I quick Grinch-risking missive to the Beeb:
Dear Sirs,
Re: Antarctic Global Warming Prizes
While the theory behind this initiative, and the ideas it inspired are to be applauded, I have to wonder at the prizes.
Our polar wastelands seem to be getting pretty crowded these days with people traveling there (often with film crews in tow) to 'study the effects', one presumes with certain irony, of people traveling there.
And did I hear right that the runner up prizes were for... travel?
http://www.iceedge.co.uk/
Just watched some winners (with a few non-winners sounding typically much more interesting actual solutions as opposed to TV-friendly gimmicks).
Further to my Grinch views, I thought the comments were telling: 'Well, it is a dilemma flying up there, but at least getting to see it before it goes will be amazing'.
Hmn, indeed. Maybe we should all go up and catch it before it has gone then?
Then I read this:
Binge-flying culture is just beginning. The only way to stop it is a severe tax
As an environmentally-concerned individual, I face the dilemma of being married to a Singaporean with all the family-related annual travel consequences that creates (no flights for several years now, but wife and kids do deserve to see their folks soon). Sadly, time and money preclude the options of other alternatives, unless I can get sponsored on a slow travel blog by some green-minded newspaper. However, unless you are a mate of the editor that may be a dodgy sell, as people may tire of 'I'm spending a year having a hoot doing no work... and getting paid for it' efforts by now.
It does rather seem the travel issue is getting more and more polarised, if you'll forgive the pun... bearing in mind what follows.
Today I watched BBC Breakfast News with what seemed like an excellent initiative to encourage kids to come up with some ideas (a few which that were perhaps less televisual not getting the credit they deserved, IMHO. Chewing gum will sort climate change?) to tackle global warming.
The prize? A trip to see the polar regions before they disappear because, one presumes, of people going to see them before they disappear.
And the runner up prizes were... travel!
There is quite an interesting industry being created in saving, and promoting the saving of this planet.
Shame it seems there is little actual desire or effort to actually get around to actually doing it in favour of hype, spin and a quick slot on the TV.
Monday, May 07, 2007
Saturday, May 05, 2007
SlowNewD
Ok, with all that's going on, adding a new category to Blogger, and a non-enviro one at that, seems pretty typical of my tangential nature and knat-like attention span.
But I really have to get this one out of mine and into this system.
SlowNewD stands for Slow News Day, which I will invoke when the sorry collection of individuals that constitutes or media these days, from producers to editors to journalists to anchors, in whichever order of pondweed you choose to stack them, start excavating through the bottom of the barrel en route to China.
I was already poised at 7ish, having watched the latest Newswatch 'don't think so, don't know, don't care if it was' weekly dismissal of some truly egregious examples, when I went to Mum's place to take her lunch over. Sadly she is addicted to BBC News 24, and it is on all day.
Now there is a tragedy that has happened, and still unfurling. And, to an extent, it is news. But the blow by blow bullsh*t that is being served up by the story of this blonde Brit kidnapped kiddie in Portugal is beyond the pale. It was on first thing, and is still on now.
How many kids are abducted every day, all round the world AND in Britain, without so much as a mention?
Everything possible should be done to get her back, but I can't see what serves this process that I am seeing unravel here and now. The act is sickening, but the media coverage is proving more than a complement. Queue the copycats. But at least it will get a rating or two extra.
But I really have to get this one out of mine and into this system.
SlowNewD stands for Slow News Day, which I will invoke when the sorry collection of individuals that constitutes or media these days, from producers to editors to journalists to anchors, in whichever order of pondweed you choose to stack them, start excavating through the bottom of the barrel en route to China.
I was already poised at 7ish, having watched the latest Newswatch 'don't think so, don't know, don't care if it was' weekly dismissal of some truly egregious examples, when I went to Mum's place to take her lunch over. Sadly she is addicted to BBC News 24, and it is on all day.
Now there is a tragedy that has happened, and still unfurling. And, to an extent, it is news. But the blow by blow bullsh*t that is being served up by the story of this blonde Brit kidnapped kiddie in Portugal is beyond the pale. It was on first thing, and is still on now.
How many kids are abducted every day, all round the world AND in Britain, without so much as a mention?
Everything possible should be done to get her back, but I can't see what serves this process that I am seeing unravel here and now. The act is sickening, but the media coverage is proving more than a complement. Queue the copycats. But at least it will get a rating or two extra.
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Too.. er, something, to miss
Looking out for polar bears
I think everyone should visit these beautiful, unspoiled but devastated places to see just how in danger they are from folk taking a last chance to see/study these beautiful, unsp...
Are we perhaps in danger of killing with 'awareness'? Just askin'
Let's send a film crew up to find out.
Meanwhile, my Maplin solar phone charger is doing the business in my home office window as I write.
I think everyone should visit these beautiful, unspoiled but devastated places to see just how in danger they are from folk taking a last chance to see/study these beautiful, unsp...
Are we perhaps in danger of killing with 'awareness'? Just askin'
Let's send a film crew up to find out.
Meanwhile, my Maplin solar phone charger is doing the business in my home office window as I write.
What's source for the goose...
Still in the thick of trying to squeeze the maximum PR for the RE:tie award whilst juggling all sorts of help and advice - solicited and some often not - from everyone who kindly wants a piece of the action.
As a consequence of paying a PR-dissemination service to send out our release, I also ended up with a free trial for a service called 'Enquirer', whereby you get bombarded with pitch and story lead requests posted by journalists.
It has been fairly fruitful, and I have had a couple pick up as a consequence of my replying. With luck one will be in Accountancy with my views on 'being' a social enterprise, and another will pitch my plea for help in a subscription only net magazine called Scientific Business.
Having gone cold Turkey on scanning the papers and online feeds to concentrate on all this, I now have another addiction, as there are about 50 a day. And I can't resist peeking at even those which are nothing in my area.
It's also fascinating to see how 'news' is actually created. I saw on the news today a 'story' which was basically created by a journalist setting out what they needed to fill out their medium's agenda.
As a consequence of paying a PR-dissemination service to send out our release, I also ended up with a free trial for a service called 'Enquirer', whereby you get bombarded with pitch and story lead requests posted by journalists.
It has been fairly fruitful, and I have had a couple pick up as a consequence of my replying. With luck one will be in Accountancy with my views on 'being' a social enterprise, and another will pitch my plea for help in a subscription only net magazine called Scientific Business.
Having gone cold Turkey on scanning the papers and online feeds to concentrate on all this, I now have another addiction, as there are about 50 a day. And I can't resist peeking at even those which are nothing in my area.
It's also fascinating to see how 'news' is actually created. I saw on the news today a 'story' which was basically created by a journalist setting out what they needed to fill out their medium's agenda.
War is hell. Except for sales and ratings. Discuss.
Nothing much to do with the environment (though I have to say war is pretty poor on the carbon footprint front), or my current fun and games, but I was moved to write to our national broadcaster again (so there is a tenuous link), and really have nowhere else to file it. Sorry.
Washington's War by Gen Sir Michael Rose
I watched this piece, sporting the now inevitable Newsnight twofer sandwich, with the General on one side, a single, totally opposing view from Washington on the other, and the BBC voice of sweet, cynical reason in the middle.
I confess to little in the way of historical, military or geopolitical education and experience in comparison to this collection, but really couldn't get my head around even the basic premise that has lead the BBC to help this old boy advertise and sell his controversial product, and stir up a nest of WASPS (geddit?) to drive some ratings.
Surely in the War of Independence the British were fighting even initially a relatively coherent, and ever-more united group of folk who stood FOR something, and were prepared to defend it with their lives to get... or keep it, and make it work for self-betterment on resolution?
Whereas, by any reasonable estimation, the coalition forces and those around them are just being attacked by an amorphous collection of anarchic organisations and individuals whose simple, even stated, aim is to stand solely AGAINST anything 'Western' (with the occupation serving up a cause on a plate). And they will attack to their deaths any aspect associated with this, including the very people, soil and ways of life they are in theory 'defending'. Job done, they will rattle about a while to ensure the maximum misery is caused for the benefit of any who may have missed the point... and the media... and then move on to the next appropriate venue. I am sure our political ‘leadership’ will soon provide this opportunity to them.
So in this case I just can't make any aspect of the cited comparison stick, and hence wonder what the point of it all was. Bar the sales and ratings, of course.
Washington's War by Gen Sir Michael Rose
I watched this piece, sporting the now inevitable Newsnight twofer sandwich, with the General on one side, a single, totally opposing view from Washington on the other, and the BBC voice of sweet, cynical reason in the middle.
I confess to little in the way of historical, military or geopolitical education and experience in comparison to this collection, but really couldn't get my head around even the basic premise that has lead the BBC to help this old boy advertise and sell his controversial product, and stir up a nest of WASPS (geddit?) to drive some ratings.
Surely in the War of Independence the British were fighting even initially a relatively coherent, and ever-more united group of folk who stood FOR something, and were prepared to defend it with their lives to get... or keep it, and make it work for self-betterment on resolution?
Whereas, by any reasonable estimation, the coalition forces and those around them are just being attacked by an amorphous collection of anarchic organisations and individuals whose simple, even stated, aim is to stand solely AGAINST anything 'Western' (with the occupation serving up a cause on a plate). And they will attack to their deaths any aspect associated with this, including the very people, soil and ways of life they are in theory 'defending'. Job done, they will rattle about a while to ensure the maximum misery is caused for the benefit of any who may have missed the point... and the media... and then move on to the next appropriate venue. I am sure our political ‘leadership’ will soon provide this opportunity to them.
So in this case I just can't make any aspect of the cited comparison stick, and hence wonder what the point of it all was. Bar the sales and ratings, of course.
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Just a quicky
The rich world's policy on greenhouse gas now seems clear: millions will die
Sorry, my limit is 50 posts, so I'll just throw this in and apologise if anyone else has made the point.
It just tickles me we get such articles in a publication with a banner ad that says 'Prefer the Sun? Prefer the Snow? Guardian Unlimited will send you a brochure'
Sorry, my limit is 50 posts, so I'll just throw this in and apologise if anyone else has made the point.
It just tickles me we get such articles in a publication with a banner ad that says 'Prefer the Sun? Prefer the Snow? Guardian Unlimited will send you a brochure'
Monday, April 30, 2007
All the news that's unfit to print, broadcast, etc
Dilemma time. I need them, but I can't stand most of them, or what they stand for.
This blog, maybe rightly, will continue to be slim for a while as I try to maximise the PR value of the Geneva win.
So far, it has been a mixed bag.
One thing that is hard to understand is the almost complete silence from the majors.
But then again, as Carol Thatcher rightly pointed out yesterday on the Andrew Marr Sunday Show, as she dumped all the packing and inserts from her papers on the table: 'how can we take any of them seriously in their 'wars' on packaging when they are so hypocritical?' It seems they are so obsessed with being seen to be green they are not in the least bit interested in actually being it. Or playing up genuine efforts to help people make a small difference.
Meanwhile the various BBC programmes remain mute. Paranoia is knowing they are out to ignore you, but I do wonder if my critiques have resulted in some kind of blacklist. So be it. They have a new Chairman of the Trust in place now, and his claimed remit is to respond to the customers they serve rather than just defend the Corporation. I think this needs testing more.
The same day I get yet another form 'so what?' reply to a complaint about a blatant ad for ASDA in the increasingly laughable Breakfast 'Business' slot, they run another, even more ridiculous plug for them.
And I've just switched off the TV this morning in disgust at the boss of EDF energy being given his opportunity to do the same, before running off like excited kids to see the new Kate Moss collection being unveiled. This isn't news, but if there is no financial reward for them doing it, I can't figure what it is mean to be, or for.
BBC - EDF to lower its gas bills by 10% - In case you missed the plug on air
This blog, maybe rightly, will continue to be slim for a while as I try to maximise the PR value of the Geneva win.
So far, it has been a mixed bag.
One thing that is hard to understand is the almost complete silence from the majors.
But then again, as Carol Thatcher rightly pointed out yesterday on the Andrew Marr Sunday Show, as she dumped all the packing and inserts from her papers on the table: 'how can we take any of them seriously in their 'wars' on packaging when they are so hypocritical?' It seems they are so obsessed with being seen to be green they are not in the least bit interested in actually being it. Or playing up genuine efforts to help people make a small difference.
Meanwhile the various BBC programmes remain mute. Paranoia is knowing they are out to ignore you, but I do wonder if my critiques have resulted in some kind of blacklist. So be it. They have a new Chairman of the Trust in place now, and his claimed remit is to respond to the customers they serve rather than just defend the Corporation. I think this needs testing more.
The same day I get yet another form 'so what?' reply to a complaint about a blatant ad for ASDA in the increasingly laughable Breakfast 'Business' slot, they run another, even more ridiculous plug for them.
And I've just switched off the TV this morning in disgust at the boss of EDF energy being given his opportunity to do the same, before running off like excited kids to see the new Kate Moss collection being unveiled. This isn't news, but if there is no financial reward for them doing it, I can't figure what it is mean to be, or for.
BBC - EDF to lower its gas bills by 10% - In case you missed the plug on air
Friday, April 27, 2007
The Good, the Bad and the... can't be bothered
You can see a few more here.There's money in talking about the environment, obviously.
And I now, in addition to Junkk.com have something well worth talking about, not least because it actually is a physical thing that does something, and does it less.
Yet still I face an uphill struggle to share it.
This piece in the Indy allowed me a slight venting opportunity:
Terence Blacker: Why I'm not sold on 'The Apprentice'
Dear Mr. Blacker,
'Selfishness, a lack of personal accountability, a ruthless aggression towards others are, in everyday life, regarded as social problems. How odd it is that [any successful medium] suggests that they are so desirable in business [and engages in such practices itself].' My brackets.
Couldn't agree with you more.
Having been involved in a positive campaign for a years to change consumers' attitudes towards packaging, and recently winning a Gold international award for an invention to help them to improve matters, I still await any acknowledgement, recognition or support from the paper you write for.
I will put anything and anyone on my site if it helps improve the environment, even if they are technically competitive. A shame that other enterprises are not so able to share in the bigger picture, when self-interest, opportunism, ego and greed take over. Good luck to the Indy and the Daily Mail as the latest self-appointed guardians of our eco-future as they slug it out to gain the high profit green ground. Sir Alan would be proud.
However, to end on a more positive note, there are glimmers of gold glinting in the morass.
Having waded through a lot of government 'stuff', I ended up with some guys at the Centre for Remanufacturing and Reuse. They may or may not be able to help, but by golly got back nice and quick with a compliment and some nifty areas that look promising.
With so much deadweights around it's hard not to get weighed down, but it's the few positives like these that keep you going.
We may even make it yet.
STOP PRESS - Relief! The UKTI/BizLink are keen to help and coming round next week. Phew!
Indy - No time to waste - no s**t, really?
STOP PRESS #2 - Mr. Blacker has replied and, despite my venting if not at him at least his employers, kindly, which makes me blush (though the tone does make me wonder if it is not more than a little 'form' in nature. Better than telling me to p*ss off, though!):
Many thanks for your kind email - and the best of luck with your campaign.
Who's a clever boy then?
Well, I'm back.
Actually, I have been since Monday, but for reasons that will hopefully become apparent, have been a tad busy elsewhere dealing with the backlog that built up during the Geneva trip... and the consequences of it. Because....
I won. And I won big!
Here's the press release that has been prepared, and I am touting around as we speak to try to make the most of it while it is fresh.
‘Hole-in-one’ for award-winning Herefordshire inventor Ross-on-Wye inventor Peter Martin has been awarded a Gold Medal at the International Exhibition of Inventions held in Geneva last weekend… for a small hole in a strip of plastic. His patented Re:tie concept is simple, but shows just what you can achieve from an inventive approach to recycling. Peter has redesigned the security closure strip used in many drinks bottles and jars, by introducing a block with a hole. This means the strip can be saved and reused as a tie, in the garden, for cabling, for bags – for anything which needs tying together. Peter took his invention to Geneva with his company Junkk.com, and won the Award against stiff competition from the world’s top inventors and major R&D institutions. The international Judges were so impressed with the simplicity and potentially wide application of the eco-design tie that they awarded Gold, and several have subsequently congratulated him by email. ‘It’s one of those “Why didn’t anyone think of this before?” ideas,’ says Peter, whose free website Junkk.com has been created to share how virtually any potentially discardable item can be reused. “I am proud to win such a prestigious award for myself, my company and the UK, but I am particularly thrilled that it was noted for its environmental impact, and potential positive contribution to commercial eco-design. When you are in a place like Switzerland and surrounded by eco-inventions from the likes of Germany and Asia, it is good to show we Brits are creating consumer-friendly solutions that need not incur or impose additional costs.” The RE:tie may be a small change to a piece of plastic, but every little bit helps when it comes to reducing waste and helping save the planet. The Re:tie will also bring manufacturers considerable green-£-based benefits as Peter intends to license the concept for commercial use. He is also hoping to turn the commercial and public interest in RE:tie into further official support for his free re:use ideas website initiative Junkk.com – which offers people a way to exchange second use ideas for all sorts of products and packaging. “After immense interest and support from the 70,000 international visitors to the show, I'd like to accelerate my plans to expand the site into other languages, and establish its postcode localisation facility into other countries.” Peter is now seeking investors for RE:tie, especially if he is to fight off imitations despite his patent: “It would be a pity not to exploit this idea worldwide from a British base. I'd like to see it not only on an Innocent juice carton here, but a jar of jam in China and a bottle of pop in the US, too’.
So, a lot of work to do. I'm trying to get help to protect the idea from the likes of the BusinessLink, UKTI and various government agencies, and of course support from the media.
Both are proving an effort.
I know business help takes time, but it can be frustrating to wade through the systems. There is so much that is in theory on offer, but finding it and making use of it demands a lot of time and inside knowledge which I don't have.
Then there is the media.
I am getting some coverage, but in a week when waste and packing is all over the media, from the Indy to the Daily Mail (who shamelessly seem to have copied the Indy's campaign, not that it was that original or skillfully applied), the level of interest so far (with a few notable, and appreciated, exceptions) has been about what I'd expect from our mighty 4th estate.
And now I watch BBC's Declan in a 5 minute slot* on the same thing. Having already queried their addiction to giving free PR to ASDA, I guess it wouldn't help to wonder why the majority of the slot was about 'an initiative' in 'a few stores', whereby customers are asked to put packs in a bin 'for analysis'. Hmn. Does it it wash as a real, credible attempt? And does the BBC's coverage count as valid, skillful reporting?
Maybe I haven't yet sussed out the secret to getting coverage in this new media age.
*BBC - Tough packaging fines are urged - Check out the vid top right: nice ad for ASDA guys!
Monday, April 16, 2007
RE:solution time
It seemed a nice idea: What is your Earth Day Resolution? April 22nd, 2007
Mine: To get back and DO more by uploading at least one new re:use idea a week to Junkk.com, and stop wasting time arguing theory on blogs.
Mine: To get back and DO more by uploading at least one new re:use idea a week to Junkk.com, and stop wasting time arguing theory on blogs.
Green Gold
Totting on the Costas
'Nowt wrong wi' a bit off reuse, lad!
I am in the business of bringing this process online (see signature link), and look to such folk in such countries as a source of inspiration.
ps: In Singapore, where I spent several years, he was the Kallang (or maybe Karran, as the former is a place - never did get the spelling) Guni man. Sadly, they stopped taking PCs when I left... no money in them!
'Nowt wrong wi' a bit off reuse, lad!
I am in the business of bringing this process online (see signature link), and look to such folk in such countries as a source of inspiration.
ps: In Singapore, where I spent several years, he was the Kallang (or maybe Karran, as the former is a place - never did get the spelling) Guni man. Sadly, they stopped taking PCs when I left... no money in them!
An interesting point...
... well made in today's Indy letters:
Sir: The Department of Education and Skills, in conjunction with the Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs, will this week begin distributing the Al Gore film, An Inconvenient Truth, to all 3,385 secondary schools in England.
According to the DfES, "influencing the opinions of children is crucial to developing a long-term view on the environment among the public" (press release, February 2007). This is an explicit admission by the Government that its intention in circulating the film is to indoctrinate children politically.
Such deliberate political indoctrination of children is contrary to the Education Act 2002, which at section 78 says the school curriculum for maintained schools is to be "balanced and broadly based", and section 79 requires the Secretary of State, local education authorities, governing bodies and headteachers to exercise their functions "with a view to securing that the curriculum for every maintained school satisfies the requirements of section 78".
Political spin is bad enough, but when we start brainwashing our own children we are finished.
I write as one concerned more than many about where we are headed, but beyond the question of legality have to also wonder if this is a bit of indocrination too far.
Sir: The Department of Education and Skills, in conjunction with the Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs, will this week begin distributing the Al Gore film, An Inconvenient Truth, to all 3,385 secondary schools in England.
According to the DfES, "influencing the opinions of children is crucial to developing a long-term view on the environment among the public" (press release, February 2007). This is an explicit admission by the Government that its intention in circulating the film is to indoctrinate children politically.
Such deliberate political indoctrination of children is contrary to the Education Act 2002, which at section 78 says the school curriculum for maintained schools is to be "balanced and broadly based", and section 79 requires the Secretary of State, local education authorities, governing bodies and headteachers to exercise their functions "with a view to securing that the curriculum for every maintained school satisfies the requirements of section 78".
Political spin is bad enough, but when we start brainwashing our own children we are finished.
I write as one concerned more than many about where we are headed, but beyond the question of legality have to also wonder if this is a bit of indocrination too far.
Swiss Adventure
Just to let you know that I will be blogging off shortly for a while in Switzerland to attend the 35th International Exhibition of Inventions, New Techniques and Products in Geneva. I think we'll call it the Geneva Invention Show from hereon in.
I am exhibiting an actual invention I have patented called the RE:Tie, which was inspired by Junkk.com and is a unique (I hope), new (I trust), solution (bank balance at the ready, fingers crossed) to offer packagers/fmcg manufacturers/retailers a way to offer a second use for an aspect of their packs to consumers to boost sales, offer better PR, make 'em smug at CSR report time during the AGM and, oh, I don't know, help save the planet, too.
Wish me luck!
Back Monday, whereupon I promptly disappear off again to London to speak at another invention 'do', this time the Global Women's Inventor & Innovator Network Awards at the DTI
I am exhibiting an actual invention I have patented called the RE:Tie, which was inspired by Junkk.com and is a unique (I hope), new (I trust), solution (bank balance at the ready, fingers crossed) to offer packagers/fmcg manufacturers/retailers a way to offer a second use for an aspect of their packs to consumers to boost sales, offer better PR, make 'em smug at CSR report time during the AGM and, oh, I don't know, help save the planet, too.
Wish me luck!
Back Monday, whereupon I promptly disappear off again to London to speak at another invention 'do', this time the Global Women's Inventor & Innovator Network Awards at the DTI
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Good question. But is it the most important?
Is Arnie really green?
To the one you pose, personally my answer would have to be 'no', not 'really'. But matters of green are pretty broad in scope, and can seldom be viewed in just black and white.
As you point out, at least he is doing something, which in comparison to others is a heck of a lot better than nothing. Or is it?
Because we have the message, and then we have the messenger. As Janet Street Porter pointed out a few days ago, few can be unaware of global warming by now, so do we really need more awareness from celebrity politicians, green-tinged celebrities and the remoras of the media that follow, share and bask in their gre-e-lite (pronounced 'leet) movements and issue forth their pronouncements of what should be done, if not by them, as such? Maybe a bit more back-room deal-making with the power-brokers would help a tad more?
There is also the small matter of gesture politics not actually serving the one thing that matters, which is enviroROI - simply, will what gets done save more carbon emissions than they cause? Financial ROI is another consideration of course, and one for those rich enough to indulge in if they can and wish to. Frankly if you can afford to go green and it does good, then I say go for it.
However, lobbing up to 'sell' such an effort in a hydrogen powered Humvee (or aspiring to a similarly-configured BMW as is apparently the case with Stuart Rose of M&S) to me helps not one jot. For a start, much as I appreciate the potential of hydrogen, its production and distribution currently means that such a vehicle may make the owner look green, but certainly is not helping Mother Earth. And... a Humvee? Why not just get Chris Eubank on the horn and convert his truck? The first message we get is that it is better (only better, mind, as creation and use does still extract an e-cost) than fossil fuels, hence we must therefore use the biggest, most fuel-inefficient-for-purpose lump of tin to consume it?
I agree with him on one point. Making things about guilt, fine or fear have not, and will not work. We need incentive-based initiatives with which the consumer will willingly engage through a perception (hopefully genuinely delivered) of end-benefit an/or reward. And a little bit of leadership by example wouldn't go amiss to get that across.
Sadly, by talking down to us from a Green Tower (I'm still trying to rationalise "[not] powering my private airplanes (plural!),” with “It's too bad for us that we can't live the lives of Buddhist monks (I guess they just go skiing on RyanAir)") I fear such as Arnie et Al (make sure y'all come to see me and my best bud Madge at Live Earth!) may not be the ideal choices to motivate the masses.
Governator aims to make green issues 'sexy'
Yes, he is 'on the cover of Newsweek as one of the big environmentalists'. Maybe that is more for that publication, and other media who publish eco-hype without thinking, to answer. And not only in America.
To the one you pose, personally my answer would have to be 'no', not 'really'. But matters of green are pretty broad in scope, and can seldom be viewed in just black and white.
As you point out, at least he is doing something, which in comparison to others is a heck of a lot better than nothing. Or is it?
Because we have the message, and then we have the messenger. As Janet Street Porter pointed out a few days ago, few can be unaware of global warming by now, so do we really need more awareness from celebrity politicians, green-tinged celebrities and the remoras of the media that follow, share and bask in their gre-e-lite (pronounced 'leet) movements and issue forth their pronouncements of what should be done, if not by them, as such? Maybe a bit more back-room deal-making with the power-brokers would help a tad more?
There is also the small matter of gesture politics not actually serving the one thing that matters, which is enviroROI - simply, will what gets done save more carbon emissions than they cause? Financial ROI is another consideration of course, and one for those rich enough to indulge in if they can and wish to. Frankly if you can afford to go green and it does good, then I say go for it.
However, lobbing up to 'sell' such an effort in a hydrogen powered Humvee (or aspiring to a similarly-configured BMW as is apparently the case with Stuart Rose of M&S) to me helps not one jot. For a start, much as I appreciate the potential of hydrogen, its production and distribution currently means that such a vehicle may make the owner look green, but certainly is not helping Mother Earth. And... a Humvee? Why not just get Chris Eubank on the horn and convert his truck? The first message we get is that it is better (only better, mind, as creation and use does still extract an e-cost) than fossil fuels, hence we must therefore use the biggest, most fuel-inefficient-for-purpose lump of tin to consume it?
I agree with him on one point. Making things about guilt, fine or fear have not, and will not work. We need incentive-based initiatives with which the consumer will willingly engage through a perception (hopefully genuinely delivered) of end-benefit an/or reward. And a little bit of leadership by example wouldn't go amiss to get that across.
Sadly, by talking down to us from a Green Tower (I'm still trying to rationalise "[not] powering my private airplanes (plural!),” with “It's too bad for us that we can't live the lives of Buddhist monks (I guess they just go skiing on RyanAir)") I fear such as Arnie et Al (make sure y'all come to see me and my best bud Madge at Live Earth!) may not be the ideal choices to motivate the masses.
Governator aims to make green issues 'sexy'
Yes, he is 'on the cover of Newsweek as one of the big environmentalists'. Maybe that is more for that publication, and other media who publish eco-hype without thinking, to answer. And not only in America.
Saturday, April 14, 2007
So that's how they decide what's news
Establishing a rapport
Will any of these soirees be held outside London?
Then you could add one more to the two (so far) visiting here (at least in print. You can add you and your Mum as 'clickers-on') online, and the fifty you met in person t'other night.
It would be a shame to find the thoughts of our nation's journalists are shaped, even if ever so slightly, by such a limited sample of the blogosphere, much less the population.
ADDENDUM - my comment provoked a retort from one of the 'in' crowd, it seems.
I must brush up on my Vogon poetry
Oo-er. As this was a post on the craft of blogging, despite being invited to comment, and assuming this thread by being in the public domain is not... yet... 'club' members only, I must pen... key this carefully. It is all too often that a stray word in print without the benefit of tone can be... unkindly taken and not as intended, so going flaming downhill. Hence my being frustrated at an inability to share live and in person with '50 "consumers" asking questions and voicing their own opinions about what all we Telegraph bloggers collectively produce'. I do trust the author, upon his return, will appreciate I was simply trying to be kind enough to visit and, better yet, offer some feedback, if purely personal and possibly subjective.
I'd like to think I do try to be scrupulously fair, but how what I write gets taken can often be out of my hands. However looking back I do believe that I simply asked a question (which remains unanswered) and made a mild observation. In fact this all may be moot depending on the answer, which I was indeed trying to to offer an opinion upon, and it may be that a regional roadshow is envisaged. That it started in London is of course more than logical in the circumstances.
It is tremendous that many who attended did so from outside our fair capital and, indeed, country. Lucky also, and very committed, that they had the resources of time and money (return fares, overnight accommodation) to do so.
It could justifiably be argued that if one cares enough to share in such things one needs to make the effort. However, as the subject of what's fair has been raised, Douglas Adams did create a neat opening to the Hitchhikers Guide on this very point. Sorry, but I still have this odd notion that journalism is as much about going out and finding a story as having it handed to one. This is a nice initiative, certainly better than nothing, and plays well to the 'we're listening' audience, but if it stays 'centric' it can also offer opportunity to those with the wherewithal to make the most such an arrangement. Activists & lobbyists spring to mind. Now, where would they mostly be based or have easy access to? Is it too much to presume that the blogospshere, which already seems to have its more 'respected', 'influential' and even 'distinguished' representatives to court, is not a rich seam to exploit? More so for its image of independence and freedom from being part of the media 'in-crowd' that inhabits, inevitably, a certain capital city a long way from where I happen to live and work, if online (which is why I surf and blog a lot, see:)
I have lost count of the number of journalistic pieces lately that, IMHO, have poorly reflected the rest of the country, especially in the blog, commentary or viewpoint sections. How many were there surrounding the road pricing scheme wondering what all the fuss was about, as the bike ride from the Thameside des res, or bus/tube/taxi trip from the Islington pied a terre really renders even a Prius unnecessary?
Equally, I have almost lost count of the number of special 'invitations' from the public and private sector I have had in my area of interest (the environment, in case you hadn't guessed) to take part in some get-together where 'my views are valued and will shape policy for years to come', but come with a price tag in time and money that I simply cannot afford. Usually, these are located in London.
So I am afraid that, even though bias was not a word I used as it has yet to ne proven to apply, it is always possible that if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and is held in Ducktown, there may be a slight danger that the potential GI from local Mallards may influence, ever so slightly, the possible GO produced by those working for the Daily Duck.
If I may end by repeating my question (I do gather at least one poster is an organiser, which makes out of three others so far two with questions, and one contented attendee): to have the opportunity of ensuring that a relatively (noting that nothing will ever be truly representative as me getting off my derriere and making a 30-50 mile trip is an unlikely commitment by most of the public at large, even the Telegraph-reading variety) well-rounded selection of contacts are made and views garnered from the four corners of the country this national paper serves, are there any plans to host future such events elsewhere?
No problem if not. I will simply view what I get presented bearing in mind where and from whom it is generated.
Pleased to meet you
Is this a private conversation?
A few blogs over, one of your colleagues has quipped 'As print reporters, we always joke that the only people who read our bylines are ourselves and our mums'. It seems there may be, Yoda-style, 'another'.
It may help if the rest of us were let in on who the heck you are talking about as you muse out loud.
Will any of these soirees be held outside London?
Then you could add one more to the two (so far) visiting here (at least in print. You can add you and your Mum as 'clickers-on') online, and the fifty you met in person t'other night.
It would be a shame to find the thoughts of our nation's journalists are shaped, even if ever so slightly, by such a limited sample of the blogosphere, much less the population.
ADDENDUM - my comment provoked a retort from one of the 'in' crowd, it seems.
I must brush up on my Vogon poetry
Oo-er. As this was a post on the craft of blogging, despite being invited to comment, and assuming this thread by being in the public domain is not... yet... 'club' members only, I must pen... key this carefully. It is all too often that a stray word in print without the benefit of tone can be... unkindly taken and not as intended, so going flaming downhill. Hence my being frustrated at an inability to share live and in person with '50 "consumers" asking questions and voicing their own opinions about what all we Telegraph bloggers collectively produce'. I do trust the author, upon his return, will appreciate I was simply trying to be kind enough to visit and, better yet, offer some feedback, if purely personal and possibly subjective.
I'd like to think I do try to be scrupulously fair, but how what I write gets taken can often be out of my hands. However looking back I do believe that I simply asked a question (which remains unanswered) and made a mild observation. In fact this all may be moot depending on the answer, which I was indeed trying to to offer an opinion upon, and it may be that a regional roadshow is envisaged. That it started in London is of course more than logical in the circumstances.
It is tremendous that many who attended did so from outside our fair capital and, indeed, country. Lucky also, and very committed, that they had the resources of time and money (return fares, overnight accommodation) to do so.
It could justifiably be argued that if one cares enough to share in such things one needs to make the effort. However, as the subject of what's fair has been raised, Douglas Adams did create a neat opening to the Hitchhikers Guide on this very point. Sorry, but I still have this odd notion that journalism is as much about going out and finding a story as having it handed to one. This is a nice initiative, certainly better than nothing, and plays well to the 'we're listening' audience, but if it stays 'centric' it can also offer opportunity to those with the wherewithal to make the most such an arrangement. Activists & lobbyists spring to mind. Now, where would they mostly be based or have easy access to? Is it too much to presume that the blogospshere, which already seems to have its more 'respected', 'influential' and even 'distinguished' representatives to court, is not a rich seam to exploit? More so for its image of independence and freedom from being part of the media 'in-crowd' that inhabits, inevitably, a certain capital city a long way from where I happen to live and work, if online (which is why I surf and blog a lot, see:)
I have lost count of the number of journalistic pieces lately that, IMHO, have poorly reflected the rest of the country, especially in the blog, commentary or viewpoint sections. How many were there surrounding the road pricing scheme wondering what all the fuss was about, as the bike ride from the Thameside des res, or bus/tube/taxi trip from the Islington pied a terre really renders even a Prius unnecessary?
Equally, I have almost lost count of the number of special 'invitations' from the public and private sector I have had in my area of interest (the environment, in case you hadn't guessed) to take part in some get-together where 'my views are valued and will shape policy for years to come', but come with a price tag in time and money that I simply cannot afford. Usually, these are located in London.
So I am afraid that, even though bias was not a word I used as it has yet to ne proven to apply, it is always possible that if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and is held in Ducktown, there may be a slight danger that the potential GI from local Mallards may influence, ever so slightly, the possible GO produced by those working for the Daily Duck.
If I may end by repeating my question (I do gather at least one poster is an organiser, which makes out of three others so far two with questions, and one contented attendee): to have the opportunity of ensuring that a relatively (noting that nothing will ever be truly representative as me getting off my derriere and making a 30-50 mile trip is an unlikely commitment by most of the public at large, even the Telegraph-reading variety) well-rounded selection of contacts are made and views garnered from the four corners of the country this national paper serves, are there any plans to host future such events elsewhere?
No problem if not. I will simply view what I get presented bearing in mind where and from whom it is generated.
Pleased to meet you
Is this a private conversation?
A few blogs over, one of your colleagues has quipped 'As print reporters, we always joke that the only people who read our bylines are ourselves and our mums'. It seems there may be, Yoda-style, 'another'.
It may help if the rest of us were let in on who the heck you are talking about as you muse out loud.
Another day on Planet Spin
Our dishwasher has died. At least, it isn't washing dishes any more. I've done my best and all pipes seem clear, but it's just turning the crud into a soup that evenly dries onto the dishes.
So I have just spent an hour doing them at the sink, which got me to pondering which method was best for the environment. Three changes of hot, and at least 6 gallons of water (not including, as my increasingly frustrated missus points out, the extra rinsing after I use the dirty water to clean all the packaging we keep) vs.... what in a dishwasher? I'm sure it has been assessed. I must track it down.
And so I was in the kitchen to enjoy another irony free episode of the BBC news. You couldn't get much better than skipping over some real news to an all points bulletin on a kid and his bird chucking each other. OK, so he's an heir to the throne, but listening to ever more intense blondes and bouffants discuss whether 'all this media interest' may have been a factor in two kids who met at school going the separate ways was just so much...
Speaking of tri...te, I think I have identified the latest spinmeister 'Get out of Jail/Doodoo/whatever free' phrase du jour, and that is: 'In hindsight, it was not.... and I'm sorry'. This is of course followed by a big empty space which seems to say 'So now that's out of the way my mates in high places (all with an ossuary of their own in the cupboard) are quite happy for me to go right back to being as stupid/corrupt/ineffective as I ever was'.
Who next after the Des (Sure, let's sell the squaddies' stories to the Sun) & Paul (speaking of girlfriends, mine needs a bigger salary) show?
So I have just spent an hour doing them at the sink, which got me to pondering which method was best for the environment. Three changes of hot, and at least 6 gallons of water (not including, as my increasingly frustrated missus points out, the extra rinsing after I use the dirty water to clean all the packaging we keep) vs.... what in a dishwasher? I'm sure it has been assessed. I must track it down.
And so I was in the kitchen to enjoy another irony free episode of the BBC news. You couldn't get much better than skipping over some real news to an all points bulletin on a kid and his bird chucking each other. OK, so he's an heir to the throne, but listening to ever more intense blondes and bouffants discuss whether 'all this media interest' may have been a factor in two kids who met at school going the separate ways was just so much...
Speaking of tri...te, I think I have identified the latest spinmeister 'Get out of Jail/Doodoo/whatever free' phrase du jour, and that is: 'In hindsight, it was not.... and I'm sorry'. This is of course followed by a big empty space which seems to say 'So now that's out of the way my mates in high places (all with an ossuary of their own in the cupboard) are quite happy for me to go right back to being as stupid/corrupt/ineffective as I ever was'.
Who next after the Des (Sure, let's sell the squaddies' stories to the Sun) & Paul (speaking of girlfriends, mine needs a bigger salary) show?
Thursday, April 12, 2007
A toast to Ethical Man? Or Ethical man is toast?
Wednesday, 11 April, 2007
So Gavin introduces our hero as 'Ex-Ethical Man'. Following the one year 'experiment' in 'individual' behaviour, he who would carry the burden of our sins is 'dead'. How very topical, considering the time of year. Does becoming ex-ethical mean one reverts to being UNethical?
I tuned in rather hoping, indeed expecting, answers to the questions that could get posed to the Green E(for eco)-lite (pronounced 'leet', naturally) in reply to yesterday's call on these pages, but came away a tad disappointed.
The preamble was interesting, as much for what was not said as was. Cars are fully 20% responsible for our household footprints. Wow! At least, being London-based, this burden is immediately removed by the simple (so long as you live in a city with decent urban transport) expedient of getting rid of the family car. Well, so long as there is one on standby for 6 weeks in the year. And the option of others on tap for rental purposes. I'm assuming the aspects of manufacture, storage, maintenance and operating were factored in before being struck off this guilt-free list.
Then there was the mea culpa on population, though one might think dragging Larry Lebensraum into a creche full of very prolific yummier mummies was a tad trivial and unfair - ' so... which blonde, blue-eyed little munchkin gets the chop, eh?'. I rather think he held his ground quite well against such a Guido Fawksian set-up, and have to admire his guts.
As I did the pols who actually managed to answer at least one question, on population, towards the end of the discussion and, surprisingly given Gavin's directness, in the affirmative. Hailing from Singapore, where I spent a large chunk of my life, I well remember the 'stop at two' campaigns. Though as was rather darkly muttered, it was a 'difficult' subject, which is code for 'one that will be dropped asap'. Rather gets into dodgy waters, rather quickly, if debated too deeply or at length. One presumes Mr. Lomborg is in favour of such expansion, as it is hard to imagine what else directing vast resources into dealing with AIDS, malaria and water deprivation is going to result in around various continents.
Anyway, to the questions or, as far as I could tell, question. And that was why the government was spouting all this guff about Stern, IPCC, Uncle Tom Cobbly and all, yet was still pretty much on the side of getting as many folk up and at 'em on RyanAir as soon as possible.
And Mr. Miliband's answer? Well, he didn't seem to have one. Again.
What we got... again... was an awesome display of factual recall, as he reeled out a bunch of stats on what 'we' were doing and how awful it all was (so 'we're 3 x worse than a German'? What does that actually mean? Is that a Fiesta driving district nurse in Cumbria vs. a Frankfurt Airbus salesman with a Prius as well as a Merc?). As a swot analysis it was great, only without the strengths or opportunities.
We were then directed to forget about this trivial 5% that may need be addressed but with no indication how, and look at the bigger, 95% picture, with equal lack of anything tangible here either. Hence still not addressing the question. But we did then come straight back to air travel, only this time to learn that its cost 'needs to be recognised', presumably by the application of passenger duties... that help, how exactly?
Only the Green party lady seemed prepared to stick to her guns and advocate a total ban on domestic air travel, before we got embroiled in a rather dodgy bit of claim and counter claim on the costs (rightly highlighted as a pretty important factor by the Tory representative) of rail vs. air. Mr. Miliband stated a clear fact that rail is cheaper, and it was left at that. Is it? Really? I know of almost no eco-friendly trip I can take, locally, regionally or internationally, that has a comparable financial balance to support the envROI. Pretending otherwise is either daft, duplicitous or simply another result of having a London-based, job and pension-insulated elite who have no conception of what is required to run a business or sustain a family in this country these days. No wonder the road pricing 'sell' went down so well.
It was in conclusion posed that the environmentalists have 'won 'the' argument'. What argument? There are hundreds of issues and thousands of arguments swirling all around them. Is the media so self-absorbed now that it really thinks something this complex can be summed up in a soundbite? Here's one: NOT ALL THAT IS GREEN CAN BE VIEWED ONLY IN BLACK AND WHITE.
At least there were a few, minor nuggets I plucked out that I could nod along to:
Good e-practice can't be sold by pain and punishment, or stick over carrot.
We need to inspire folk with simple things that save them money.
We need to encourage carbon free ways of doing what we enjoy doing.
Well, here's a non-standby plug for something that does all that - a FREE website promoting re:use ideas of stuff made from junk that you'd normally throw away:
http://www.junkk.com
I just can't figure out why, when its existence has been made clearly known to almost all major media, government, funders and political parties that the spirit of re:duction, re:use and re:pair espoused here, and elsewhere, does not get more support.
Maybe it's because the only target is DOING something in the home, as an individual.
And that seems a slightly better legacy than the message of a guy who shrugs and says he is 'going back to flying', with a 5-person long haul flight for starters (how much did the solo jaunt to Jamaica offset the total annual 'good' achieved elsewhere?), but is at least intending to pee on his grave to make up.
Pity. It could have been so much more. But simply ended up as so much... compost.
Indy - Jeffrey Sachs is wrong once again: rising population isn't going to destroy the planet
So Gavin introduces our hero as 'Ex-Ethical Man'. Following the one year 'experiment' in 'individual' behaviour, he who would carry the burden of our sins is 'dead'. How very topical, considering the time of year. Does becoming ex-ethical mean one reverts to being UNethical?
I tuned in rather hoping, indeed expecting, answers to the questions that could get posed to the Green E(for eco)-lite (pronounced 'leet', naturally) in reply to yesterday's call on these pages, but came away a tad disappointed.
The preamble was interesting, as much for what was not said as was. Cars are fully 20% responsible for our household footprints. Wow! At least, being London-based, this burden is immediately removed by the simple (so long as you live in a city with decent urban transport) expedient of getting rid of the family car. Well, so long as there is one on standby for 6 weeks in the year. And the option of others on tap for rental purposes. I'm assuming the aspects of manufacture, storage, maintenance and operating were factored in before being struck off this guilt-free list.
Then there was the mea culpa on population, though one might think dragging Larry Lebensraum into a creche full of very prolific yummier mummies was a tad trivial and unfair - ' so... which blonde, blue-eyed little munchkin gets the chop, eh?'. I rather think he held his ground quite well against such a Guido Fawksian set-up, and have to admire his guts.
As I did the pols who actually managed to answer at least one question, on population, towards the end of the discussion and, surprisingly given Gavin's directness, in the affirmative. Hailing from Singapore, where I spent a large chunk of my life, I well remember the 'stop at two' campaigns. Though as was rather darkly muttered, it was a 'difficult' subject, which is code for 'one that will be dropped asap'. Rather gets into dodgy waters, rather quickly, if debated too deeply or at length. One presumes Mr. Lomborg is in favour of such expansion, as it is hard to imagine what else directing vast resources into dealing with AIDS, malaria and water deprivation is going to result in around various continents.
Anyway, to the questions or, as far as I could tell, question. And that was why the government was spouting all this guff about Stern, IPCC, Uncle Tom Cobbly and all, yet was still pretty much on the side of getting as many folk up and at 'em on RyanAir as soon as possible.
And Mr. Miliband's answer? Well, he didn't seem to have one. Again.
What we got... again... was an awesome display of factual recall, as he reeled out a bunch of stats on what 'we' were doing and how awful it all was (so 'we're 3 x worse than a German'? What does that actually mean? Is that a Fiesta driving district nurse in Cumbria vs. a Frankfurt Airbus salesman with a Prius as well as a Merc?). As a swot analysis it was great, only without the strengths or opportunities.
We were then directed to forget about this trivial 5% that may need be addressed but with no indication how, and look at the bigger, 95% picture, with equal lack of anything tangible here either. Hence still not addressing the question. But we did then come straight back to air travel, only this time to learn that its cost 'needs to be recognised', presumably by the application of passenger duties... that help, how exactly?
Only the Green party lady seemed prepared to stick to her guns and advocate a total ban on domestic air travel, before we got embroiled in a rather dodgy bit of claim and counter claim on the costs (rightly highlighted as a pretty important factor by the Tory representative) of rail vs. air. Mr. Miliband stated a clear fact that rail is cheaper, and it was left at that. Is it? Really? I know of almost no eco-friendly trip I can take, locally, regionally or internationally, that has a comparable financial balance to support the envROI. Pretending otherwise is either daft, duplicitous or simply another result of having a London-based, job and pension-insulated elite who have no conception of what is required to run a business or sustain a family in this country these days. No wonder the road pricing 'sell' went down so well.
It was in conclusion posed that the environmentalists have 'won 'the' argument'. What argument? There are hundreds of issues and thousands of arguments swirling all around them. Is the media so self-absorbed now that it really thinks something this complex can be summed up in a soundbite? Here's one: NOT ALL THAT IS GREEN CAN BE VIEWED ONLY IN BLACK AND WHITE.
At least there were a few, minor nuggets I plucked out that I could nod along to:
Good e-practice can't be sold by pain and punishment, or stick over carrot.
We need to inspire folk with simple things that save them money.
We need to encourage carbon free ways of doing what we enjoy doing.
Well, here's a non-standby plug for something that does all that - a FREE website promoting re:use ideas of stuff made from junk that you'd normally throw away:
http://www.junkk.com
I just can't figure out why, when its existence has been made clearly known to almost all major media, government, funders and political parties that the spirit of re:duction, re:use and re:pair espoused here, and elsewhere, does not get more support.
Maybe it's because the only target is DOING something in the home, as an individual.
And that seems a slightly better legacy than the message of a guy who shrugs and says he is 'going back to flying', with a 5-person long haul flight for starters (how much did the solo jaunt to Jamaica offset the total annual 'good' achieved elsewhere?), but is at least intending to pee on his grave to make up.
Pity. It could have been so much more. But simply ended up as so much... compost.
Indy - Jeffrey Sachs is wrong once again: rising population isn't going to destroy the planet
Er... what she said
Janet Street-Porter: A song by Madonna won't save the world
I am guessing Ms. Street-Porter is not gunning for a VIP slot in the Green Room with the rest of the self-appointed Green 'E(for eco)-lite' (pronounced 'leet').
Took guts. Don't envy her chances with the canapes at the next London luvvie-fest she lobs up to, mind. When I first heard of this e-vent I felt like the potted plant in Hitchhikers Guide.
There are a few too many 'celebs' and media remoras with a vested interest in making this seem a lot more than what it is, and hence I have to question how it will serve to benefit my kids' future enviROI (stuff that gets actually DONE that lowers carbon emissions).
I even have to wonder whether the awareness aspect will actually outweigh the potential negatives that are already, and with some reason, being brought to bear. Here's hoping the protagonists have done their sums, hired the right guys who can be on message... and stay there. Remember, a planet is for life, and not just for a quick temporary ratings boost.
And so, I join her (if slightly lower and behind) on the parapet.
Letters - Nothing so far, but a great letter by a guy on the topic of dumping gulit on the kids to sort this mess out
Letters - Looks like they didn't like mine. Surprise
I am guessing Ms. Street-Porter is not gunning for a VIP slot in the Green Room with the rest of the self-appointed Green 'E(for eco)-lite' (pronounced 'leet').
Took guts. Don't envy her chances with the canapes at the next London luvvie-fest she lobs up to, mind. When I first heard of this e-vent I felt like the potted plant in Hitchhikers Guide.
There are a few too many 'celebs' and media remoras with a vested interest in making this seem a lot more than what it is, and hence I have to question how it will serve to benefit my kids' future enviROI (stuff that gets actually DONE that lowers carbon emissions).
I even have to wonder whether the awareness aspect will actually outweigh the potential negatives that are already, and with some reason, being brought to bear. Here's hoping the protagonists have done their sums, hired the right guys who can be on message... and stay there. Remember, a planet is for life, and not just for a quick temporary ratings boost.
And so, I join her (if slightly lower and behind) on the parapet.
Letters - Nothing so far, but a great letter by a guy on the topic of dumping gulit on the kids to sort this mess out
Letters - Looks like they didn't like mine. Surprise
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)