Coke adds... data

Actually they haven't.. yet. But on a more positive note I'm hoping this ad, which pretty much shows what we're up to (if for a very different reason) is karmically encouraging. At least we know they have a caliper in the office!

What's odd about this picture?

All very noble 'n all, and yes it did get noticed, but as it isn't mentioned anywhere I have to wonder how they got there. And, indeed, how the shots (there are many - we are talking an international artist here - I guess he cycles around) get taken.

There may be hints in the words 'seen from the air', 'pay a flying visit' and 'aerial artist'.

Mixed message? Me, I waited 'til they stuck up a crane and then asked the operator to take some shots of our town ;)

Agenda Benders

Another lost archive, this time from when I was contributing to the BBC about blogs, and not a little miffed about editorial, if not censorship. Still worth sharing:

There is no doubt that power can turn the head of those who wield it. And there is equally no doubt that those who occupy any position of public profile in or for a major media organisation will inevitably find such a gift, and curse, bestowed upon them, willingly or merely as a consequence. And as will always be the way, such power can come in many forms, stemming equally from the way it has been wielded, from respect to to fear. With, in the case of media, perhaps one extra aspect, the desire to be heard. You may agree or disagree with someone who can lay claim to column inches or minutes of airtime. You may like or dislike them. But if you think there's the faintest chance that you may get to their audience by engaging with them in any way, it's worth the punt.

Until recently, access to the major media was quite simple. You were either part of the story-telling system, or part of the story. Now, with the advent of the forums and blogs sprouting everywhere, there is a chance at finding oneself as a potential profiled player in either, but most significantly the former, at least by temporary association. This can be heady stuff. And has been hailed as a new era in citizen journalism bringing a new dimension to the media fare we are served and/or can opt for.

But is it? With recent personal experience I can testify that what seemed to be a brave new world of equal access and freedom of speech can easily be manipulated by whomsoever controls the medium to meet their requirements, benign or otherwise.

For this reason I have now decided to try to avoid reading much less contributing to any other blogs, and concentrate solely on my own, using and quoting such information resources with whose provenance I have more confidence, at least historically. I will always have my own of course, and what I have written, and hence think, is there for all to read and judge accordingly, warts and all. And I think I will continue to avoid allowing replies, at least directly (I always welcome contact for personal discussion), to avoid any chance that what is on view (ie: from others) artificially adds weight to my own, inevitably subjective, viewpoints.

In short there will always be an agenda. It's silly to pretend, or believe, otherwise.

Me, myself... not

I have, it seems, a common name. First and last. Those Hugenots got about a bit. Hence I share it with quite a few folk. Some of note.

Usually this is quite fun. But then a Sunday Times journalist with my moniker wrote an expose of the Russian Mafia, so I was a bit concerned when any black cars with smoked windows drove past the house a bit too slowly.

And now this morning I was in front of the TV when Newswatch came on, pretty much starring in commentary and print... me! Only it wasn't. And this person's views were not mine at all. Now I have chosen to contribute to this programme before, and at the very least readers of this blog know it. So do most of my chums. Fortunately none of you are up at this time so it is not an issue.

But it did make me think. What was the point of the name? It could have been anyone. Even adding the town can still lead to a mis-identification of there are more than one of you.

I think it's mainly to ensure those that write in check to see if they have been mentioned, which at least means some sort of audience.

I certainly think that's true of the Telegraph system I have given up on since having a post edited (see recent previous blog). When I read the initiating article first thing there are no posts as the moderating (and editing) is taking place. But unless I have contributed I can't really be bothered to check subsequently.

Vanity, vanity, thy name is 'Cross of Ross'.

Asking for thirds

Just stumbled across some notes I took for my recent jaunt to London. Hate to waste, so here they are:

Did you know there a Third Sector? Until recently, I didn't. So it came as a bit of surprise to find we (Junkk.com) fall within it. It has an office. And a Minister.

And so it was that I was up at crack of dawn (and back in the wee small hours:( to attend an event snappily entitled 'Joint HM Treasury & Cabinet Office Review On The Future Role Of The Third Sector In Social & Economic Regeneration' in London, drearily.

Basically it's an outreach, recognising that there a bunch of folk 'out there' doing stuff that is quiet helpful to the social fabric, and that it wouldn't hurt to complement. I'd even go so far as to say 'they' had understood a bit of help, or at the very least reduction of hindrance, would go a long way to making things happy and happening.

It all kicked off with the inevitable speeches from the inevitable bevvy of pols, with the inevitable excuses for not hanging around beyond wishing us the best, Young Mr. Grace-style... 'you're all doing very well'. Ah well, busy folk, I guess, but it does strike one that for all the stories they tell of 'meeting real folk' you need to wonder when it is they actually do it. Actually a fairly sharp bunch, with a few young... so young. There was a nice balance of fresh enthusiasm, though already jading with trappings of power.

At least they are trying, which is why I committed to attend.

Was it worth it? Well, it was 15 unpaid/compensated hours of my life, plus car, return train and tube.

Basically it was two sets of workshops, where 'we' (social enterprisers) sat in groups and came up with answers to structured questions around themes such as:

* Promoting Innovation and Enterprise

* Future role of the sector in shaping and delivering public services

* Cohesive communities and building a voice for citizens

* Creating a sustainable resource base

It was all structured, which is necessary, but to me no so happily. Thanks to the schedules overrunning it was more important to do what we were meant to in the allocated space, rather than consider coming up with anything sensible. More process over product. I almost expected them to ask us to make sure we ticked the box and signed in.

But by some miracle a few useful discussions were had.

Plus a few 'debates'. I think I was a very lone 'commercial' social enterprise in a sea of NGOs, charities, etc, and all of whom knew this turf backwards.

I don't like being patronised by some smart-alek in a suit whose job and salary depends on dealing in process, when I have committed my whole being to product.

At least there was a nice buffet.

I have posted the thoughts I had on the site.

ps: On a small, but not unconnected note, for visual accompaniment I attach just some of the paperwork associated with it all. Note the natty folder. Now how much better had it been not immediately disposable, but rather had a second use? Just asking.

Data Overload. Answers underwhelming?

A while ago I had a request from some media initiative I'd signed up for, to help with some research.

Keen to help, I clicked the link and even got cracking, but when I saw the thing was scores of pages long I paused, and then when it transpired they were asking pretty deep rooted financial stuff about our business I stopped dead, not even midway through.

At least this thing allowed one to have a mooch forward to see what you were letting yourself in for, and even store entries 'to date' (which strikes a chord having just lost a mulit-page online application that did neither when my browser hung - the secret is just to whack in x's and nonsense numbers until the end (don't hit submit!) and capture the headings on a Word .doc to craft at leisure, and then cut and paste when you're ready). But it was still just too much, and I dropped it.

But it seems they knew where I lived, and did not want take 'waaaay too hard' as an answer, because I have just been reminded:

"We are now heading towards the end of our annual collection of data. Your input would be greatly appreciated to help provide an overview of the whole sector, and provide results that are useful to [the commissioners]."

As it seemed only polite, I was moved to write to explain why we are not participating further in this survey rather than just not responding:

"We are and have been keen to help and indeed support any initiative(s) of this nature, as they can be more than beneficial to our area and possibly our own interests. We in fact have benefited from support in the past.

However, we are finding ourselves bombarded with such requests, and frankly many are too extensive, intrusive or indeed too regular to cope with unless they are a requirement of a grant process (and even then I have had cause to request a qualitative person-based interview rather than a form-based one). I also have a real problem with such structured questionnaires as they often do not allow for context.

This one fell under the first two as far as we are concerned. I did try, but gave up when I saw where it was going (which at least it did. Some refuse to allow you to proceed unless you fill things fully and in a way designed to suit the acquisition system)."

No kidding. I get these requests all the time. And some on a very regular basis. Plus reminders. They can get very hurt that you don't feel like filling in their form, their way.

What really gets me is that few, if any of these forms have been structured in a way that I felt I was contributing meaningfully, or were trying to help me help them. So much needs context or an explanation. And too often saying 'don't know', or 'none of the above' or 'more than one' is rarely an option. Nothing gets me offside more than a form telling me I have not filled it in correctly before allowing me to move on, especially when it doesn't allow me to answer correctly (it is way worse when it is something serious, or involving money, when you have to put your name to it at the end). There is seldom a 'gave up becuase this is a stupid form' option.

So I have to question this research technique, how much it all costs and how meaningful the results ever can be. But I'm sure it all makes for lovely reports that no one will read.

Ok, so I'm a hypocrite. Now what?

Here's an interesting piece - Welcoming Homer the tree-hugger - sent to the BBC Green Room by an American writer.

Considering the provenance it is unsurprisingly funny, intelligent and irreverent.

But...

Despite enjoying every word, and agreeing with it all, by the end I was not terribly sure what more I could do.

Yes, 'we' need to cooperate. And certainly those on his list need to be brought on board. But join what?

How I wish I had the cachet of writing something like the Simpsons behind me to get published in such a major medium and simply say 'please join Junkk.com and use it. It's free, it's fun and may make a small difference'.

I guess I'll try. But will it get read in some niche area by anyone other than a bunch of hypocrites like me who will immediately discuss and criticise without even giving it a go?

We have had welcome support for Junkk.com form many areas. But what has amazed me is how few we can trace who have actually signed up and used it. Our best hope are those who just like the idea and want to play.

Back to the shed.

The Shirty Dozen

BBC's Panorama is one of the few true, old school investigative news programmes around these days, so when I came across an invitation to submit my blog (well, it was to anyone, so I hope they have a lot of staff) I thought 'Why not?'

So I composed the following, and it can't hurt to have it logged here:

The environment is BIG these days. There are lives at stake: a current and future planetful, by some accounts. There is also good, and bad, money to be made taking advantage of its problems. I have a few profound views that shape my blog’s content... My ‘Shirty’ Dozen:

1) The facts and/or causes of climate change/global warming are too often distracting, or used as such. What really matters is that there is no sense in wasting anything unnecessarily.

2) People are inevitably polluters. With a growing global population, all we’re really doing is buying time... and still not very well. But it’s still worth trying!

3) Hence any well considered, positive/proactive initiative is better than nothing, well worth supporting and applauding. But there always need to be SWOT analyses and ROI assessments built-in... with consequential contingencies.

4) Little that is green can be viewed productively only in black and white.

5) There is still waaay too much remote, high-level talk, and not enough individual action.

6) Where there is action, the demands of PROCESS too often hijack the aims behind the RESULT, making change much more difficult to apply.

7) Most everyday folk would like to do something, but few have the time or resources to find out or sift through everything out there (and often contradictory), much less engage. They must be reached on terms they can cope with, and in ways they can respond to.

8) The public are often poorly served by those - authority, activist and even the media - with what can look like pretty short-sighted, selfish or self-promoting agendas. Inefficiencies and hypocrisies need to be exposed and called into account

9) The ‘Green Elite’ can too often contribute to the problem rather than helping with the solution.

10) Green need not always be good, or be above question. If it doesn't make sense to me, it may not to others. So it's always worth asking why.

11) Positive results need to be promoted, and rewards and incentives favoured over nagging, scare tactics or threats.

12) It is possible to be an idealist. The tricky part is keeping pragmatic and practical along with it.

Enough Talk

It's a painful process, weaning myself of all this. I enjoy it. But it is an addiction, and like all such, can prove a negative infleunce on one's day.

But I was helped by yet another consumption of time and energy, again courtesy of the excellent Grist.

They had inspired a debate that was essentially about how best to deal with communications - Self-interest is the answer - and when words like 'cool' and 'brand are bandied about, it gets my attention. Having read all the comments I was ready to pitch in. But then... how much would I consume today on trying to write a well argued piece? And what, really, would it acheive?

Nah. Better to stay with trying to do something.

Not that it stopped my having a small input on someone else advocating doing something, this time by tapping into Geothermal.

I guess I just feel more comfortable with the notion of reducing waste rather than finding new ways of making and expending energy to make more.

The consequences seem less fraught with contradictions.

Too much. Too Often. Too late?

As I have mentioned, for the sake of all sorts of things that really need preserving, I am cutting down on the whole surfing thing, and even, to an extent, the commentating.

It really has been a case of 'too much, too often'.

And having read this - Media attacked for 'climate porn' - in one of the few daily 'must reads', the BBC, I can see I am not alone. The irony of this being more, if not the same, at least simply 'more' to digest, is not lost on me.

Or the fact that the most likely result of not a bad analysis is a lot more 'is!/isn't' exchanges as Rome burns (or will soon as the planet heats).

The piece also introduced me to a series of pretty neat articles i was not aware of until now, labelled 'The Green Room".

Maybe I'll contribute, but I have to say I think that in many ways it's simply too late, so there is little point.

Chilling

The information overload reduction process continues apace, as I divert more and more daily 'e-wsletters' to the Trash. Note that I can't quite bring myself to unsubscribe, which means they are still to be read and/or simply serve to clutter up my hard drive until one of my infrequent purges.

I'm having more trouble weaning myself off commenting.

Yesterday there was a piece on BBC Breakfast TV's business section, with the Jerry of Ben & Jerry's. I actually thought he was quite an engaging soul.

What surprised me was that there was the opportunity for an online chat via the blog of Declan, the host. More so that it wasn't 'under' the BBC but actually Blogger (like this) and had been going since April.

Anyways, I thought it a good opportunity to pitch in and maybe get some profile.

Boy, did I get thwarted. Despite being registered and all with Blogger, I was not with 'the Group', and it was all over before I could figure out how to join, which I still can't.

Maybe someone, somewhere, is trying to tell me something.

Baby Steps

Some more positive news to share.

A wee while time ago I applied us for the Guardian Social Entrepreneur Awards. Fair amount of dosh, a whiz under noses of some useful judgepersons and... major media coverage!

Well, we're through to the next stage. How's about that? OK, so probably a lot of other fine folk are too, but it's better than a 'Sorry, but..' letter.

Wish us luck in September when we (taking First Lady PJ who has a bit more chance of keeping us suit-friendly with the forms than yours truly) go to make the next level pitch.

Two cultures separated by... common courtesy

Just before the weekend, I wrote to two of my favourite e-media blogs/newsletters, Grist and Treehugger (about whom, and others, I plan to write an article, er... soon). And just before the weekend I got replies. Short, polite, helpful (as far as they could be) and... as you will gather... prompt.

They both hail from the USA. I pose a question whose answer I think we all know... would I have heard back in this way, or even at all, if it had been addressed to media of any form closer to home?

Spend, spend, spend

And another from the archive, still 'Lost in Space' :

The other day I was in London, haunting the corridors of power, mixing with the governing class... getting nowhere fast. Of this, more later.

It does coincide with this little piece, about amounts of money blown, poorly, on 'communications', a subject dear (in every sense of the word) to my heart: There are far easier ways to excite teenagers

Of course, I could not resist a thought of my own.:

"There's nothing difficult in spending oodles of taxpayers' money, especially when it is on 'communication'. What IS easy is avoiding being pinned down to a defined ROI for such an exercise, yet if challenged conjure up a result that 'meets target' by producing an increase in 'awareness'. Effecting the tangible result of real change is a tad more tricky. After years in the ad game, I would wish all clients were so generous with their money and oversight. But then, they usually have products designed to be actually bought."

What was good about yesterday was the seeming commitment to helping business help the community. It remains to be seen if the juicy plums of ad budgets as part of that process stay with an elite, and seemingly unaccountable, few.

Teacher's Pet Gift Ideas

Well, that's it, I'm going to have to stop going e-postal. Just found another blog I emailed last week that is now in the Bermuda hyperspace (at least the spelling should get better):

I am shamed. But my eyebrow also twitches. And it's all because of this: Teachers 'prefer ethical gifts'

Last Friday saw my kids break up for summer. The morning saw a mad dash to get a card drawn up and a quick rummage in the kitchen cupboard managed to locate, with relief, a box of (non-Fairtrade?) Maltesers left over from last month's birthday party. With many assurances that this would be replaced, it was duly donated.

Our one small tilt to enviro-considerations was wrapping it in newspaper. Mrs. Jones does run the eco-club as well, after all.

But I have to say that I did not for one second ponder going the full monty ethically, as suggested here. Mainly because it did not occur to me... and certainly not in time.

And while it all seems a plan, I just wonder what the basis of this research was. Guy from the educational media standing there saying 'Do you, a guardian of our nation's youth and future, think it better to get a nice box of All Gold or bottle of Merlot, or do you think it's your job to point the little angels even further on the path of righteousness?'.

Just asking.

A while ago I stopped to help one of my sons' mate's mums change a tyre. She dropped off a nice red subsequently. I'm not sure a goat would have been quite the same.

Confused? You will be!

It's not easy being green. Especially a lite one. You want to do what's best, but just when you think you're doing the right thing by doing what you're told, along comes advice that can often be completely at odds.

Hence, while not strictly green, I look at this from today's Mail, which is about energy, so it is pertinent:

The Government has urged energy customers to switch suppliers after British Gas announced further price hikes. It is the fourth price rise in less than two years and follows a 22 per cent increase in March.

Woo. The Government. And in the Daily Mail what's more. So it must be a good idea, right? On balance it seems to make sense.

But then.... you find something like this trots along from another direction, this time Martin Lewis' Money-Saving Expert (go to his site to get the full skinny):

British Gas Major Price Rise Don't listen to anyone saying 'switch supplier now!' - British Gas has just announced a 12.4% gas price rise and 9.4% electricity price rise effective 4 September. You'll read comments telling you 'switch, switch, switch', yet that message is pumped by companies with a vested interest in churning the market. Actually the sensible thing to do is sit tight!

I respect this guy, his sources and his advice a lot. So I think I'll stick with this.

But what about all the other 'official' 'You shoulds...' we get, especially in the e-area?

I don't want to be a Groucho, but...

... to quote Mr. Marx the eldest, I often feel 'I wouldn't want to join any club that would have me as a member'.

I have been meaning to write about the whole 'free eBay'/swap arena for a while, and may soon do a formal review, but this - freecycle: TM, and R.I.P. - in today's Grist (an e-letter well worthy of subscribing to... for free) has moved me to put digit to keyboard now.

It’s always sad when something so fundamentally ‘good’, such as anything that’s not just talking about trying to save the planet but actually doing something (I’m big on tangibles) gets compromised – to any degree – by... talking. But I guess we all can't resist having opinions. So I simply advocate the notion of ‘whatever works!’, which does not exclude constructive criticism.

Freecycle is a true phenomenon, and certainly already has a firm foothold here in the UK. It is also about the only serious such initiative around that I'm aware of - not counting our little JunkkYard.

I'm pretty sure all the corporate, legalistic shenanigans would and possibly could not occur here, but we'll see. Academic anyway, as it hardly affects anything.

The issue seems to be cultural. Personally I had trouble (hey, ours is not perfect and we're always working on it... funds permitting) coping with the system Freecycle used/s and have given up with it. But a lot do. So if asked we will happily advocate trying JunkkYard AND Freecycle (and now a few others this post has made me aware of, if they are over here). Why not? They're both free, not exclusive and achieve the same result. And we gain from being helpful all round, so with luck will get revisited. So what is being defended here?

As a consumer you go where you feel comfortable. In the UK I sensed the same 'clique' tensions creeping in. When I could be bothered to read the vast numbers of daily emails, there'd often be sniping going on. Why so heavy? Who needs it?

For sure we're keen to create a community, and there is a Forum for people to engage, but mostly it's just a tool. Like some others mentioned, our model is much more Google or eBay. Donor/Beneficiary. Post/Surf. Offer/Collect. Beyond providing the matchmaking mechanism (and enjoying passive exposure to the traffic created) what other involvement is required?

We opened from day one with our hearts on our sleeves... well, our business model up there on our banners.

Much like Anita Roddick's sale of Body Shop, if you start as one thing, you can probably expect to cop some flak when you try and change the fundamentals. Especially having established with a super-ethical ‘no money involved’ stance, to trying to turn a buck, even if it’s just to keep funding the whole shebang. And moving from voluntary to sponsored will put a few supporters' noses out. Sadly the whole e-movement can be quite ‘purist’ in approach when it comes to making green, and beyond grubby money, standards of hotly advocated 'best practice' (who decides?) can also often alienate those who are a lighter shade and lives to get on with.

Frankly I can't quite see what’s the problem (being commercial that is). However, being uber-precious and especially getting the shark suits involved does not seem productive. I wonder who funds this aspect? And why? Does this suggest a another, possibly more financially-aspirational agenda?

If it is, consumer preferences and market forces will decide. Welcome to the club.

What you say may not be what you've done (or said)

Having posted on a forum/blog (see last post) this morning, I have come back to find a very active series of exchanges (mine's in there somewhere). It was interesting to note (and worthy of separate comment), that when I posted the board was still a blank canvas, though obviously many had been posting well before me, which can lead to unfortunate disconnects, especially if referring to another post.

I have tended to prefer such the Telegraph version to some other major media, because there is point in contributing beyond venting, as you do have the chance of a credit, and this can be of value. We have had sign-ups to the site as a consequence of my posting to these things in the past.

Now I am thinking of pulling back from these arenas, as explained by this subsequent post I have been moved to add (and may or may not get 'approved' at all, much less 'as is', despite the following: 'telegraph.co.uk does not monitor, approve, endorse or exert editorial control over information posted by users'. Which I had taken to mean what one wrote, so long as it followed guidelines, was what went up. But apparently not):

"It hadn't occurred to me until now that, despite having a few issues to cover and working within a stated limit, what one has contributed even to a Blog/Forum can be edited before sharing. And this of course can seriously affect context. Not to mention shape the direction of the piece in the direction of the media controller's agenda. It can enhance the pros or cons of an issue, or simply keep things bubbling ratings-wise by emphasising the best 'bites'.

This has added to my doubts about the value of such things, but in mitigation here at least I offer a 'big up' (or maybe it should be 'God bless') to the power of the blogging system and its participants. Thanks to some today, I realise I should have been much more concerned with discovering further substance on what the good Bishop may or may not have said, and done or not have done, before so enthusiastically endorsing a piece that was quite harsh on his words and deeds, at least as reported. As we're on a theological roll, to paraphrase Pastor Niemoller , 'First they selectively quoted the Bishops, and I did not speak, yadayada... and now they have selectively quoted me and no one had the time (or inclination) to delve any deeper to find out what I'd really said'.

Otherwise I think most of what I anticipated earlier has been almost all been illustrated in many posts."

Maybe what ended up on board was pithier, and hence my effort benefitedtted from the editorial input, but it was not what I had written. And I think it omitted some key aspects I thought important.

For that, at least I still have my own blog.

A point well made is a point well taken

A good blog in today's Telegraph - Ignore the bishop: enjoy your holiday - on a subject (actually a couple) about which I have commented before, have here (below) and doubtless will again. It will be interesting to see what replies she gets. Here's mine ( a bit fuller than online, as they 'only' allow 4000 characters, which to a windbag like me is a cruel constraint:

"Very good. Ignore the bishop. Enjoy the holiday. But please don't dismiss the message.

This is an excellent post, so long as one reads all of it.

I agree totally that one of the greatest impediments to promoting the benefits of responsible (the definition and scope of which is obviously still wide open) environmental practices by the individual, is the notion that everything green must be black and white. Nuances abound, and too often those that seek to effect positive (in a global warming sense) changes, for whatever reason (career to enhance, book to sell, viral to promote, consultancy to secure, pension fund to stock up... or possibly even genuine concern), have to think very carefully before taking a moral high ground and aggressively tackling a narrow topic, especially one that may be dear to their hearts. Especially from a position of relative privilege. And more so by the excessive use of comparative negativity. Because it can all too easily backfire, and while debate is great, I fear for effecting change when everyone is too busy pointing fingers at each other when they should be encouraged to just get on and do what they can. How much of the introduction to this post was strenuous rebuttal before the positive suggestions kicked in?

Things have to be debated, and I use the blog on my site (which tries to offer solutions, ideas and things to do to hopefully improve matters 'enviro') to do this a lot, and sometimes end up in some 'healthy discussions', which unlike here I prefer to conduct one-to-one offline, as things can get a bit flaming daft as the entrenched camps weigh in. Not long ago I tried to convince a respected media commentator that calling fellow petrolhead scribes 'selfish' (that word again) for their obsession with high speed exotica could have set in motion a confrontational situation that did not serve his point as well as adopting a less personal and reasoned approach might have, especially as he introduced his article as written on a plane to Australia.

My other concern was that he seemed to also be tipping the wink to groups who were engaging in 'more robust' commentary on the rights or wrongs of others to buy and use a legally and freely available consumer good. This cannot be a productive route, no matter what the frustrations. Now it seems it's a plan to spit in my farmer (they do wear suits and often visit the big city) neighbour's coffee, if a new anti 4x4 viral ad is to be emulated. I'm sure the making of this latter was carbon offset to the nth degree, but having been on a few shoots I very much doubt every aspect was totally 'environmentally sound' with no compromises to getting the job done on time and within budget. Cast and crew drinking water from a tap and not an spring water bottle in sight?

We have to accept the compromises of living in an overpopulated (and 'ing') world, with an infinite desire and ability to make new things and (at least in affluent countries) the means and desire to embrace them. People no longer stay in their village their whole lives, and the desire to travel is almost ingrained.

Hence better ways must be found to change behaviours, some of which look like being painful. And must be massive in scale. I only have to glance up at the contrails in the sky each day (or revisit BBC Horizon's Global Dimming documentary) to feel that air travel has to be to be a hefty influence in unnatural weather patterns. But reversing a global industry that employs millions, provides pleasure (accepting this is one instance when the journey is not part of the holiday) to hundreds of millions and brings in revenue to billions more is not going to happen easily. Especially when one looks at the rate of new airport construction in developing countries.

A start has to be made, somewhere, and as we cannot be unaware any more it may as well be at home. One can't really ask a neighbour to put their house in order when you have historically been trashing yours and enjoying the party up until now (and still want to). Examples must be set. Alternatives sought and offered. As suggested, subsidies to pollute need to be restricted, but incentives with rewards introduced wherever possible (the points on fuel tax and rail costs are well made). And such notions need to be (excuse the pun) aired. But by whom?

Hence pedestals should be mounted very circumspectly. And those who take it upon themselves - priest, politician, celeb, commentators... blog participants - to pronounce from them to others on what not to do should think very carefully on what qualifies them to do so. And before being too smug, ponder also what circumstances have allowed them to pontificate. I have read a lot lately on the 'Green Elite', and it is not a club, like many, I could easily afford - in money, time or opportunity - to join. So practice what you preach, and if you do preach what you practice please make it inspirational rather than critical. Nothing can compromise a message more than being accused of hypocrisy, which usually ends up distracting away from simply getting on and doing.

Say what?

A quick test of the blogging system to see if the emails are working again. The BBC has asked: Has the internet changed your life?

And I have replied:

"Email is invaluable. The net has given me affordable two-way access to the world, via my web-business/blog. And, via such as this Forum, an opportunity to voice an opinion in public elsewhere.

But...

...it's all now so vast it's but a babel of opinion, hard to substantiate (hence believe) fact, subjectivity and 'noise' - to which I have just contributed - that's almost impossible to absorb, much less cut through meaningfully to make any real positive impact.

Between just getting the invitation and writing my post, the entry pages jumped from 8 to 10. I don't have the time or inclination to read it all ( I will sneak a peak to see if I'm there) to assess context. What value is that?"

I must say I do wonder what the purpose of it all was to them. Will they have names they can use? Will it be for research? Will they glean some comments of use to further their knowledge base?

Or is it juts a major waste of time all round?