In a month I stand in a lonely box at the NEC trying to persuade FMCG brands and retailers to buy into RE:tie. So this pigued my interest: Tesco back Dragons' Den-style show to reward unknown brands
Sadly, while there are clues to pursue, at the moment it remains more tantalising than tangible.
Especially as it is probably shot and in the can already. Anyway, nothing ventured...
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Well, they did ask.
Green bling - Can luxury mean more than excess consumption?
It's all a matter of what your definitions are, and where you set the bars (and the link to the article didn't work for me so I can't reflect the detail).
That said, it is hard to reconcile the words with consequent actions, especially 'environmental and ethical messages' followed, almost inevitably, with 'excess consumption' in the next sentence.
It's why I find a Sunday supp special on 'recycled fashion' hilarious when by the following Friday it's all 'so early this week' and they've all scooted off in the Lear to Tokyo to gush on making barstool covers out of Willy's, er... well...
Take that as a no. And all trying to jump on board the bandwagon should feel deep shame. Well, if they had any shame. Or the ability to feel.
It's all a matter of what your definitions are, and where you set the bars (and the link to the article didn't work for me so I can't reflect the detail).
That said, it is hard to reconcile the words with consequent actions, especially 'environmental and ethical messages' followed, almost inevitably, with 'excess consumption' in the next sentence.
It's why I find a Sunday supp special on 'recycled fashion' hilarious when by the following Friday it's all 'so early this week' and they've all scooted off in the Lear to Tokyo to gush on making barstool covers out of Willy's, er... well...
Take that as a no. And all trying to jump on board the bandwagon should feel deep shame. Well, if they had any shame. Or the ability to feel.
Smiling because you don't drive a chelsea tractor?
Well, you may have to drive that smile off your face if you have cause to stray into the London congestion zone on occasion, as Ken's new £25 'gas-guzzler' charge is going to catch an awful lot of ordinary family cars out too.
This from BBC News reports that non 4x4's, but still categorised as members of the chelsea tractor club, such as the Peugeot 407 SW and several models of the Vauxhall Zafira range will also fall into the £25 bracket because their emissions exceed the 225g/km emissions limit.
As they say, if you don't catch enough fish, spread the net further.
This from BBC News reports that non 4x4's, but still categorised as members of the chelsea tractor club, such as the Peugeot 407 SW and several models of the Vauxhall Zafira range will also fall into the £25 bracket because their emissions exceed the 225g/km emissions limit.
As they say, if you don't catch enough fish, spread the net further.
Darfur - is the deafening silence broken at last?
The genocide in Darfur has been going on for what seems years now. Ostensibly, at least according to the current Sudanese government, this dispute between local farmers started over water (the shortage thereof), has caused the deaths of over 200,000 people and created the displacement of an even greater number to refugee camps within Sudan and in its neighbours. The fighting has even spread over the border into Chad and supposedly into Ethiopia too.
Yet the world's major media seems to have generally ignored the entire issue, until now. So what appears to have made the media realise that there is actually an important story behind Darfur?
Ahhhhh, I see, an internationally renowned member of the big screen fraternity, Stephen Spielberg, no less, has made the media luvvies sit up and take notice by stepping down from his role as artistic adviser to the Beijing Olympics opening and closing ceremonies. Now that's something really worth getting worked up about.
Isn't it amazing how a bit of celebrity can raise the media image of an issue whilst the deaths of hundreds of thousands can't?
Yet still not a peep about the fact that Darfur lies right across what is probably the largest potential oilfield in Sudan. Is it me?
Yet the world's major media seems to have generally ignored the entire issue, until now. So what appears to have made the media realise that there is actually an important story behind Darfur?
Ahhhhh, I see, an internationally renowned member of the big screen fraternity, Stephen Spielberg, no less, has made the media luvvies sit up and take notice by stepping down from his role as artistic adviser to the Beijing Olympics opening and closing ceremonies. Now that's something really worth getting worked up about.
Isn't it amazing how a bit of celebrity can raise the media image of an issue whilst the deaths of hundreds of thousands can't?
Yet still not a peep about the fact that Darfur lies right across what is probably the largest potential oilfield in Sudan. Is it me?
Sticks and.. well just sticks may warm my bones
Of late, and with some justification, anything involving 'bio' and 'fuel' seesm enough to get the Council excorcists out. So it's nice to stumble on something that seems a bit more enviROI+ in this regard.
FT.com - Green shoots from dead wood
At least, I'm hoping it is from the 'dead wood' aspect. But just looking at the money flying about... it's eye-watering!
FT.com - Green shoots from dead wood
At least, I'm hoping it is from the 'dead wood' aspect. But just looking at the money flying about... it's eye-watering!
REVIEW - Moneysavingexpert.com
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/
If you don't know about it, it's well worth a look... and signing up.
Hey, it's free. What's to lose? Actually, what's to save, or gain, more like!
And I say this still smarting from a few attempts to get in touch with more than the inevitable 'whoshudIsayzcallin'?' gatekeeperette and hence being ignored. Shame, as I like what Martin Lewis has done, is doing and can do. And I think he'd appreciate Junkk.com.
The reminders are weekly and usually contain well worthy nuggets of gold.
Such as this, which prompts my review here and now: Time to switch energy supplier. He even has my outfit, Swalec, sussed as pitching today but bumping up soon.
My only niggle is the email, like the site, is a navigation nightmare. But then Junkk.com is not exactly the London Tube map.
If you don't know about it, it's well worth a look... and signing up.
Hey, it's free. What's to lose? Actually, what's to save, or gain, more like!
And I say this still smarting from a few attempts to get in touch with more than the inevitable 'whoshudIsayzcallin'?' gatekeeperette and hence being ignored. Shame, as I like what Martin Lewis has done, is doing and can do. And I think he'd appreciate Junkk.com.
The reminders are weekly and usually contain well worthy nuggets of gold.
Such as this, which prompts my review here and now: Time to switch energy supplier. He even has my outfit, Swalec, sussed as pitching today but bumping up soon.
My only niggle is the email, like the site, is a navigation nightmare. But then Junkk.com is not exactly the London Tube map.
Must fly
It has been a good day so far for not only finding 'interesting' stories or opinion, but also being pleasantly surprised where I find them.
Indy - Revealed: the £1.2m spent by select committees on travels around the globe
I wonder how many were on trips to assess the impact of air travel?
Indy - Revealed: the £1.2m spent by select committees on travels around the globe
I wonder how many were on trips to assess the impact of air travel?
Peak soil as well as peak oil?
That's just a little snippet from a well reasoned article by George Monbiot, on biofuels. Monbiot argues that many of the crops (and even crop wastes) grown for biofuels actually create a net carbon debt of decades (and even centuries in some cases), and lead to soil exhaustion, not to mention competing with land for food production.
"Removing crop wastes means replacing the nutrients they contain with fertiliser, which causes further greenhouse gas emissions. A recent paper by the Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen suggests that emissions of nitrous oxide (a greenhouse gas 296 times more powerful than CO2) from nitrogen fertilisers wipe out all the carbon savings biofuels produce, even before you take the changes in land use into account. Growing special second generation crops, such as trees or switchgrass, doesn’t solve the problem either: like other energy crops, they displace both food production and carbon emissions."
So just when we were beginning to think that some selected biofuels were the way forward, the counter arguments appear to become more convincing.
"All these convoluted solutions are designed to avoid a simpler one: reducing the consumption of transport fuel. But that requires the use of a different commodity. Global supplies of political courage appear, unfortunately, to have peaked some time ago."
Political courage? Come on George, we haven't see any of that for decades!
"Removing crop wastes means replacing the nutrients they contain with fertiliser, which causes further greenhouse gas emissions. A recent paper by the Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen suggests that emissions of nitrous oxide (a greenhouse gas 296 times more powerful than CO2) from nitrogen fertilisers wipe out all the carbon savings biofuels produce, even before you take the changes in land use into account. Growing special second generation crops, such as trees or switchgrass, doesn’t solve the problem either: like other energy crops, they displace both food production and carbon emissions."
So just when we were beginning to think that some selected biofuels were the way forward, the counter arguments appear to become more convincing.
"All these convoluted solutions are designed to avoid a simpler one: reducing the consumption of transport fuel. But that requires the use of a different commodity. Global supplies of political courage appear, unfortunately, to have peaked some time ago."
Political courage? Come on George, we haven't see any of that for decades!
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Thousands of deaths by 2012
That could be the scenario here in the UK as a direct consequence of climate change, according to this from The Guardian.
Heatwaves, Malaria, skin cancer, Lyme's disease, plus huge increases in food poisoning cases from nasties like Salmonella, as well as increased rates of air pollution health problems, could account for thousands of additional deaths. It reads a bit like the proverbial pestilence stories from the bible - all that seems to be missing are the plagues of locusts!
It's all going to be OK though, because our Gov is on the case - "health minister Dawn Primarolo said the national health service would have to adapt to deal with the problems posed by climate change. ......... Measures would include: ensuring that hospitals were equipped to deal with the effects of heat, gales, and floods; developing local plans for heatwaves, gales and flooding; disaster preparation; and advising people how to adapt to climate change."
Errrr ..... wouldn't it be better to put more effort into mitigating climate change rather than adapting to it?
But, and again, it's all down to one little word - the report uses that word 'could' again - which seems to be the main culprit for most of this alarming reporting.
Heatwaves, Malaria, skin cancer, Lyme's disease, plus huge increases in food poisoning cases from nasties like Salmonella, as well as increased rates of air pollution health problems, could account for thousands of additional deaths. It reads a bit like the proverbial pestilence stories from the bible - all that seems to be missing are the plagues of locusts!
It's all going to be OK though, because our Gov is on the case - "health minister Dawn Primarolo said the national health service would have to adapt to deal with the problems posed by climate change. ......... Measures would include: ensuring that hospitals were equipped to deal with the effects of heat, gales, and floods; developing local plans for heatwaves, gales and flooding; disaster preparation; and advising people how to adapt to climate change."
Errrr ..... wouldn't it be better to put more effort into mitigating climate change rather than adapting to it?
But, and again, it's all down to one little word - the report uses that word 'could' again - which seems to be the main culprit for most of this alarming reporting.
Leagues of their own
I have blogged before on the pre-selective, exclusive nature of a lot that takes place in the world of 're'.
Conferences and events that you need to pony up thousands for just to sit in an audience. No wonder those that are 'in' often don't relate as well as they might to those who are not.
Of course, all things that take time and money to create and need paying for (even Junkk.com, one day), so market forces will dictate.
But I must say I just had an eye-opner as to where I am vs. where others can afford to be in the wonderful world of being informed about your market.
Amongst many others, I subscribe to a (free) online news feed called PackWire. And I often get the odd useful tidbit through.
So when I saw this in my subject line, with all that I am in the thick of with RE:tie, I really perked up:
Consumer Attitudes Towards Packaging: New Insights and Future Perspectives
Today, it is widely acknowledged that packaging decisions can have a significant impact on sales. This report explores the changing nature of consumer attitudes and behaviors towards packaging in consumer packaged goods. It examines all the key trends shaping packaging led choices and ultimately offers actionable recommendations for industry players going forward.
Reasons to purchase...
• Access a blend of quantitative and qualitative data aggregating the most compelling and recent research in this increasingly important topic
• Gain a detailed insight into consumer views towards packaging and understand the implications for design
• Improve your marketing by following best-practice guidelines enabling more effective targeting with on-trend products and relevant communications
• Download Brochure
Sadly, a short-lived moment of excitement at further valuable market intel, for it was follwed by this:
• $5695
Ah well, I guess I'll just have to wing it some more! But one does have to wonder hwo those who can afford access to such things seem to pretty much get it wrong so often still!
Conferences and events that you need to pony up thousands for just to sit in an audience. No wonder those that are 'in' often don't relate as well as they might to those who are not.
Of course, all things that take time and money to create and need paying for (even Junkk.com, one day), so market forces will dictate.
But I must say I just had an eye-opner as to where I am vs. where others can afford to be in the wonderful world of being informed about your market.
Amongst many others, I subscribe to a (free) online news feed called PackWire. And I often get the odd useful tidbit through.
So when I saw this in my subject line, with all that I am in the thick of with RE:tie, I really perked up:
Consumer Attitudes Towards Packaging: New Insights and Future Perspectives
Today, it is widely acknowledged that packaging decisions can have a significant impact on sales. This report explores the changing nature of consumer attitudes and behaviors towards packaging in consumer packaged goods. It examines all the key trends shaping packaging led choices and ultimately offers actionable recommendations for industry players going forward.
Reasons to purchase...
• Access a blend of quantitative and qualitative data aggregating the most compelling and recent research in this increasingly important topic
• Gain a detailed insight into consumer views towards packaging and understand the implications for design
• Improve your marketing by following best-practice guidelines enabling more effective targeting with on-trend products and relevant communications
• Download Brochure
Sadly, a short-lived moment of excitement at further valuable market intel, for it was follwed by this:
• $5695
Ah well, I guess I'll just have to wing it some more! But one does have to wonder hwo those who can afford access to such things seem to pretty much get it wrong so often still!
Hardly a flying start!
Back in December 2006, Ol' Golden, then our chancellor, trumpeted a major tax relief policy that would see all new homes deemed to be zero carbon (in terms of emissions) free of stamp duty. Despite the apparently vague definition of what zero carbon meant exactly, this created quite a bit of excitement at the time, and many pundits were forecasting that the savings involved for buyers would entirely offset the additional construction costs.
OK, so a year and a bit on, just how many thousands of new homes have been constructed to qualify for this major tax relief?
Go on, have a guess. Any idea? No? Well, the answer is six. No, not six thousand, but the single digit only - i.e. six new homes have qualified for stamp duty exemption. Report is from This Is London.
"Clearly this does fall into the camp of green-tax con. The Government is not putting forward serious policies to tackle climate change and this is a classic example. ........ It is all talk and no action. If the Government were serious about benefiting the environment, they would offer everyone a rebate if their houses were properly insulated."
Quite! Despite the government spokesman's claim that numbers will rapidly rise this year, for once I agree with the Green Party's economic spokesman wholeheartedly.
OK, so a year and a bit on, just how many thousands of new homes have been constructed to qualify for this major tax relief?
Go on, have a guess. Any idea? No? Well, the answer is six. No, not six thousand, but the single digit only - i.e. six new homes have qualified for stamp duty exemption. Report is from This Is London.
"Clearly this does fall into the camp of green-tax con. The Government is not putting forward serious policies to tackle climate change and this is a classic example. ........ It is all talk and no action. If the Government were serious about benefiting the environment, they would offer everyone a rebate if their houses were properly insulated."
Quite! Despite the government spokesman's claim that numbers will rapidly rise this year, for once I agree with the Green Party's economic spokesman wholeheartedly.
On yer bike!
That seems to be the message from Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, as reported by NaturalChoices today.
Can't argue with any of the ideas at all; it all looks very sensible and would be for any major urban conurbation. But just look at that cost, £1 Billion! That seems an awful lot of bucks for a few cycle ways!
And I'll be interested to see what any 'out of city' local equivalents might be. An express cycleway from Shrewsbury to Ludlow? I can't quite see it happening somehow.
Can't argue with any of the ideas at all; it all looks very sensible and would be for any major urban conurbation. But just look at that cost, £1 Billion! That seems an awful lot of bucks for a few cycle ways!
And I'll be interested to see what any 'out of city' local equivalents might be. An express cycleway from Shrewsbury to Ludlow? I can't quite see it happening somehow.
A very cheap shot
And I am making it. Sorry.
Just watching the BBC morning news about a wind farm proposal in Scotland, with those involved making the case for and agin'.
Mainly it surrounds the energy needs vs. other factors such as, ironically, 'environmental damage'.
Thing is, from the start to the finish of the piece, live and to camera, the reporter was in front of a mighty windmill that wasn't actually turning, with a couple behind also acting as nifty perches for seagulls.
At least I am now joined in this less than helpful, and rather superficial, observation by the anchor. Tricky. Becuase of course if they had opted for the library shots the BBC could have been accused of potraying an overly favourable scenario.
It's just as shame that, given the choice to do it live, it wasn't considered helpful to also address the enviROI of the operational facts to round out the case. All I know is that I went away with a vision of a great, big... still turbine.
Just watching the BBC morning news about a wind farm proposal in Scotland, with those involved making the case for and agin'.
Mainly it surrounds the energy needs vs. other factors such as, ironically, 'environmental damage'.
Thing is, from the start to the finish of the piece, live and to camera, the reporter was in front of a mighty windmill that wasn't actually turning, with a couple behind also acting as nifty perches for seagulls.
At least I am now joined in this less than helpful, and rather superficial, observation by the anchor. Tricky. Becuase of course if they had opted for the library shots the BBC could have been accused of potraying an overly favourable scenario.
It's just as shame that, given the choice to do it live, it wasn't considered helpful to also address the enviROI of the operational facts to round out the case. All I know is that I went away with a vision of a great, big... still turbine.
NEWS/GO3 PR - Pocket battles
A PR last night from the Green (Party) Machine (London) has strirred a musing in me. Let me share it here as supplied, but I do propose to comment:
ABOLISH ROAD TAX AND CHARGE THE POLLUTERS, DARLING
The Green Party's Principal Speaker, Caroline Lucas MEP has today
urged the government to reward responsible motorists by abolishing
the Road Tax, and shifting the responsibility onto gas-guzzlers
through the fuel duty. The call comes as road lobbyists meet with the
Chancellor to plead for a smaller increase in fuel tax.
Dr Lucas said:
"The flat road tax on vehicle ownership takes no account of road
usage, and provides no incentive or reward for making less polluting
travel choices. A far fairer alternative would be to scrap it and move
the responsibility onto fuel tax.
"But today we see the road lobby arguing against this fairer measure.
The AA has consistently argued for more roadbuilding, more traffic,
more pollution. They have attempted to block every effort to reduce
our dependency on petrol. Now the price has inevitably risen, and
they want the rest of us to pay for it through our taxes, or in cuts
to services.
"Most car owners would like to take more public transport, but some
lobbyists seem determined to make it as hard for them as possible.
Does Alasdair Darling have the guts to stand up to them?"
At first blush, what is not to agree with? Polluter pays. Simple.
Thing is, this is issued by a self-evidently London-centric source (not suprisingly, as their candidate is gunning for mayor. Which, by the way, I was totally unaware of, for which the major media might be asked why. It's the Boris & Ken show, with Hugh coming in on occasion. No one else gets a peep). But to the best of my interpretation, this call refers to a national issue.
And there be the rub. And it's our old chum again. The politics of the pocket. Or Eco(nomics) vs. Eco(logy).
In London, you don't really need a car, especially to do your job. Distances are shorter. Cycling is an option. Tubes and trains and busses abound. So the Prius is really just to get the luvs to cello practice without paying the congestion charge.
But elsewhere you might need to drop a few hundred miles a week in your Fiesta just to earn a crust.
So what seems so simple need not necessarily be so... or certainly fair. It's a tricky balance, but whoever starts trying to do it properly will get my vote. Make that whenever...
ABOLISH ROAD TAX AND CHARGE THE POLLUTERS, DARLING
The Green Party's Principal Speaker, Caroline Lucas MEP has today
urged the government to reward responsible motorists by abolishing
the Road Tax, and shifting the responsibility onto gas-guzzlers
through the fuel duty. The call comes as road lobbyists meet with the
Chancellor to plead for a smaller increase in fuel tax.
Dr Lucas said:
"The flat road tax on vehicle ownership takes no account of road
usage, and provides no incentive or reward for making less polluting
travel choices. A far fairer alternative would be to scrap it and move
the responsibility onto fuel tax.
"But today we see the road lobby arguing against this fairer measure.
The AA has consistently argued for more roadbuilding, more traffic,
more pollution. They have attempted to block every effort to reduce
our dependency on petrol. Now the price has inevitably risen, and
they want the rest of us to pay for it through our taxes, or in cuts
to services.
"Most car owners would like to take more public transport, but some
lobbyists seem determined to make it as hard for them as possible.
Does Alasdair Darling have the guts to stand up to them?"
At first blush, what is not to agree with? Polluter pays. Simple.
Thing is, this is issued by a self-evidently London-centric source (not suprisingly, as their candidate is gunning for mayor. Which, by the way, I was totally unaware of, for which the major media might be asked why. It's the Boris & Ken show, with Hugh coming in on occasion. No one else gets a peep). But to the best of my interpretation, this call refers to a national issue.
And there be the rub. And it's our old chum again. The politics of the pocket. Or Eco(nomics) vs. Eco(logy).
In London, you don't really need a car, especially to do your job. Distances are shorter. Cycling is an option. Tubes and trains and busses abound. So the Prius is really just to get the luvs to cello practice without paying the congestion charge.
But elsewhere you might need to drop a few hundred miles a week in your Fiesta just to earn a crust.
So what seems so simple need not necessarily be so... or certainly fair. It's a tricky balance, but whoever starts trying to do it properly will get my vote. Make that whenever...
Monday, February 11, 2008
There are ethical funds and there are ............errrr .... ethical funds
This from the Guardian highlights a few little nuances that may surprise you if you are lucky enough to have a few spare quid and choose to invest in one of the so called 'ethical funds'.
Reading it made me smile. There are obviously rather varying shades of ethical just as there are varying shades of green.
So, if you thought that your ethical fund investment was directly helping to tackle climate change, you just may have to reconsider having read this.
It's just not easy being green, or ethical, is it?
Reading it made me smile. There are obviously rather varying shades of ethical just as there are varying shades of green.
So, if you thought that your ethical fund investment was directly helping to tackle climate change, you just may have to reconsider having read this.
It's just not easy being green, or ethical, is it?
Bureaucrats - 200. Rainforests - Nil
And my brain into minus figures, if not near meltdown.What I should be doing is getting cracking on filling this lot out. But all I can think of doing is taking a picture and blogging (yes, I need help. In more ways than one).
You are looking of stacks of up to a dozen pages, from A to O, though with a few letters rating subsets from (i) to (iv), so probably around 30 stacks in all.
It all started so well. I stumbled across some nice folk who liked what I was doing and offered to help with the prototypes of the RE:tie for the show next month. So I went up to Brum to see what they could do and explain what was needed; we communed, and lo... it was good.
And it's all ready to kick off. With precisely a month to go. But... just... a bit of paperwork.
I didn't pay much attention as it was just one Excel document, but when it came time to address it (OK, deadline) it just kept on printing... and printing. No first born required, nor pint of blood, but amounts and levels of data required that go back in the past and project into the future that I can barely grasp the relevance of for this task, yet alone imagine how I will aquire... or complete.... ever.
Even the lovely lady who sent it to me was sympathetic, for she is but an intermediary working for the University and hired just to handle their responsibilities with such paperwork, as demanded from 'above' by... now who is that? A blue square with a circle of golden stars at the bottom of each page (only part-funded by, mind. Lord help me if I get another set from another bunch later!). Layer upon layer of 'EU-what!' to 'help' them 'help' me get a prototype ready.
And I must do it as I have no choice now but to. I am committed.
But sadly, I do not seem to have the luxury of a lovely lady hired for the sole purpose of filling such forms out.
Nope, despite writing that, the monkey is still very much resting full square on my shoulders.
And so, with a heavy everything I must now turn to Form A (i).....
You gotta larf
Sorry, but this just appealed to my sense of irony.On the page devoted to a piece on climate science (well, the apparent supression of a scientist in the field - Climate scientist they could not silence), I could not help but note what rather dominated the rest of the page. Not quite the same on the online version.
There's the medium. There's the message. There's mixed. And there's just, plain 'off'.
The media really does just love it all ways.
Just in case they don't 'moderate' it in:
Meanwhile, in the print edition, the majority of the page with this piece seems to be dominated for a Tesco ad for cheap petrol - 'Every litre helps'.
Not quite clear as to what, in the circumstances.
Delicious irony?'
Bet they're in with a chance at the Sunday Times "Best Green Companies" slot, mind.
To the winners, whoever they are, the spoils.
Zadie Smith sinks teeth into book awards - it is about the world of literature, but applies pretty much everywhere.
I've won a few. Lost more than I care to think on. But it's certainly hard these days to think of many that are judged purely on merit, without soem agenda creeping in.
Awards are, like most things these days, are merely products of an industry whose prime motivation is its own survival and the interests of those who work within it or feed off it to survive.
Winning is nice (and useful) if you are a winner. Not so great if you don't. But those nominated andhence competing are essentially irrelevant. It is the process, more than anything, that drives the system, rather than the product (though to some remoras, sorry, reporters, controversy can extend the period they can suck the life out of the topic).
So it is refreshing to say the least, if necessary to avoid accusations of sour grapes, to find a winner rather plainly stating it like it is.
Which, with luck, may briefly make for uncomfortabel reading for those who are paid way too much and have much more influence than they deserve, simply for being in the industry rtaher than contributing anything worthwhiel to it.
But though flawed, I see no hope for improvemnt, and hence the real winners will continue to be those nowhere near the podium.
I've won a few. Lost more than I care to think on. But it's certainly hard these days to think of many that are judged purely on merit, without soem agenda creeping in.
Awards are, like most things these days, are merely products of an industry whose prime motivation is its own survival and the interests of those who work within it or feed off it to survive.
Winning is nice (and useful) if you are a winner. Not so great if you don't. But those nominated andhence competing are essentially irrelevant. It is the process, more than anything, that drives the system, rather than the product (though to some remoras, sorry, reporters, controversy can extend the period they can suck the life out of the topic).
So it is refreshing to say the least, if necessary to avoid accusations of sour grapes, to find a winner rather plainly stating it like it is.
Which, with luck, may briefly make for uncomfortabel reading for those who are paid way too much and have much more influence than they deserve, simply for being in the industry rtaher than contributing anything worthwhiel to it.
But though flawed, I see no hope for improvemnt, and hence the real winners will continue to be those nowhere near the podium.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Led by donkeys; reported on by jackals
Watching the Andrew Marr show and decided to make a commment.
I simply could not let pass a continued notion coming across that I, as a member of the public, am apparently very happy with our Dear Leader's performance so far, or indeed upon the reporting on it.
I simply could not believe a News 24 report the other night, which was the first in as long as I could recall that involved our PM having an opinion, when the reporter seemed to be parroting a press relase, and casting an amazingly glow on the man's character based on the subjective belief of the reporter. I do not think it is an objective newsperson's' job to say how calm and confident a politcal indivdual is, or how genuine and honest his beliefs. This was a character endorsement too far in my view.
However, the main reason for my post is a comment made by the host regarding the fact we are enjoying some unseasonably warm weather that is described as showing Global Warming in action.
Just watched the slot with Peter Mandelson, where the competencies of our PM were raised. With all the huge issues swirling about us I can of late recall no peep from him, bar a glowing mention the other day by a BBC reporter who positively misted up at Mr. Brown's common person empathy via his deep interest in... football.
ps: Andrew, when the weather is unseasonably nice, if you have to come up with a reason it might be better to refer to the possible explanation as climate change rather than global warming. Otherwise you may hand yet another piece of ammo to 'climate optimists' who often cite often rather loose science and editorial, especially when comparisons are made with historical records, or when it ends up very cold somewhere.
I simply could not let pass a continued notion coming across that I, as a member of the public, am apparently very happy with our Dear Leader's performance so far, or indeed upon the reporting on it.
I simply could not believe a News 24 report the other night, which was the first in as long as I could recall that involved our PM having an opinion, when the reporter seemed to be parroting a press relase, and casting an amazingly glow on the man's character based on the subjective belief of the reporter. I do not think it is an objective newsperson's' job to say how calm and confident a politcal indivdual is, or how genuine and honest his beliefs. This was a character endorsement too far in my view.
However, the main reason for my post is a comment made by the host regarding the fact we are enjoying some unseasonably warm weather that is described as showing Global Warming in action.
Just watched the slot with Peter Mandelson, where the competencies of our PM were raised. With all the huge issues swirling about us I can of late recall no peep from him, bar a glowing mention the other day by a BBC reporter who positively misted up at Mr. Brown's common person empathy via his deep interest in... football.
ps: Andrew, when the weather is unseasonably nice, if you have to come up with a reason it might be better to refer to the possible explanation as climate change rather than global warming. Otherwise you may hand yet another piece of ammo to 'climate optimists' who often cite often rather loose science and editorial, especially when comparisons are made with historical records, or when it ends up very cold somewhere.
Voyages of discovery
Amazing what leads to what.
I was scoping one of my many sources of stuff, and came across this from SHARKRIDE: A retail experience with negative externalities minimized and reflected in the labeling and pricing.
Now I can't say the headline did a lot for me, or indeed the cause of bringing the e-word to the near-indifferent masses, but it was worth persevering.
And I did pop in a plug, as it seems there may be guys, like Bob, who 'know people'.
I have to say I rather stumbled on the, er, ‘negative ex-thingies’. But a nice share, ta.
For any, like Bob, interested in mitigating efforts via design, may I point you at http://www.junkk.com, which tries to matchmake those with ideas for second uses with those keen not to throw stuff away if not necessary.
But I have to agree that the more potent notion is building this in from the off. If any are in the UK in March there is a show at the NEC called Innovative Packaging, with a sub-section called EcoPack, at which I am exhibiting (a bottle/jar cap re:evolutionary design called RE:tie) and also speaking on the joys of re:use!
However there was, in the words of Yoda, 'one more'. And that was the little gizmo called Snapshot, which looks a well nifty effort to, as the name suggests, give folk a thumbnail of your site.
I was scoping one of my many sources of stuff, and came across this from SHARKRIDE: A retail experience with negative externalities minimized and reflected in the labeling and pricing.
Now I can't say the headline did a lot for me, or indeed the cause of bringing the e-word to the near-indifferent masses, but it was worth persevering.
And I did pop in a plug, as it seems there may be guys, like Bob, who 'know people'.
I have to say I rather stumbled on the, er, ‘negative ex-thingies’. But a nice share, ta.
For any, like Bob, interested in mitigating efforts via design, may I point you at http://www.junkk.com, which tries to matchmake those with ideas for second uses with those keen not to throw stuff away if not necessary.
But I have to agree that the more potent notion is building this in from the off. If any are in the UK in March there is a show at the NEC called Innovative Packaging, with a sub-section called EcoPack, at which I am exhibiting (a bottle/jar cap re:evolutionary design called RE:tie) and also speaking on the joys of re:use!
However there was, in the words of Yoda, 'one more'. And that was the little gizmo called Snapshot, which looks a well nifty effort to, as the name suggests, give folk a thumbnail of your site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)