Get in quick before winter comes (if it does). And make sure they put things on the right way! 25% of ours are on backwards and hammer if they are not full on or off.
Now I’m going on to a real concern about another section raised in the piece, thanks to what looks like one of our Dear (as in ‘fine if you don’t; you pay not to get fined so do) Leaders’ many daily initiatives.
" The big one was filling the cavity in my walls... The only reason I haven't already... is I didn' t have a cavity to fill . "
How’s this work if one doesn’t live in a brand new SE semi, that’s doing it’s bit for global warming by the DPM concreting over all that’s left of what’s green to build it and keep all those new young voters happy and out of the red (or in it, votes wise)?
Just popped on, is it? No can change, no arguments? Ker-ching! I live in an existing house, that takes no more emissions to make. And I’m making it as eco as I can. Partly for the planet; partly for my wallet – I have just popped in a solar dehumidifier for my cellar - http://www.junkk.com/index.asp?slevel=0z0z893&parent_id=893 - which I’m road-testing on these bases for our next newsletter, and so far it’s looking good.
Like Justin, I don’t have a cavity to fill, but can think of a few some can stick it in if this is just another ring-fenced, public pension pot revenue generator at my expense in the name of green.'
'The plumbing, ethical, financial and environmental bits are pretty much covered. Despite the £300, I’d say go for it.
I needed to upgrade my system a while ago, so bolted on the rad valves to the boiler upgrade, as a lot of the costs were in the flushing of the system anyway, and the guys were there. Saves a trip cost. More of a dilemma when it’s just for the valves.
Maybe combine with the annual service? Get in quick before winter comes (if it does). And make sure they put things on the right way! 25% of ours are on backwards and hammer if they are not full on or off.
Now I’m going on to a real concern about another section raised in the piece, thanks to what looks like one of our Dear (as in ‘fine if you don’t; you pay not to get fined so do) Leaders’ many daily initiatives.
" The big one was filling the cavity in my walls... The only reason I haven't already... is I didn' t have a cavity to fill . "
How’s this work if one doesn’t live in a brand new SE semi, that’s doing it’s bit for global warming by the DPM concreting over all that’s left of what’s green to build it and keep all those new young voters happy and out of the red (or in it, votes wise)?
Just popped on, is it? No can change, no arguments? Ker-ching! I live in an existing house, that takes no more emissions to make. And I’m making it as eco as I can. Partly for the planet; partly for my wallet – I have just popped in a solar dehumidifier for my cellar - http://www.junkk.com/index.asp?slevel=0z0z893&parent_id=893 - which I’m road-testing on these bases for our next newsletter, and so far it’s looking good.
Like Justin, I don’t have a cavity to fill, but can think of a few some can stick it in if this is just another ring-fenced, public pension pot revenue generator at my expense in the name of green.'
Dr. Junkk Writes...
... for Newsnight: Foraging with care
"A late blooming comment, as it were. Still relevant to the last post (da, da..... da, tat tat tat-tat, dee tat, tat, tat-tat)
While I'm all for going au naturel locally, if it's out of your allotment (and frankly, even if it is) do be very, very careful on the hygiene aspects. At the very least make sure you get it home and wash it within an inch of losing all nutritional value.
Having just nursed a wife through two weeks of food poisoning (no clue how, the rest of us were fine), I don't think our finances, the health service or the environment were served too well during this period."
"A late blooming comment, as it were. Still relevant to the last post (da, da..... da, tat tat tat-tat, dee tat, tat, tat-tat)
While I'm all for going au naturel locally, if it's out of your allotment (and frankly, even if it is) do be very, very careful on the hygiene aspects. At the very least make sure you get it home and wash it within an inch of losing all nutritional value.
Having just nursed a wife through two weeks of food poisoning (no clue how, the rest of us were fine), I don't think our finances, the health service or the environment were served too well during this period."
If you are what you eat, this is a worry.
TOP TEN TRENDS FOR 2007
Mintel has identified what will be hitting supermarket shelves in 2007.
They asked if we thought these trends important. Silly boys and girls:
"Oh yes, they are important. Good to see this "..With a love of nature comes a deeper commitment to ethical products.." and this "..Refillable packaging has a strong opportunity to make its mark as consumers are increasingly looking for more ways to save natural resources". Though I'm not sure how they equate to this "..exotic fruits such as açaà and cupuaçu [wow, those babies did for my Spellchecker!) continuing their rise to fame..", food miles wise. But as my fellow Geordie-centric poster points out, I'm still wondering when the whole issue moves from Prius (as a 2nd car) Person to Mondeo Man (R-Reg. Can't afford an LPG convert)."
Mintel has identified what will be hitting supermarket shelves in 2007.
They asked if we thought these trends important. Silly boys and girls:
"Oh yes, they are important. Good to see this "..With a love of nature comes a deeper commitment to ethical products.." and this "..Refillable packaging has a strong opportunity to make its mark as consumers are increasingly looking for more ways to save natural resources". Though I'm not sure how they equate to this "..exotic fruits such as açaà and cupuaçu [wow, those babies did for my Spellchecker!) continuing their rise to fame..", food miles wise. But as my fellow Geordie-centric poster points out, I'm still wondering when the whole issue moves from Prius (as a 2nd car) Person to Mondeo Man (R-Reg. Can't afford an LPG convert)."
No Green Port Left
Sorry, I came over all nautical. It's just that I kind of associate Green with Left, and that's how... oh forget it.
The point is, I was floored just now by this: Green my ride
A non rant, average person-friendly, pragmatic... useful article in the Grauniad Love the pop-up for 2 business class seast to Dubai, guys. I can occupy twice the space to go look at them make the oil we're burning:)
Long my they do more.
Plus I feel oodles better about my Volvo. I could... probably... afford to convert to LPG. But I don't trust Gordo, and so far the makers say I can't, while the converters say I can.
The point is, I was floored just now by this: Green my ride
A non rant, average person-friendly, pragmatic... useful article in the Grauniad Love the pop-up for 2 business class seast to Dubai, guys. I can occupy twice the space to go look at them make the oil we're burning:)
Long my they do more.
Plus I feel oodles better about my Volvo. I could... probably... afford to convert to LPG. But I don't trust Gordo, and so far the makers say I can't, while the converters say I can.
So little rare. Or well done.
I hope I don't get in trouble for the whole Nazi allusion thing (what with Ken having a spot 'o bother with this recently), but I'm still banging away. I don't know why. One recent one I devoted a while to ended up with a few hundred replies. I doubt the author read them all.
Still, this does get bigger than the environment: Make them all pay £25 to drive in London
First they came for the 4x4s, and I did not speak (They are a bit much, if not really necessary; a bit like drinking six pints. Still, it's a free country).
Then they came for the 'bigger' cars, and I managed an eyebrow raise (they are what some of us, not on ex's, who pay for our own trips, use to transport a bit more than our single selves to work in. Or simply can be a lot cheaper on a cost/per mile/opportunity cost basis - you'll find that when it's a family outing).
And then they came for my pint (it takes a lot of water to make one), and as it actually impinged on me getting bladdered each night I was miffed, though by then it was too late.
But hey ho, at least I can now still enjoy a healthy glass of designer mineral water in my favourite H20 bar.. er..
As this is a national newspaper, I would estimate that not everyone lives and/or works in (as in 'in') London. I'm sure many do, though perhaps not within striking range of a tube or a bus that works.
But sadly, for all sorts of reasons, we all may need to travel there. No one does that trip unless you have to.
Now it may be daily, and if we're stinking rich and live in the 'burbs or beyond, we simply add to our Aston and Shogun a Prius... and Ken's Your Daddy: you can enter Bryony's patch free as a bird, and buzz about all day emitting away (electricity - be it hybrid or whiz-bang - gets generated and distributed, and not very efficiently in the latter case, somewhere).
Or if you're not so rich, you can try and lug a bit more into the exhibition than your journalistic utility belt of Alka Seltzer (Nice. Hope the liver holds out for the spawning thing), and pay an extra £25 for the privilege, despite the fact that you are now mostly emitting ... nothing.
So Ken has never used a Taxi then? Or been conveyed in some other form of vehicular transport (I'm sure he took the tube to Heathrow with is entourage to pop off to visit his mates on those fact finding tours, and they cycled them all around). I don't deny him the need, or right to so it. It is simply necessary to do your job. So that first few paras is either tunnel visioned or wilfully simplistic.
Other than being a modest-income earner's worst nightmare, and hence sure-fire vote loser, if it was about the environment wouldn't taxing the amount of stuff that goes in the fuel tank (regularly), in combination with what comes out the pipe (exhaust or power station - electricity comes with an e-cost) as a miles covered-fee (as opposed to a one off purchase tariff), be a) fairer and b) better for emissions control?
Divide and conquer is a great way to grab control. It's not so good for democratic change and social cohesion.
We expect it from the pols. When the media offer their support I despair.
This planet needs sensible action. Not hot air, hype and silly, divisive gestures.
And as a % of the whole greenhouse thing what are London's private car emissions, anyway? Say versus the non fuel-taxed skiing trips to Verbier? Or the non energy-saving bulbs burning in city offices? Or the poorly insulated homes? Or those that can't afford high-efficiency boilers... etc?
Fewer targets & penalties; more effective actions & incentives, please.
Still, this does get bigger than the environment: Make them all pay £25 to drive in London
First they came for the 4x4s, and I did not speak (They are a bit much, if not really necessary; a bit like drinking six pints. Still, it's a free country).
Then they came for the 'bigger' cars, and I managed an eyebrow raise (they are what some of us, not on ex's, who pay for our own trips, use to transport a bit more than our single selves to work in. Or simply can be a lot cheaper on a cost/per mile/opportunity cost basis - you'll find that when it's a family outing).
And then they came for my pint (it takes a lot of water to make one), and as it actually impinged on me getting bladdered each night I was miffed, though by then it was too late.
But hey ho, at least I can now still enjoy a healthy glass of designer mineral water in my favourite H20 bar.. er..
As this is a national newspaper, I would estimate that not everyone lives and/or works in (as in 'in') London. I'm sure many do, though perhaps not within striking range of a tube or a bus that works.
But sadly, for all sorts of reasons, we all may need to travel there. No one does that trip unless you have to.
Now it may be daily, and if we're stinking rich and live in the 'burbs or beyond, we simply add to our Aston and Shogun a Prius... and Ken's Your Daddy: you can enter Bryony's patch free as a bird, and buzz about all day emitting away (electricity - be it hybrid or whiz-bang - gets generated and distributed, and not very efficiently in the latter case, somewhere).
Or if you're not so rich, you can try and lug a bit more into the exhibition than your journalistic utility belt of Alka Seltzer (Nice. Hope the liver holds out for the spawning thing), and pay an extra £25 for the privilege, despite the fact that you are now mostly emitting ... nothing.
So Ken has never used a Taxi then? Or been conveyed in some other form of vehicular transport (I'm sure he took the tube to Heathrow with is entourage to pop off to visit his mates on those fact finding tours, and they cycled them all around). I don't deny him the need, or right to so it. It is simply necessary to do your job. So that first few paras is either tunnel visioned or wilfully simplistic.
Other than being a modest-income earner's worst nightmare, and hence sure-fire vote loser, if it was about the environment wouldn't taxing the amount of stuff that goes in the fuel tank (regularly), in combination with what comes out the pipe (exhaust or power station - electricity comes with an e-cost) as a miles covered-fee (as opposed to a one off purchase tariff), be a) fairer and b) better for emissions control?
Divide and conquer is a great way to grab control. It's not so good for democratic change and social cohesion.
We expect it from the pols. When the media offer their support I despair.
This planet needs sensible action. Not hot air, hype and silly, divisive gestures.
And as a % of the whole greenhouse thing what are London's private car emissions, anyway? Say versus the non fuel-taxed skiing trips to Verbier? Or the non energy-saving bulbs burning in city offices? Or the poorly insulated homes? Or those that can't afford high-efficiency boilers... etc?
Fewer targets & penalties; more effective actions & incentives, please.
Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Incoming!
I leapt into dangerous waters, regarding a sacred, cash cow.
Driving a 4x4? That'll be £25 a day, please
"I live in the country (some of us do).
I don't have a 4x4, or a big engined car (some of us do.. and a few probably need them).
I come into London a fair bit (some of us have to, lugging stuff, ironically in my case to share the joys of saving the planet).
For those of us juggling our finances, an electric or hybrid is looking a pretty good idea (except for the lugging bit), which seems the intention.
So if I am rich enough to have a 4x4/biggie (ignoring those, for instance growing our 'buy local' crops who may not be, and who don't live in London. Or have an old car), forget the train, I simply buy myself another (5-25% of total eco-cost in manufacture, depending on who you believe), to spend most of my time lugging a battery down the motorway, to buzz about for free the last few miles.
At which point it stops all day filling up space. Or can buzz about cranking out emissions (batteries do need to get charged somehow, and not that efficiently, using fossil fuels) for free.
Hmmn.
Other than being a modest-income earner's worst nightmare, and hence sure-fire vote loser, wouldn't taxing the amount of stuff that goes in the fuel tank (regularly) in combination with what comes out the pipe (exhaust or power station - electricity comes with an e-cost) as a miles covered-fee be a) fairer and b) better for emissions control?
Or was the latter perhaps not the point?
The first casualty in a spin war is trust.
What a sad debate for the capital city of a country who accounts for a fraction of total global emmissions, and talks and gestures its way into the future, while the majority who don't have such cars get distracted from real issues and actions that can make a difference."
Driving a 4x4? That'll be £25 a day, please
"I live in the country (some of us do).
I don't have a 4x4, or a big engined car (some of us do.. and a few probably need them).
I come into London a fair bit (some of us have to, lugging stuff, ironically in my case to share the joys of saving the planet).
For those of us juggling our finances, an electric or hybrid is looking a pretty good idea (except for the lugging bit), which seems the intention.
So if I am rich enough to have a 4x4/biggie (ignoring those, for instance growing our 'buy local' crops who may not be, and who don't live in London. Or have an old car), forget the train, I simply buy myself another (5-25% of total eco-cost in manufacture, depending on who you believe), to spend most of my time lugging a battery down the motorway, to buzz about for free the last few miles.
At which point it stops all day filling up space. Or can buzz about cranking out emissions (batteries do need to get charged somehow, and not that efficiently, using fossil fuels) for free.
Hmmn.
Other than being a modest-income earner's worst nightmare, and hence sure-fire vote loser, wouldn't taxing the amount of stuff that goes in the fuel tank (regularly) in combination with what comes out the pipe (exhaust or power station - electricity comes with an e-cost) as a miles covered-fee be a) fairer and b) better for emissions control?
Or was the latter perhaps not the point?
The first casualty in a spin war is trust.
What a sad debate for the capital city of a country who accounts for a fraction of total global emmissions, and talks and gestures its way into the future, while the majority who don't have such cars get distracted from real issues and actions that can make a difference."
Head Over Parapet.. Commence!
I've posted a couple in the Guardian today.
Both to David Miliband at the UN climate change conference: day two
"I'm trying to get a grip who is saying what, and with luck doing the same thing. Or, more likely, another.
Sorry to kick off with the Indy, but with a front page that has all the political party logos to the left and the UKIP logo and a picture of Mr. Blair - not his party - to the right (no comment) I have read this today: "David Miliband, the Environment Secretary, wants to extend the carbon trading scheme to include more businesses such as hotels and supermarkets. But Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, is resisting the idea."
But then in this fine tome I now read '...reports of a clash with the chancellor, Gordon Brown, were " ridiculous".
May I ask who thinks what, and who gets the casting vote on environmental matters in government?
And what, precisely, will this country's stance be, and the consequences to industry and the voting population.
Please can we have some tangibles, and with luck avoiding the word 'targets'.
I've watched a succession of his Ministerial eco-colleagues been given a daily 3 minutes on BBC Breakfast TV trot out waffle, and when posed questions on real-life, actions (such as VAT breaks on e-friendly home improvements), the best I've heard so far is 'it's tricky, and were looking at it'.
Hope the weather's nice there."
Second, to anyone, really
"In posting before, a little ad popped up telling me that I could save 30% on my energy bills by popping in a wind turbine. Sounds a plan. But is this so? I have also recently read (Mail on Sunday, sorry) that they may not be such a good idea, not just financially but environmentally.
Meanwhile, it seems a good idea to buy a hybrid. Only I don't live in London (some of us don't - and the nearest train station is 40 minutes way, and at 4x the fare, let's not go there here) and lugging a battery down the M4 apparently isn't too smart either.
With major political leaders advocating, and in some cases stuffing through either laws against or incentives for such things daily, and such contradictory advice either in support or against, its all a tad confusing for the poor consumer.
When are we going to see some sense talked by the political and green elites (activist and media) that don't presume we all live in a house in Putney, can all afford to offset our Perrier and jaunts to Klosters, and whack up a solar panel on the nanny flat each week?
I know there are a lot of folk out there struggling along with mortgages, kids, holiday plans, relative overseas etc, who are not only seeing a bit much on the fine or tax front that will affect the minority of those who can afford it not one jot. And precious little on the incentive front that can help those who want to do something but need help and non-agenda-driven guidance that works for them and the planet.
Speaking of which, while recycling is dead good and all, is it perhaps not getting a bit too much of the lion’s share of the target-driven culture that serves box-tickers and makes a lot of folk big money (quangos, ad agencies, local composting officer salaries/pensions, waste contractors)? A few tens of millions of folk spending a minute a day sorting out their waste is a heck of a wage bill saved. But it isn't too satisfying or anything other than emotionally rewarding on an individual level.
Reduction can be equally unattractive (but doesn't have to be). But let me pitch something that can help a tad and be both fun and rewarding: repair and reuse. Try http//:www.junkk.com for a start."
Shame I cocked up the URL, though! D'oh!
Both to David Miliband at the UN climate change conference: day two
"I'm trying to get a grip who is saying what, and with luck doing the same thing. Or, more likely, another.
Sorry to kick off with the Indy, but with a front page that has all the political party logos to the left and the UKIP logo and a picture of Mr. Blair - not his party - to the right (no comment) I have read this today: "David Miliband, the Environment Secretary, wants to extend the carbon trading scheme to include more businesses such as hotels and supermarkets. But Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, is resisting the idea."
But then in this fine tome I now read '...reports of a clash with the chancellor, Gordon Brown, were " ridiculous".
May I ask who thinks what, and who gets the casting vote on environmental matters in government?
And what, precisely, will this country's stance be, and the consequences to industry and the voting population.
Please can we have some tangibles, and with luck avoiding the word 'targets'.
I've watched a succession of his Ministerial eco-colleagues been given a daily 3 minutes on BBC Breakfast TV trot out waffle, and when posed questions on real-life, actions (such as VAT breaks on e-friendly home improvements), the best I've heard so far is 'it's tricky, and were looking at it'.
Hope the weather's nice there."
Second, to anyone, really
"In posting before, a little ad popped up telling me that I could save 30% on my energy bills by popping in a wind turbine. Sounds a plan. But is this so? I have also recently read (Mail on Sunday, sorry) that they may not be such a good idea, not just financially but environmentally.
Meanwhile, it seems a good idea to buy a hybrid. Only I don't live in London (some of us don't - and the nearest train station is 40 minutes way, and at 4x the fare, let's not go there here) and lugging a battery down the M4 apparently isn't too smart either.
With major political leaders advocating, and in some cases stuffing through either laws against or incentives for such things daily, and such contradictory advice either in support or against, its all a tad confusing for the poor consumer.
When are we going to see some sense talked by the political and green elites (activist and media) that don't presume we all live in a house in Putney, can all afford to offset our Perrier and jaunts to Klosters, and whack up a solar panel on the nanny flat each week?
I know there are a lot of folk out there struggling along with mortgages, kids, holiday plans, relative overseas etc, who are not only seeing a bit much on the fine or tax front that will affect the minority of those who can afford it not one jot. And precious little on the incentive front that can help those who want to do something but need help and non-agenda-driven guidance that works for them and the planet.
Speaking of which, while recycling is dead good and all, is it perhaps not getting a bit too much of the lion’s share of the target-driven culture that serves box-tickers and makes a lot of folk big money (quangos, ad agencies, local composting officer salaries/pensions, waste contractors)? A few tens of millions of folk spending a minute a day sorting out their waste is a heck of a wage bill saved. But it isn't too satisfying or anything other than emotionally rewarding on an individual level.
Reduction can be equally unattractive (but doesn't have to be). But let me pitch something that can help a tad and be both fun and rewarding: repair and reuse. Try http//:www.junkk.com for a start."
Shame I cocked up the URL, though! D'oh!
Who? More like Where's Wally?
Now my eyesight isn't so good. And I know there's been a lot of monkeying about with logos lately.But while I can see the Lib Dems and I think (worth noting to graphic designers what reads best) Tories and Greens on the left, somewhat aptly to the right is UKIP & Mr. Blair - as opposed to, one presumes, the Labour Party, our Government... guys in charge.
What an odd front page?
Q&A - Question and Avoidance
I can't seem to get Junkk.com (me, maybe) arrested, much less mentioned as a viable part of the fight against waste.
This morning was typical. In advance of the Queen's Speech, we had a puff piece with the Minister for (something eco... How many are there now?), 'Bouffant Ben' Bradshaw showing off his vlog on how easy it is to recycle... in London.
When it came to corporate responsibilities, it was clearly stated that 'turning to legislation at every turn' is not the best way to go. Out of the mouths of Blair babes...
Moving swiftly on, it was jokingly pointed out that he actually had been caught in the very transgression of co-mingling, which in another council area would have got him... um.. a fine.
'Just show's how tricky it all is,' he guffawed. And how easy to say one thing and do another. Or be asked one thing and answer... well... differently to that required.
Apparently those who have been fined, as captured so loudly in the papers of late, they were in the minority and 'had been warned several times'. Accepted nods all round from fellow Beeb bouffant. Were they? Had they? I didn't get that impression from the last one I read. I guess we'll never know.
About the only thing I did learn was that banning plastic carriers is not going to work 'cos people just turn to paper, and that's worse environmentally. Is it?
Meanwhile, other than four soldiers getting blown apart, we'll have the skateboarding minister for tortoises on...
This morning was typical. In advance of the Queen's Speech, we had a puff piece with the Minister for (something eco... How many are there now?), 'Bouffant Ben' Bradshaw showing off his vlog on how easy it is to recycle... in London.
When it came to corporate responsibilities, it was clearly stated that 'turning to legislation at every turn' is not the best way to go. Out of the mouths of Blair babes...
Moving swiftly on, it was jokingly pointed out that he actually had been caught in the very transgression of co-mingling, which in another council area would have got him... um.. a fine.
'Just show's how tricky it all is,' he guffawed. And how easy to say one thing and do another. Or be asked one thing and answer... well... differently to that required.
Apparently those who have been fined, as captured so loudly in the papers of late, they were in the minority and 'had been warned several times'. Accepted nods all round from fellow Beeb bouffant. Were they? Had they? I didn't get that impression from the last one I read. I guess we'll never know.
About the only thing I did learn was that banning plastic carriers is not going to work 'cos people just turn to paper, and that's worse environmentally. Is it?
Meanwhile, other than four soldiers getting blown apart, we'll have the skateboarding minister for tortoises on...
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Getting Noticed For All The Wrong Reasons
I have in my time commented and pitched to BBCs Working Lunch a fair bit. Like when they went on an eco-tour of the country ands I thought we'd be worth mentioning. It all fell on deaf ears. Not a dicky-bird, despite their frequent exhortations to get in touch in their mails, show and site. It was something raised in a Newswatch or Newsnight a while ago, I recall, by another frustrated, failed contributor.
Of course, nice does not cut it these days.
So it is with interest that I note the following terse reply (with mine back... the plot thickens) to my admittedly terse enquiry (prose gets binned I've found) just now about one of their pieces:
It is/was open to those in the UK, and further field who have a business needing investment to continue its growth and it is meant to be more than just a one off competition. I'm sorry you were disappointed with the item.
I was disappointed in as much as I tuned in to see about a further opportunity to expand, which seemed to have passed. If it is still open to those in the UK then maybe I should have not have been. Where can I find out more?
May I ask do you use "see us on the BBC" on all your promotional literature ?
As we don't have any, I'd say no, unless you count my email signature. May I ask why you ask? Would you like me to stop? It was a while ago.
It will be interesting to see where this leads. I'm guessing she's going to equate me looking for promo for my frre, public service website, with giving 3 minute commercials to for-major-profit CEOs, a major beef of mine with a public broadcaster.
Addendum:
Didn't hear back. Surprise. Didn't like that. Big surprise. Took issue. Well, there's a surprise.
The BBC has a complaints system. As they get a lot, they may not alwasy answer. Let's see what happens:
Not a complaint... yet. But as things have been left hanging more than 24hrs after a flurry of activity, I have a... concern.
I wrote to the above programme with a question, and in addition to my answer had the following comment regarding my email signature:
May I ask do you use "see us on the BBC" on all your promotional literature ?
Best wishes
Lynne Jones
I immediately answered, but then asked why this was posed, but to date have not heard back.
May I therefore formally ask for an explanation as I remain
unclear for the reasons behind this question and the manner in which it was asked.
Of course, nice does not cut it these days.
So it is with interest that I note the following terse reply (with mine back... the plot thickens) to my admittedly terse enquiry (prose gets binned I've found) just now about one of their pieces:
It is/was open to those in the UK, and further field who have a business needing investment to continue its growth and it is meant to be more than just a one off competition. I'm sorry you were disappointed with the item.
I was disappointed in as much as I tuned in to see about a further opportunity to expand, which seemed to have passed. If it is still open to those in the UK then maybe I should have not have been. Where can I find out more?
May I ask do you use "see us on the BBC" on all your promotional literature ?
As we don't have any, I'd say no, unless you count my email signature. May I ask why you ask? Would you like me to stop? It was a while ago.
It will be interesting to see where this leads. I'm guessing she's going to equate me looking for promo for my frre, public service website, with giving 3 minute commercials to for-major-profit CEOs, a major beef of mine with a public broadcaster.
Addendum:
Didn't hear back. Surprise. Didn't like that. Big surprise. Took issue. Well, there's a surprise.
The BBC has a complaints system. As they get a lot, they may not alwasy answer. Let's see what happens:
Not a complaint... yet. But as things have been left hanging more than 24hrs after a flurry of activity, I have a... concern.
I wrote to the above programme with a question, and in addition to my answer had the following comment regarding my email signature:
May I ask do you use "see us on the BBC" on all your promotional literature ?
Best wishes
Lynne Jones
I immediately answered, but then asked why this was posed, but to date have not heard back.
May I therefore formally ask for an explanation as I remain
unclear for the reasons behind this question and the manner in which it was asked.
OK, I'm the Grinch That Stole The Planet
A long, long time ago, I lived in Hong Kong. And I was a slob. I worked all day and played all night. So I decided to get fit. So every lunch I took a tube to a city helth club, and then up a lift, where I static-cycled and Stairmastered for an hour.
Then I thought: 'Why no cycle there and walk up. And then turn back?' A lot cheaper. And better for me.
I'm afraid this is what ran through my mind when I read this: Kids walk to Moon and back in climate campaign
I'm all for awareness, but Britta Freitag of the German-based Climate Alliance travelled how far to hand a suitcase stuffed with 618,315 paper "green footprints" to U.N. climate talks in Nairobi on Monday?
100,000 children cut out the shape of their foot from whatt pieces of paper for every mile?
Some 5,000 delegates are discussing ways to step up the fight on global warming, with Austria a leading contributor to the campaign with more than 200,000 cut-out coloured footprints.
Apparently, most scientists say that global warming is being stoked by emissions of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels in power plants, factories and vehicles.... like, paper making ones and planes to get folk to jollies?
Nil points.
Then I thought: 'Why no cycle there and walk up. And then turn back?' A lot cheaper. And better for me.
I'm afraid this is what ran through my mind when I read this: Kids walk to Moon and back in climate campaign
I'm all for awareness, but Britta Freitag of the German-based Climate Alliance travelled how far to hand a suitcase stuffed with 618,315 paper "green footprints" to U.N. climate talks in Nairobi on Monday?
100,000 children cut out the shape of their foot from whatt pieces of paper for every mile?
Some 5,000 delegates are discussing ways to step up the fight on global warming, with Austria a leading contributor to the campaign with more than 200,000 cut-out coloured footprints.
Apparently, most scientists say that global warming is being stoked by emissions of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels in power plants, factories and vehicles.... like, paper making ones and planes to get folk to jollies?
Nil points.
Working for whom?
Working Lunch just ended.
I had to write, becuase I felt my time had been wasted. They sent me a 'heads up' that made me watch to see about enetring a contest. Hnece:
"I tuned in to watch because of this:
On Tuesday we talk to venture capitalists from the Isle of Man who are running a competition to find entrepreneurs.
Interesting questions posed.
So I'm clear, this is now a closed competition and it was/is not open to me anyway? So really it was a promo piece for the IoM than of any real value to businesses like mine?"
They also had in the programme a pitch to appear on Friday if you paid enough (for charity). Now what's airime on the BBC worth to the right business with a pitch to make? Hmmn. Your licence fee at work.
I had to write, becuase I felt my time had been wasted. They sent me a 'heads up' that made me watch to see about enetring a contest. Hnece:
"I tuned in to watch because of this:
On Tuesday we talk to venture capitalists from the Isle of Man who are running a competition to find entrepreneurs.
Interesting questions posed.
So I'm clear, this is now a closed competition and it was/is not open to me anyway? So really it was a promo piece for the IoM than of any real value to businesses like mine?"
They also had in the programme a pitch to appear on Friday if you paid enough (for charity). Now what's airime on the BBC worth to the right business with a pitch to make? Hmmn. Your licence fee at work.
The sound of silence
I'm watching BBC Working Lunch. Just emailed them (it says it all):
"I'm watching your show.
This morning on BBC Breakfast, Govt. Minsister Darling was asked about incentives to help us engage more environmental measures in the home. What I heard was a ton of waffle, with at best, 'it was being looked at'.
Now I hear another Minister, Mr. Pearson, being asked pretty much the same question, this time on eco-fuels for transport. And guess what... the same non answer!!!
What is the point of asking these very pertinent questions if they are to be allowed to get air time to say nothing."
Addendum: Worth a gander, from the dti website.
"I'm watching your show.
This morning on BBC Breakfast, Govt. Minsister Darling was asked about incentives to help us engage more environmental measures in the home. What I heard was a ton of waffle, with at best, 'it was being looked at'.
Now I hear another Minister, Mr. Pearson, being asked pretty much the same question, this time on eco-fuels for transport. And guess what... the same non answer!!!
What is the point of asking these very pertinent questions if they are to be allowed to get air time to say nothing."
Addendum: Worth a gander, from the dti website.
The trouble with high horses: being behind a higher one



Sorry, I am inordinately proud of that title. And in scouting around for something to go with it, I came across the attached. I've arched an eyebrow at words vs. deeds (Pols telling how to save the planet and not doing so themsleves. Green media mouthing off on eco-stuff whilst promoting less than optimal behaviour - I'll try and get the URLs) before, and make no apology for doing so again. Let they who are without carbon offsets cast the first nasturtium!
Just(ify) the facts, man
I keep breaking my vow to avoid debates on climate change, but this one is too big to ignore, both figuratively and literally.
Lord Monckton's artcile - Wrong problem, wrong solution (plus another, Greenblinkers) makes for an interesting read. It certainly stirred up something. And a sad explantion for where we are, and headed: the PDF of responses to his last article. 77 pages of small type! Who on earth has time to read all that and still have a life?
Suffice to say that I can't be bothered with so much needless argument, but have to say that I am depressed that much of it is fulled by vitriol rather than a desire to seek answers.
Lord Monckton's artcile - Wrong problem, wrong solution (plus another, Greenblinkers) makes for an interesting read. It certainly stirred up something. And a sad explantion for where we are, and headed: the PDF of responses to his last article. 77 pages of small type! Who on earth has time to read all that and still have a life?
Suffice to say that I can't be bothered with so much needless argument, but have to say that I am depressed that much of it is fulled by vitriol rather than a desire to seek answers.
Little that you know that I know that you know less than me

A big day for windbags - This is a dazzling debunking of climate change science. It is also wildly wrong
Here's my contribution:
"Golly, I wish we could harness all this energy arguing about who knows more than whom. Then it may be some use. I'm a bit more interested in what I can (which has many parameters) do. For instance, as one of the rotation ('scuse the pun) there was a nifty wind turbine ad spinning up in the top right hand corner of this piece. Funny if it was between a bottled water and skiing holiday one, eh? It says I can go green without going into the red. Is this true? I have heard the payback period can be quite a long time. And even the environmental side seems to be being challenged, too: "Wind turbines 'may actually do more harm than good' Daily Mail" (ah, that may explain it, though the quoted bods are mainstream eco): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=415993&in_page_id=1770 I just wish when it comes to matters of fact these days I could trust, and act on, what I read. Anywhere. Not any more, sadly."
One billion Chinese can't... er... what?
And so one leads to the next. Couldn't not pitch in with my nifty headline previously, so here's what I lobbed into the Guardian blog: The smoking dragon
"This morning on Breakfast TV I watched a reporter outside a suburban semi telling me the owners 'were laughing', one presumes on account of the nice perch they had provided for the pigeons, as the thing was in negative rotation mode.
Meanwhile, at the weekend I read that even some expert (whatever they are) environmentalists had conceded that not only were these things not exactly the panacea to our energy needs, but may actually detract from the overall planetary benefit environmentally!!!
One has to wonder where all this stuff gets made, and shipped from, especially if it is now looking like a marketing fad just to get us to buy more stuff.
Who the heck do we listen to? Who do we believe?
Certainly not our Government. To a series of rather pertinent questions about VAT rebates and grants Mr. Darling seemed to manage 5 minutes' worth of waffle amounting to 'it will be looked at.' Meanwhile Mr. Cameron is going to set targets and fire the guy at the top if we don't meet them.
That'll sort it all, then."
"This morning on Breakfast TV I watched a reporter outside a suburban semi telling me the owners 'were laughing', one presumes on account of the nice perch they had provided for the pigeons, as the thing was in negative rotation mode.
Meanwhile, at the weekend I read that even some expert (whatever they are) environmentalists had conceded that not only were these things not exactly the panacea to our energy needs, but may actually detract from the overall planetary benefit environmentally!!!
One has to wonder where all this stuff gets made, and shipped from, especially if it is now looking like a marketing fad just to get us to buy more stuff.
Who the heck do we listen to? Who do we believe?
Certainly not our Government. To a series of rather pertinent questions about VAT rebates and grants Mr. Darling seemed to manage 5 minutes' worth of waffle amounting to 'it will be looked at.' Meanwhile Mr. Cameron is going to set targets and fire the guy at the top if we don't meet them.
That'll sort it all, then."
Labour Is Working... 'Til You Drop
OK. so I'm getting political. But this one was hard to resist. In reply to this - Public sector aloof from pensions chaos - in the Telegraph, I had to offer:
'I think it was a recent programme that commented on US-style attack ads, and asked what if we had them here. I always thought we did. We need them.
In light of this, may I suggest to the Tories an homage to their famous poster, this time with a line of pension-aged folk lining up at the factory gates: 'Labour Is Working... 'Til You Drop.'
I pondered an asterisk that would point out that the only ones work on government side would be younger box tickers monitoring our progress to ensure enough is skimmed off for their comfortable retirement.'
'I think it was a recent programme that commented on US-style attack ads, and asked what if we had them here. I always thought we did. We need them.
In light of this, may I suggest to the Tories an homage to their famous poster, this time with a line of pension-aged folk lining up at the factory gates: 'Labour Is Working... 'Til You Drop.'
I pondered an asterisk that would point out that the only ones work on government side would be younger box tickers monitoring our progress to ensure enough is skimmed off for their comfortable retirement.'
A Total Lack Of Effective Spin
Another day, another initiative. Another media talking head. Another Minister. Another anchor asking but not worrying about failing to get an answer.
Against the backdrop of a suburban home, a BBC reporter says the owner ' is laughing' because of, amongst other things, his wind turbine. Sadly, it seemed to be more of a bird perch than energy generation device as it was, well, still.
Then we had Al Darling, Minister for Gravitas, being interrogated by the vanilla of the day, who actually asked(well, had been given) some good questions. Sadly, she seemed less than concerned that he didn't actually saying anything useful in reply. My email to the Beeb:
'Who is laughing, exactly? ... when I read stuff like the article attached - Wind turbines 'may actually do more harm than good' - I just get confused when I am told how great* wind turbines are. And did Mr. Darling answer a single question (such as your one about wall cavity and VAT reductions), or simply say things were going to be looked at?'
My faith in Government and the Media takes a further dive. I wonder if this was their plan when they figured talk was cheaper than action?
At least there was one good bit of advice. Move your fridge a tad more away from the wall. It makes it more efficient.
*On present evidence it looks like another way to make more stuff, which is hardly eco, and of course more money for the chancers.
Against the backdrop of a suburban home, a BBC reporter says the owner ' is laughing' because of, amongst other things, his wind turbine. Sadly, it seemed to be more of a bird perch than energy generation device as it was, well, still.
Then we had Al Darling, Minister for Gravitas, being interrogated by the vanilla of the day, who actually asked(well, had been given) some good questions. Sadly, she seemed less than concerned that he didn't actually saying anything useful in reply. My email to the Beeb:
'Who is laughing, exactly? ... when I read stuff like the article attached - Wind turbines 'may actually do more harm than good' - I just get confused when I am told how great* wind turbines are. And did Mr. Darling answer a single question (such as your one about wall cavity and VAT reductions), or simply say things were going to be looked at?'
My faith in Government and the Media takes a further dive. I wonder if this was their plan when they figured talk was cheaper than action?
At least there was one good bit of advice. Move your fridge a tad more away from the wall. It makes it more efficient.
*On present evidence it looks like another way to make more stuff, which is hardly eco, and of course more money for the chancers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)