This is about nothing being wasted, of course, because I am going to allude to the environment when I in fact refer to obesity, and one can only assume little of the slab gets left on the slab... well, until the other part of .. & taxes.
This morning, the big thing was our nation's 'kids of greater than desirable girth'. So far, so Billy Bunter (I hoping I'm safe in this from the PC police, as they all seem to have just graduated in the last 10 minutes from the University of Nannyton with a degree in ElfernSafety and a higher in fixingfingswotwasneverbroketilnow, and while there were lots of punters sticking their oars in when not at classes for 2 minutes a week no doubt).
So we had the Blair-babe blue rinse with the scarf and sing-song patronising voice on the couch, and at the other side a young lady of 12 and her Mum. Not at school today then, 'cos what's better than being on the telly to say that it's really hard not to eat all those buns because of the nasty ad men.
Which the blue rinse obviously got inspired by. Because she reckoned that the supermarkets and parents didn't have enough information, and they needed.. an ad campaign.
Now I am a TV addicted couch potato with the best of them, and merely by paying a bit of attention to the bits between Big Bruvva and The Qui... er... gambli... er... rip-off shows, have a pretty good notion that if you feed your face, or that of your child's, with endless burgers and fries, and then don't kick 'em out in the garden every so often, they may end up like the young Princess of Tonga this am. And I'm pretty sure the supermarkets know this too.
So no amount of money frittered, battered or otherwise coated on such an indigestible notion is going to make anyone take a blind bit more notice of such a thing, or make one whit of difference, except denuding apparently pretty low stocks of public service funds.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
At least it's good for the planet..ish
The other night I was watching a documentary channel, and was about to switch off when I saw: 'Next - Megastructures: Recycled Tanks'. How could I resist?
So it was a bit of a surprise to find it was about a factory that... recycles tanks. Dirty great big, Storming Norman Mk whatever Abrams battle.. tanks.
Now I'm a big kid. I like guns and stuff, so long as they are not pointed at me and no one gets hurt, except the bad guys (sooooo open to debate, that one). So I was hooked.
And it was a great show. Even if you are a pure re:anything fanatic. Because these things were/are designed to be recycled all the time. In fact they haven't made a new one in years! As an exercise in engineering and indeed forward planning it ticked a lot of ROI boxes.
There is however the small matter of them doing 10 litres to the mile and knocking down a lot of perfectly stuff with that cannon, of course...
So it was a bit of a surprise to find it was about a factory that... recycles tanks. Dirty great big, Storming Norman Mk whatever Abrams battle.. tanks.
Now I'm a big kid. I like guns and stuff, so long as they are not pointed at me and no one gets hurt, except the bad guys (sooooo open to debate, that one). So I was hooked.
And it was a great show. Even if you are a pure re:anything fanatic. Because these things were/are designed to be recycled all the time. In fact they haven't made a new one in years! As an exercise in engineering and indeed forward planning it ticked a lot of ROI boxes.
There is however the small matter of them doing 10 litres to the mile and knocking down a lot of perfectly stuff with that cannon, of course...
A dish best served cold.
The makers of the Big idea are probably thinking this is over. Sorry, I'm just starting.
TV phone-in quizzes
'My personal experience is not with a phone-in quiz, but a phone-in show, but whichever one it is, the answer is an unequivocal 'Yes!' to 'better' (whatever that may mean) 'regulation' (ditto).
I believe with all these things, both contestants (who often commit a large amount of time and often money, for free to contribute the 'content') and those who phone in on premium rate lines (to take part or 'vote') must be able to expect a fair delivery (and explanation of what that entails, or not) of the contest/show's stated structure.
That's nothing to do with 'people taking responsibility' for THEIR actions, but a rip-off industry, which is making millions for those unscrupulous, unethical and greedy enough to take advantage of slack or toothless monitoring and policing.
Can you imagine if the advertising industry - or the lottery, for that matter - was allowed to promise one thing and then deliver another, or nothing at all, with rules changing and/or shrouded in secrecy, plus little or no official audit of fairness or numbers?
Doesn't matter if it's a quiz or a contest, if these guys are allowed access to your 0900 billing there is only ever going to be one winner, and they'll make sure it is them, their ratings or their incomes, whichever comes highest, and regardless of skill or result.
Other than that, I'm sure it's all good, honest entertainment.'
Guardian - Call quiz shows dodge bullet
'A similar discussion is going on via the Newsnight online blog as we write. They seem to think it's a matter of better regulation and people should be responsible for their own actions. By that logic a person getting into a licensed (I presume if it is on air, OFCOM grants one) London taxi is 'repsonsible' for being driven to their destination via Alaska.
I'll cut and paste my contribution here, as I doubt that they'll moderate it in for being slightly 'off brief' by referring to any show that has contestants and/or phone-in partcipants/guests/votes via a 0900 number.
I still think the points I made hold true, and looking at that last sentence wonder how the telecoms companies who are willing partners in this racket can avoid some responsibility for being the collection agents.'
ADDENDUM to original:
It seems some smug folk reckoned being gullible warrants you being fair game:
Let he (or she... must be PC) who casts the first stone...
As one who catches all other's typos but never his own, I'd say a wee bit of slack could be offered as it a) was not exactly a world-changing cock-up and b) about the first I've seen (and passed over, chuckling to myself) on these pages in a fair long time.
Meanwhile, back on the topic....
As one of those it seems deemed by some to have got what he deserved, I do look forward to their posts when they next engage with well, pretty much anything in life really, where what they have been told is not true, or even is as can be reasonably presumed by virtue of no clarifications being obvious, when in good faith they make a financial transaction. If so I look forward to running ads for beachfront property development in certain parts of Florida soon.
It is called fraud. And it doesn't matter if it's your accountant running off with your life savings or a TV production company taking 50p knowing full well you have a 'BMW gearbox on a beach's' chance of getting it back.
And I remain ensure how the collectors of the money (the telecoms companies) on behalf of the con-artists in question, are also allowed free rein to take their skim, especially when I presume both, to repeat, require a licence from those we pay to defend our interests against such sharp practices.
Unless they are in on the deal, too inept or frightened of lobbyists to do anything about it.
TV phone-in quizzes
'My personal experience is not with a phone-in quiz, but a phone-in show, but whichever one it is, the answer is an unequivocal 'Yes!' to 'better' (whatever that may mean) 'regulation' (ditto).
I believe with all these things, both contestants (who often commit a large amount of time and often money, for free to contribute the 'content') and those who phone in on premium rate lines (to take part or 'vote') must be able to expect a fair delivery (and explanation of what that entails, or not) of the contest/show's stated structure.
That's nothing to do with 'people taking responsibility' for THEIR actions, but a rip-off industry, which is making millions for those unscrupulous, unethical and greedy enough to take advantage of slack or toothless monitoring and policing.
Can you imagine if the advertising industry - or the lottery, for that matter - was allowed to promise one thing and then deliver another, or nothing at all, with rules changing and/or shrouded in secrecy, plus little or no official audit of fairness or numbers?
Doesn't matter if it's a quiz or a contest, if these guys are allowed access to your 0900 billing there is only ever going to be one winner, and they'll make sure it is them, their ratings or their incomes, whichever comes highest, and regardless of skill or result.
Other than that, I'm sure it's all good, honest entertainment.'
Guardian - Call quiz shows dodge bullet
'A similar discussion is going on via the Newsnight online blog as we write. They seem to think it's a matter of better regulation and people should be responsible for their own actions. By that logic a person getting into a licensed (I presume if it is on air, OFCOM grants one) London taxi is 'repsonsible' for being driven to their destination via Alaska.
I'll cut and paste my contribution here, as I doubt that they'll moderate it in for being slightly 'off brief' by referring to any show that has contestants and/or phone-in partcipants/guests/votes via a 0900 number.
I still think the points I made hold true, and looking at that last sentence wonder how the telecoms companies who are willing partners in this racket can avoid some responsibility for being the collection agents.'
ADDENDUM to original:
It seems some smug folk reckoned being gullible warrants you being fair game:
Let he (or she... must be PC) who casts the first stone...
As one who catches all other's typos but never his own, I'd say a wee bit of slack could be offered as it a) was not exactly a world-changing cock-up and b) about the first I've seen (and passed over, chuckling to myself) on these pages in a fair long time.
Meanwhile, back on the topic....
As one of those it seems deemed by some to have got what he deserved, I do look forward to their posts when they next engage with well, pretty much anything in life really, where what they have been told is not true, or even is as can be reasonably presumed by virtue of no clarifications being obvious, when in good faith they make a financial transaction. If so I look forward to running ads for beachfront property development in certain parts of Florida soon.
It is called fraud. And it doesn't matter if it's your accountant running off with your life savings or a TV production company taking 50p knowing full well you have a 'BMW gearbox on a beach's' chance of getting it back.
And I remain ensure how the collectors of the money (the telecoms companies) on behalf of the con-artists in question, are also allowed free rein to take their skim, especially when I presume both, to repeat, require a licence from those we pay to defend our interests against such sharp practices.
Unless they are in on the deal, too inept or frightened of lobbyists to do anything about it.
Davos III (the plebs strike back)
Not his fault, I suppose, but it's the first report I've read from 'the front' and this came across a bit smug a la 'I'm one of the in-crowd and you'll find out what I heard in secret when I decide.'
Davos 07: are we fanning the flames?
"I'll pop this on the record, so it's slightly more valuable than a free lunch with a VIP and a jolly with a media rep.
I'm wondering what, who 'mainstream media' is.. are? I'm guessing another 'elite' that means 'not the rest of you'.
I also wonder how many representatives of 'it' there were (the BBC apparently has managed 37, which has to be some kind of record - and we have a bet here they didn't take the bus) slumming it in a very cosy resort who noticed the irony of who was there, who was not, how they all got there (speaking of flying visits) and what was supposed to be quite high on the agenda.
So yes, it is getting warmer, and I have a fair notion who is fanning some of those 'flames'. I'll await my e-version in return."
Davos 07: are we fanning the flames?
"I'll pop this on the record, so it's slightly more valuable than a free lunch with a VIP and a jolly with a media rep.
I'm wondering what, who 'mainstream media' is.. are? I'm guessing another 'elite' that means 'not the rest of you'.
I also wonder how many representatives of 'it' there were (the BBC apparently has managed 37, which has to be some kind of record - and we have a bet here they didn't take the bus) slumming it in a very cosy resort who noticed the irony of who was there, who was not, how they all got there (speaking of flying visits) and what was supposed to be quite high on the agenda.
So yes, it is getting warmer, and I have a fair notion who is fanning some of those 'flames'. I'll await my e-version in return."
Declan Does Davos II - the sequel
No link I'm afraid, but who really needs one, assuming the facts to be accurate?
DAILY MAIL - BBC accused of wasting £50,000 sending 37 journalists to cover
the Davos economic summit.
Your licence fee at work. And, one presumes, they all took the bus.
DAILY MAIL - BBC accused of wasting £50,000 sending 37 journalists to cover
the Davos economic summit.
Your licence fee at work. And, one presumes, they all took the bus.
Er, what he said...
As we all know, Scott Adams is a genius, and Dibert is more than humour, it is simply the best, most targeted piece of social satire there is. Sign up now (this digs me out of copyright issues... I hope... when I just have to share).I claim to be no superior being, but in view of what I am trying to do, and the success I am having in getting through to those who are foursquare blocking my paths to sharing it with a willing population, it does strike a chord. For the last 'corporate/departmental/media' comment, simply substitute 'ignored... again' for 'fired', and 'Free ways to deliver tangible, worthwhile financial/environmentally beneficial ROIs to the consuming, taxpaying-public' for 'Linux' and that should about cover it.
Some see grasping commercialism and waste. I see a free gutter guard.
Now, I'd best start by saying it's a pity it's a flyer stuck through my door. No probelm with an ad for a freebie, and I know the logistics are impossible to get around, but hey.
Anyway, tucked down there is a 'twofer' on my kids' summer squash.
But the product is also already on Junkk.com with an idea.
Anyway, tucked down there is a 'twofer' on my kids' summer squash.
But the product is also already on Junkk.com with an idea.
Until the next time...
...there's always us.I admire what the Indy has done... tried to do. It devoted three straight days to a campaign to cut down on waste. That's a rather dour topic to invest so much headline space on for so long.
And now it is over.
They had, by all accounts (well, theirs. I actually didn't see or read mention of it anywhere else, even the Guardian or any Govt. PR, which is odd, as a Minister came out in support) a huge response.
And that is great. Whether it was just from those already persuaded and acting, who knows?
I hope it has set a precedent, got itself established and will continue. But today it is nowhere to be seen. And while I know certain media are committed, and a lot more than others, I also know commercial realities will take hold. And selling copies appears at the top. And you don't do that with endless pictures of shopping baskets and rubbish tips and local authority ministers in reflective jackets. Jade visits a recycling tip or ship breakers in India... you're golden. So now it is, if at all, on an inner page. And who knows, like fashion fur or the rather oxymoronic ethical travel, it may still warrant coverage if it sells a copy or nets a rating point.
Speaking of which, if I was to cock an eyebrow (and I did), I must say that those who take it upon themselves to throw bricks should ensure that they are at least WoBo's (go on, ask me).
I am always banging on about the deleterious effects of warring camps fighting verbal/written (and often, at least so far, physical protest) wars at the expense of unity in inspiring mass actions.
So, how did this fare? Not too bad, I guess. Some woeful examples were highlighted.
But having not scanned every inch of the pages I have bought the last few days, I don't think the slight double-standard of their own 'product' can have been missed.
Though no free DVD (and what is the plastic in that, if not excess packaging designed to encourage increased purchase?), there was indeed a fair bit of unrequested, unrequired and ultimately disposed off... waste. Ad flyerand a bird thingy. I will keep them as postcards to send... sometime (or donate to the Charity shop as I do all the DVDs), but how many will be so.. disposed.
And I couldn't again note the slight irony of someone trashing (sorry, couldn't resist) others, whilst on the same pages were ads advocating trips, well, just let's say 'not toocarbonifically beneficial, global-warming-wise.'.
Which makes me wonder when the next salvo comes in from the other side to further distract us or keep most ducking for cover 'til it all blows over. Which it won't.
Bus-ted
I am guilty. There is a bus service to Gloucester from here. I don't use it. It doesn't go where I need. I doesn't go fast enough. It doesn't go regularly enough.
Some do use it. And need it. And have no alternative.
But it is about to cease. So even if I was challenged to practice what I preach (which, to be fair, I don't in this case, but still do fly the flag for planet-saving and hence will get so tasked), I soon will not be able to do so. Way hey! When next summoned to London I can't get to the station other than by car, so I may as well stick on the A40 and get there quicker (ish), cheaper and a lot more in keeping with my return schedule than the train. No alternative.
It's a dilemma, and I am not sure I have an answer. But to head in a better direction, I'm pretty sure I will face those who make the most aggressive green noises - from Pols to activists - that allowing yet more eco-options is not the best way to get 'us' on board.
Some do use it. And need it. And have no alternative.
But it is about to cease. So even if I was challenged to practice what I preach (which, to be fair, I don't in this case, but still do fly the flag for planet-saving and hence will get so tasked), I soon will not be able to do so. Way hey! When next summoned to London I can't get to the station other than by car, so I may as well stick on the A40 and get there quicker (ish), cheaper and a lot more in keeping with my return schedule than the train. No alternative.
It's a dilemma, and I am not sure I have an answer. But to head in a better direction, I'm pretty sure I will face those who make the most aggressive green noises - from Pols to activists - that allowing yet more eco-options is not the best way to get 'us' on board.
Too far?
Just back from walking the kids to school. Gorgeous, if cold.
Which got me to pondering real-life ways to save cost and the planet around the home. As I look out of my study's North window I can see a row of housing opposite. It's interesting to watch the frost disappear in the sunlight. But also depressing to see how many have no frost at all, which means they either didn't know about, didn't care about or couldn't afford (the purchase price) of lagging.
Of all the banks who send my 'We've gone carbon neutral' PR-pap, why could one not simply say: 'Here's an interest free loan to buy lagging - we calculate, at worst, pay back is x months/years, at which point you repay us, plus £1 to go towards the next applicant'. I'd put that on our front page.
It's all a matter of degree, if you excuse the pun.
To watch TV this morning, I entered a very dark room, as we have shutters. I am pretty sure thick curtains would be better eco-wise, but a) they won't fit in the same void and b) I can't afford them (see above).
To switch the thing on (one option: don't), plus the SKY box, I needed some light. And there I stood, at the door, trying to figure out which would be better. Low energy bulb on for a few minutes? Or open a shutter and unleash the cold air?
Probably an green dilemma too far. I may pop it in IT-anic Vs., though. There may be an answer. I'm guessing the former.
Which got me to pondering real-life ways to save cost and the planet around the home. As I look out of my study's North window I can see a row of housing opposite. It's interesting to watch the frost disappear in the sunlight. But also depressing to see how many have no frost at all, which means they either didn't know about, didn't care about or couldn't afford (the purchase price) of lagging.
Of all the banks who send my 'We've gone carbon neutral' PR-pap, why could one not simply say: 'Here's an interest free loan to buy lagging - we calculate, at worst, pay back is x months/years, at which point you repay us, plus £1 to go towards the next applicant'. I'd put that on our front page.
It's all a matter of degree, if you excuse the pun.
To watch TV this morning, I entered a very dark room, as we have shutters. I am pretty sure thick curtains would be better eco-wise, but a) they won't fit in the same void and b) I can't afford them (see above).
To switch the thing on (one option: don't), plus the SKY box, I needed some light. And there I stood, at the door, trying to figure out which would be better. Low energy bulb on for a few minutes? Or open a shutter and unleash the cold air?
Probably an green dilemma too far. I may pop it in IT-anic Vs., though. There may be an answer. I'm guessing the former.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
'Bah, humbug' - le son et lumiere
When I crest the last hill on the remaining few miles of the M50 on my way back from London late at night, one of the most welcome sights is the spire of St Mary's in Ross. It is a sodium yellow-illuminated symbol that I am almost home. It is also, by virtue of needing several dirty great big lamps to achieve this effect, a rather major consumer of juice, and hence cause of the dreaded GeeGees (greenhouse gasses).
Now, do I storm up the the next parish whatever meeting and insist they blow them out right away? Well, it's a consideration, really, is it not? And hence a socio, enviro, and all sorts of other 'io's' dilemma.
'Cos that being the case, I should equally well be lobbing up at the next meeting of the guys who run Wembley Stadium, which as I leave London on the A40 is also rather pretty. Or the Millenium Bridge (pictured).
Sorry, no solutions. Like firework displays, I rather see me getting into hot water between heart and head just with myself, let alone with anyone else.
But as is my way, I do think it a question worth pondering. And I wonder how many stalwarts of the nan-e state and guilt-e activism have also decided these glowing icons to be best left out of the tsk-tsk finger-pointing.
Maybe one for a Prof's Poser... or London's Mayor. Relative to the additional emissions (above simply driving around in, say, a Prius) of all the 4x4s in the city, what would be the negative GeeGee impact be relative to purely decorative illumination of public buildings? I'm not even sure which side of a hundred it would go.
Now, do I storm up the the next parish whatever meeting and insist they blow them out right away? Well, it's a consideration, really, is it not? And hence a socio, enviro, and all sorts of other 'io's' dilemma.
'Cos that being the case, I should equally well be lobbing up at the next meeting of the guys who run Wembley Stadium, which as I leave London on the A40 is also rather pretty. Or the Millenium Bridge (pictured).
Sorry, no solutions. Like firework displays, I rather see me getting into hot water between heart and head just with myself, let alone with anyone else.
But as is my way, I do think it a question worth pondering. And I wonder how many stalwarts of the nan-e state and guilt-e activism have also decided these glowing icons to be best left out of the tsk-tsk finger-pointing.
Maybe one for a Prof's Poser... or London's Mayor. Relative to the additional emissions (above simply driving around in, say, a Prius) of all the 4x4s in the city, what would be the negative GeeGee impact be relative to purely decorative illumination of public buildings? I'm not even sure which side of a hundred it would go.
Make that 11!
I am hoping against hope that a medium such as the Indy (which, to be fair, has mentioned us in passing before), will give us a 'BIG UP' in such as the campaign they are running. I've tried to reach them and offer some input. No return as yet. Never say never.It can just be so frustrating seeing headlines such as this, making out there is everything going on elsewhere and nothing here, when so much is being done on our doorsteps. Just... maybe not by those paid millions to do it.
Anyway, fingers crossed they will register us again soon and 'gis a mention.
I sent our January newsletter out the other night, after much faffing about with the technology... again. I think it's improving with each issue, and with luck is set to get better, and more useful soon.
I've been pretty blown away with the response, which has been a double-edged sword: yet more things now on top to edit and add to the site.But this is, of course, a 'happy problem'.
PRW - Excessive packaging under spotlight
The Ultimate Promo?
You (unless you are a certain police cadet) have to hand it to Michael O'Leary/RyanAir: they know how to get in the news. And what's that again? Oh yeah, 'there is no publicity like free publicity'.
So to drum up a petition of 1m to Gordon Brown, he's popping out a free flight offer to get you to do it.
And the media are cooperating big-time. Sure they do point out at the end that it's pretty p*ss-poor, time-sensitive offer (a bit like the normal flights), but hey, news is news. I'd also guess a few will accuse him/them of bribing 'votes' with a freebie. Well, just so long as they check their own pages for 'Fly to.. free' competitions on the ad and promo pages before they get too sanctimonious about doing pretty much the same thing.
I could also point at the road pricing petition (link on our Jan newsletter - via About Us on the site) that got 1/2 a million on no more than people feeling strongly.
But I have to question the value of these e-things though, and who signs up and what notice is really taken of them. Especially when you are paid to respond.
So to drum up a petition of 1m to Gordon Brown, he's popping out a free flight offer to get you to do it.
And the media are cooperating big-time. Sure they do point out at the end that it's pretty p*ss-poor, time-sensitive offer (a bit like the normal flights), but hey, news is news. I'd also guess a few will accuse him/them of bribing 'votes' with a freebie. Well, just so long as they check their own pages for 'Fly to.. free' competitions on the ad and promo pages before they get too sanctimonious about doing pretty much the same thing.
I could also point at the road pricing petition (link on our Jan newsletter - via About Us on the site) that got 1/2 a million on no more than people feeling strongly.
But I have to question the value of these e-things though, and who signs up and what notice is really taken of them. Especially when you are paid to respond.
Burning Bush
There'll be links on this later I'm sure.
But the State of the Union report on BBC was clear: Less petrol use. But no targets on emissions.
That'll sort it then.
Telegraph - Bush seeks 20% cut in petrol
But the State of the Union report on BBC was clear: Less petrol use. But no targets on emissions.
That'll sort it then.
Telegraph - Bush seeks 20% cut in petrol
Steal £200. Get out of Jail free.
Remember Monopoly money? It had less value(s) than the real thing. I think we have arrived at Monopoly society, presided over by Monopoly Government and reported on by Monopoly Media.
So now the solution to full jails (one may ask how the trend has not been noticed over the last 10 years, or the causes of it - both in terms of creating customers and failing to prepare to accommodate them) is to a) not put any more in or b) let some out. I must find a Gatso right away and speed past it, and then fail to pay the fine. I bet they'll have a mugger out before you can say 'the law is the law'.
Meanwhile, Ms. Jade Gobby is rewarded for her performance and contribution to race relations with an all expenses (if not salaried, and PR/TV crew in tow)-paid trip to the country she didn't seem to rate.
Well, let me state here and now that some Singaporeans don't take their turn at the washing up, and I wish she would. Also, do they eat with their hands (Ans: some do, (even Chinese ones, like my Missus) sometimes, as do a few Ang Mohs, if they are at a Banana Leaf restaurant)?
There. I hope you are all suitably offended. Now, me and the family would like to visit the rellys this summer, if you would like to put us up in Raffles and fly (sadly our 2 week holiday allowance precludes the QE2 or getting an oil company to sponsor us to drive there - but rest assured we will write a blog for the book tour and whack a palm in our back garden in time for it to croak come winter (or maybe not, way things are going)) us SQ.
I had to do that last bit to make it re:levant. But really it all is. If the guys at the helm can't set an example, is it any wonder we follow our leaders to the easy options?
BBC - Limit Jail Sentences
So now the solution to full jails (one may ask how the trend has not been noticed over the last 10 years, or the causes of it - both in terms of creating customers and failing to prepare to accommodate them) is to a) not put any more in or b) let some out. I must find a Gatso right away and speed past it, and then fail to pay the fine. I bet they'll have a mugger out before you can say 'the law is the law'.
Meanwhile, Ms. Jade Gobby is rewarded for her performance and contribution to race relations with an all expenses (if not salaried, and PR/TV crew in tow)-paid trip to the country she didn't seem to rate.
Well, let me state here and now that some Singaporeans don't take their turn at the washing up, and I wish she would. Also, do they eat with their hands (Ans: some do, (even Chinese ones, like my Missus) sometimes, as do a few Ang Mohs, if they are at a Banana Leaf restaurant)?
There. I hope you are all suitably offended. Now, me and the family would like to visit the rellys this summer, if you would like to put us up in Raffles and fly (sadly our 2 week holiday allowance precludes the QE2 or getting an oil company to sponsor us to drive there - but rest assured we will write a blog for the book tour and whack a palm in our back garden in time for it to croak come winter (or maybe not, way things are going)) us SQ.
I had to do that last bit to make it re:levant. But really it all is. If the guys at the helm can't set an example, is it any wonder we follow our leaders to the easy options?
BBC - Limit Jail Sentences
Declan Does Davos
I'm just about to walk the boys to school (no e-smugness intended; we only live about a mile away, it's a nice(ish) morning and I need the exercise) and caught the tail end of BBC Breakfast's coverage of Davos.
So we have their cuddly reporter there, and to intercept reader's email challenges as to why everyone is flying in to discuss (amongst other things) global warming, a solution is to hand: Offsetting! Yes, Aunty is, along with all the rest, going to bung 13 quid into a bucket and throw it on the forest fire. That'll sort it then.
I would rather have hoped they might have sussed by now that such simplistic buy-offs are a little under the microscope; not just for what they don't do to help, but for the fact that they simply say 'keep on doing what you fancy', and by giving some guys in suits some cash it will all be hunky-dory.
For what it's worth, I think it obvious that major leaders have to meet, but it may be nice that they start erring on doing so in less poor ways environmentally (as well as rich financially), whilst propagating the D2AID2AIS hypocrisy (Sounds like a Robert Ludlum novel - ask me here if you want to know what it means).
BBC - Green Agenda
So we have their cuddly reporter there, and to intercept reader's email challenges as to why everyone is flying in to discuss (amongst other things) global warming, a solution is to hand: Offsetting! Yes, Aunty is, along with all the rest, going to bung 13 quid into a bucket and throw it on the forest fire. That'll sort it then.
I would rather have hoped they might have sussed by now that such simplistic buy-offs are a little under the microscope; not just for what they don't do to help, but for the fact that they simply say 'keep on doing what you fancy', and by giving some guys in suits some cash it will all be hunky-dory.
For what it's worth, I think it obvious that major leaders have to meet, but it may be nice that they start erring on doing so in less poor ways environmentally (as well as rich financially), whilst propagating the D2AID2AIS hypocrisy (Sounds like a Robert Ludlum novel - ask me here if you want to know what it means).
BBC - Green Agenda
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
And he'll fly anywhere he can to save the planet. Cheap.
I'm sorry, it's not quite fair (though well-balanced with the last left/right-wise), as I know our adsense can throw up the odd ad on site that is not what we'd wish.But these are booked banners.
I just love the irony.
BBC
It's all over. It isn't now?
Yet another award we have gamely gone in for.
I think one reason we do not often win is I can't resist posts like this.
Because today it's still be advertised, despite:
"The closing date for the first stage of entries is 19 January 2007. Successful entrants will be notified by the end of January"
I also love the irony of the ad next to it. I guess the snow is no longer any good in Europe, so Canada is now the place to go to ski... for those keen on saving the planet, and whocan afford to do so.
Shssssh, you don't know who
Another BBC Breakfast TV piece, another eyebrow-twitch.
This time it was about the power of supermarkets crushing small suppliers and shops.
At one point we had the usual bouffant and blonde 'interviewing' a besuited talking head from some ministry or body or whatever. So far, so pointless.
But towards the end, my ears pricked up when it transpired this guys did actually have powers to impose sanctions*. 'What are they?' asked the bouffant. 'I'd prefer not to go into that now,' said the suit, unchallenged. Er, why? Was it a secret? Seemed like the key point of the deal to me. Another media triumph. Meanwhile, back to the skateboarding duck...
*Reuters - Supermarket probe reports early findings - Or, not, possibly???!
BBC - there you go
This time it was about the power of supermarkets crushing small suppliers and shops.
At one point we had the usual bouffant and blonde 'interviewing' a besuited talking head from some ministry or body or whatever. So far, so pointless.
But towards the end, my ears pricked up when it transpired this guys did actually have powers to impose sanctions*. 'What are they?' asked the bouffant. 'I'd prefer not to go into that now,' said the suit, unchallenged. Er, why? Was it a secret? Seemed like the key point of the deal to me. Another media triumph. Meanwhile, back to the skateboarding duck...
*Reuters - Supermarket probe reports early findings - Or, not, possibly???!
BBC - there you go
Stereo-blooming-typical
There may be a link on their site later, which I'll add, but I have to post on this morning's BBC Breakfast TV 'piece' on urban 4x4s.
Seems they are, on top of all else, less reliable than other cars (more complex drivetrain? Ceratinly another eco, if not financial-nail in their coffins), which gave the producers the chance to throw two fighting cocks in the ring.
So we have a slick (in every sense), suited petrolhead who was allowed to claim, amongst other things, that they were safer (I thought they were more prone to fall over), pitted against yet another frizzy-haired earth mother from London ('No darlings, it's not a class issue (you bet, it's a 'we have decent public transport to do our thing, and sod the rest of you'. Here WE lead, and the rest of the country will follow'). Let's just say I didn't identify too closely with either.
In the great scheme of things, her rebuttals were plain daft, where she could have scored some points. And despite being waaaay too extreme in a few areas (and being allowed to get away with them), he made a lot more sense and came across a lot better.
Though aware of it so not a new point, as he asked: why indeed is so little being done to restrict the actual causes of more pollution and emissions, such as vans and trucks, as opposed to such divisive, spiteful, ill-informed and tokenistic campaigns?
And why is the media stoking them with such mouthpieces in the pro/con debates?
Answers please, on a ratings card.
Seems they are, on top of all else, less reliable than other cars (more complex drivetrain? Ceratinly another eco, if not financial-nail in their coffins), which gave the producers the chance to throw two fighting cocks in the ring.
So we have a slick (in every sense), suited petrolhead who was allowed to claim, amongst other things, that they were safer (I thought they were more prone to fall over), pitted against yet another frizzy-haired earth mother from London ('No darlings, it's not a class issue (you bet, it's a 'we have decent public transport to do our thing, and sod the rest of you'. Here WE lead, and the rest of the country will follow'). Let's just say I didn't identify too closely with either.
In the great scheme of things, her rebuttals were plain daft, where she could have scored some points. And despite being waaaay too extreme in a few areas (and being allowed to get away with them), he made a lot more sense and came across a lot better.
Though aware of it so not a new point, as he asked: why indeed is so little being done to restrict the actual causes of more pollution and emissions, such as vans and trucks, as opposed to such divisive, spiteful, ill-informed and tokenistic campaigns?
And why is the media stoking them with such mouthpieces in the pro/con debates?
Answers please, on a ratings card.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)