I am looking forward to this. I get the ST anyway, so it's a bonus not to have to go out and buy it.By way of reminder, I just had an email.
Thing is, the ad alongside was/is from BMW.
No real problem, there (well, maybe a teensie-weesnie one). Their 1 series is apparently better than a Prius. Not that this seemed to be the message. More about touring the globe, and going on a journey together. The example I saw was Hong Kong, with a night view of all the skyscrapers ablaze. Apparently, the light show went on all night.
Not sure, but that may also go a small way to '... explaining the damage we're doing'.
Just a thought.
Treehugger - (are they following me?) - How Green Can a Newspaper Afford to Be?
The difference between the views of on-line and paper readers is notable, with 81% of paper readers thinking the coverage on climate change was excellent but only 45% of the web readers agreeing. - Well, D'uh. Which medium is lower impact?
Not sure the Editor has quite nailed the justification, mind.
Dirty great big car and skiing holiday ads (while the snow lasts!) next to pieces about how awful it all is what 'we' are doing to the planet and how 'we' need to be more aware of 'our' impact' and 'we' need to act now, rather undercut the basic thrust of many pieces, though.
Or maybe there are different 'we's' around. The 'we' haves and the ''we' haven't yets, because it's not like, you know, practical, as such'?
No comments:
Post a Comment
I believe in freedom of speech. But I also don't like bullies on blogs, even verbal ones, as they can drive away those with something valid to say... or offer.
Subjective is fine, but well argued and substantiated is even better. Calm and polite tops. Anything that crosses my personal line will not go up. There may be reasons given, but not guaranteed.
I'm not too keen on 'Anon' as a handle (and the content usually explains why), so if that's what you opt for it may not make it. Sorry.