And so it rumbles on: How green should we be?
"I always have trouble with these blogs because there are the questions asked in the headline. Then those asked in the body. And then those answered and asked in post replies that can be arriving in a moderated scenario out of sequence, if at all (system permitting)
So on the day of the ICCP report, in answer to the headline at the top, I’d say ‘as green as you can be, realistically!’.
That last word immediately sets up a whole can of worms. What is realistically? You are a public broadcaster. How do you best serve the public. With information and facts? But whose? Offer both sides and if you err on a view then you can be accused of bias.
And then there is the sheer volume of fact AND opinion, multiplied by blogs. I have almost given up trying to cope with all just on the Newsnight one alone about this issue, much less the BBC and then on to the major media. My blog (accessed via my site above) has tried to list all the competing majors, with more to be added.
And it can all get sidelined by trivia.. if with
some validity. Jeremy makes a pretty gutsy stand, with fair points, and then we have by way of response that he may have not switched his monitor off, so who’s he to talk? Helpful?
I’d agree with the poster who is a tad surprised that you don’t feel its your job to save the planet you are standing on.
Just make sure that if you do it, you do it for the right reasons and in the right ways..
That’s an even bigger can of worms I’m debating with some sincere, smart cookies on my site now.
I hope I’ve offered enough to fulfill your needs here for now."
Friday, February 02, 2007
So little rare. So little well done.
Another reply to another featured link: Science forward, Bush backward
"I can comment little on the ICCP report, etc
Maybe tomorrow we'll avert it. Today we'll get parents heated up about kids getting heated up about heating up. If there is more debate tomorrow I shall return perhaps better informed but I doubt with some forming views much altered about the issue, and how the various protagonists (gov, med, interest/activist groups and biz) have, are and will treat it. Even in blogs. Who knows what lobbyist, PR or press officer lurks behind a "Clarkson for PM' or 'Green of Bristol moniker'.
...etc.
"I can comment little on the ICCP report, etc
Maybe tomorrow we'll avert it. Today we'll get parents heated up about kids getting heated up about heating up. If there is more debate tomorrow I shall return perhaps better informed but I doubt with some forming views much altered about the issue, and how the various protagonists (gov, med, interest/activist groups and biz) have, are and will treat it. Even in blogs. Who knows what lobbyist, PR or press officer lurks behind a "Clarkson for PM' or 'Green of Bristol moniker'.
...etc.
At least the trains will run on time. If there are any.
One climate post was this: What the world needs now is a green fascist
I had to write:
"Dear Mr. Carr,
I have been meaning to write before, most recently on a good commentary you passed on joined up government, and the media’s role in reporting it – The rising tide of generalisation.
This one has at last moved me to get finger to keyboard in good order.
I do hope what you meant was a 'good authoritarian'. While he skirted pretty close, having lived in Singapore for several years Lee Kwan Yew 'got things done' under that mantle, and got away with few applying the fascist accusation either internally of externally. Indeed the PAP seems to sail along, fairly democratically, under his watchful eye still.
Which is more than I sense happening here (as in this country): http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/02/this-is-very-likely-one-of-more.html
As you arch an eyebrow at Ms. May's suggestion, so I have, do and will ask how much will be consumed (if not wasted) throwing good money into the globally warming inferno, and to what effect.
I am currently writing to Mr. Miliband and his many other co-green ministers to ask why one of his vastly funded enviro-quangos a) never helped me when it could and should, and b) now seems to be competing with me, using my business plan and taking 'sponsorship' (ie: ad money) to do so, when they originally said they couldn't help me because I was commercial (whilst being free to all, at the same time as funding Tesco and Heinz, when the last time I looked a tin of beans wasn't).
This is one social entrepreneur who is fearing for his sanity, along with his kids' and their kids' chances."
I had to write:
"Dear Mr. Carr,
I have been meaning to write before, most recently on a good commentary you passed on joined up government, and the media’s role in reporting it – The rising tide of generalisation.
This one has at last moved me to get finger to keyboard in good order.
I do hope what you meant was a 'good authoritarian'. While he skirted pretty close, having lived in Singapore for several years Lee Kwan Yew 'got things done' under that mantle, and got away with few applying the fascist accusation either internally of externally. Indeed the PAP seems to sail along, fairly democratically, under his watchful eye still.
Which is more than I sense happening here (as in this country): http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/02/this-is-very-likely-one-of-more.html
As you arch an eyebrow at Ms. May's suggestion, so I have, do and will ask how much will be consumed (if not wasted) throwing good money into the globally warming inferno, and to what effect.
I am currently writing to Mr. Miliband and his many other co-green ministers to ask why one of his vastly funded enviro-quangos a) never helped me when it could and should, and b) now seems to be competing with me, using my business plan and taking 'sponsorship' (ie: ad money) to do so, when they originally said they couldn't help me because I was commercial (whilst being free to all, at the same time as funding Tesco and Heinz, when the last time I looked a tin of beans wasn't).
This is one social entrepreneur who is fearing for his sanity, along with his kids' and their kids' chances."
This is very likely one of the more important posts you can read here...
..to date.
For a start, I am going to say little, because not only have I not read the ICC report yet (if ever, at least in its entirety), I have not thoroughly read all these reviews. So maybe an even more important post is yet to come.
For now... enjoy (or not, as the case may be - I'm certainly not looking forward to all I have to wade through this weekend):
BBC - Humans blamed for climate change
Guardian CiF - Science forward, Bush backward
Guardian - Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study
Indy - What the World needs now is a green fascist
Indy - Alan Johnson: Children must think differently
Indy - Ten years left to avert catastrophe
Indy - All pupils to be given lessons in climate change
Reuters - U.N. panel says global warming man-made
New Scientist - Blame for global warming placed firmly on humankind
DEFRA - Debate on climate change science is over - international political agreement now urgently needed/Climate change film distributed to all secondary schools
Telegraph - Man's guilt for global warming clear
I have chosen as the visual today's Indy cover (I would have liked to have used for its awesome irony the pop-up ad I got of a Land Rover on top the world, but didn't hit page capture before it disappeared). I do so because I note no other has taken this as the lead, and indeed nor has the Indy, which is odd when we have a headline on offer that reads Ten years left to avert catastrophe
Maybe tomorrow we'll avert it. Today we'll get parents heated up about kids getting heated up about heating up.
I have to say that if I was a minister of indeed sub-editor, as a parent as well I'd be more inclined to go the route of 'We must help kids get informed and inspired in the best ways to engage with the challenges of CC/GW'. As it reads what I see smacks of nanny and big brother or, god forbid, another total waste of funds on a 'campaign' by target-hitters whose only knowledge of pushing kids' buttons is by fining 12 year olds for putting the wrong type of paper in the bin.
I'd go for fun, education and re:ward, with such as Junkk.com. What are the chances of that? Or there is support from well-known kids' reads such as broadsheets like the Indy, who still can't bring themselves to mention us (much less get in touch in reply to our outreach) in their campaign on packaging.
You get the picture and [fill in dis-organisational gov, media and biz entities here] ... you deserve.
Bon. Mais.. cinq minutes!
I wrote about public building illumination recently, so this caught my eye:
Eiffel Tower turns light off to signal climate risk
I know there's safety and all, but what is the symbolic message here? And is there a better one? Off during the week? Hour earlier? On hour later? Low energy bulbs? Make it a thing to come to see once a year?
Son mais pas d'illumiere.
Eiffel Tower turns light off to signal climate risk
I know there's safety and all, but what is the symbolic message here? And is there a better one? Off during the week? Hour earlier? On hour later? Low energy bulbs? Make it a thing to come to see once a year?
Son mais pas d'illumiere.
Charity begins, at 17.5% of spend
At least it used to when I ran my agency, unless you did a deal and waived the media commission on top of doing the creative and production for free (which we did, but usually on the understanding we could really go for it with the concept).
Save the Children overhauls marketing
This is a story in a specialist publication about a specialised industry, but the numbers and the players (and numbers of players) makes me queasy at what actually may be going on here.
I know it should be as simple as getting money from a donor to a worthy recipient, but no longer can be. And I know 'marketing' is a legitimate part of making that match. But... how many people are feeding off the money before it even arrives?
Mad - On the plus side (not sure about the media)
Save the Children overhauls marketing
This is a story in a specialist publication about a specialised industry, but the numbers and the players (and numbers of players) makes me queasy at what actually may be going on here.
I know it should be as simple as getting money from a donor to a worthy recipient, but no longer can be. And I know 'marketing' is a legitimate part of making that match. But... how many people are feeding off the money before it even arrives?
Mad - On the plus side (not sure about the media)
Let the (blame) games begin!
I don't play much sport. I watch even less. Especially now that the whole thing has become a business on one side and I can appreciate the abilities of most sportsperson no more than the money spent on training and success at finding new, legal 'aids'.
However, I am now a (poor, in every sense) student of cause funding, and I do not like what I read here: Good causes miss out as Olympics soaks up half a billion in Lotto funds
As I bang on about specious ROIs being used, even trumpeted in the environmental world, I should not be surprised that the small matter of setting a budget and sticking to it seems to have been neglected.
A lot of Pols these days (have to) start of their interviews with 'I'm not in the business of blaming anyone'. Well, I'm afraid I think we need to get back to this a lot more. Every inefficient, egotistical and especially corrupt individual who is engaged in a project and cocks up, especially because of self-interest, should be named, shamed, fired and not compensated.
However, I am now a (poor, in every sense) student of cause funding, and I do not like what I read here: Good causes miss out as Olympics soaks up half a billion in Lotto funds
As I bang on about specious ROIs being used, even trumpeted in the environmental world, I should not be surprised that the small matter of setting a budget and sticking to it seems to have been neglected.
A lot of Pols these days (have to) start of their interviews with 'I'm not in the business of blaming anyone'. Well, I'm afraid I think we need to get back to this a lot more. Every inefficient, egotistical and especially corrupt individual who is engaged in a project and cocks up, especially because of self-interest, should be named, shamed, fired and not compensated.
Can we now move on? Clearly.
This Man's guilt for global warming clear seems pretty, er, clear.
Though I would wish that headlines and facts tallied more closely, to avoid Achilles Heels that others can exploit:
Scientists are now overwhelmingly confident...
The exact phrasing of the report... was still being negotiated by scientists.
The best estimate is that...
This is expected to mean...
If it is as alarming as experts predicted...
'Scientists' or 'experts' are pretty catch-all terms, and I think need to be put in context much more clearly and up-front to establish credibility.
And those disclaimer terms seem to be the work of a person trying to steal a march. Wait until you know, and then state it loud... and clear
Finally, without sounding like a denier, I am not sure if Man's guilt for causing GW in totality is proven, but there seems a clear case for us making it lots worse and hence needing to do something about making it better. Again, I hope creating an opening for such semantics will not in turn lead to more pointless debate.
Though I would wish that headlines and facts tallied more closely, to avoid Achilles Heels that others can exploit:
Scientists are now overwhelmingly confident...
The exact phrasing of the report... was still being negotiated by scientists.
The best estimate is that...
This is expected to mean...
If it is as alarming as experts predicted...
'Scientists' or 'experts' are pretty catch-all terms, and I think need to be put in context much more clearly and up-front to establish credibility.
And those disclaimer terms seem to be the work of a person trying to steal a march. Wait until you know, and then state it loud... and clear
Finally, without sounding like a denier, I am not sure if Man's guilt for causing GW in totality is proven, but there seems a clear case for us making it lots worse and hence needing to do something about making it better. Again, I hope creating an opening for such semantics will not in turn lead to more pointless debate.
Some get more airtime than others...
...which, in a media-driven age, means they end up more equal.
I had to pitch in to this: No Special Treatment
'This seems a game with no winners, except maybe those who create conflict and those who feed on it.
I think all parties playing it, especially some press, needs to assess the creation, acceptance and status accorded 'community leaders'.
Are they elected? If not, who says they speak for anyone other than themselves and their own agendas? Interviews with these guys (and gals) seem at best lazy and at worst ratings-driven (to extremes) reporting. And it’s frustrating to be fed a politician or ‘leader’ claiming to speak for the majority, when the only credible evidence of any frequent contact they do have is with a news channel researcher’s speed dial.
I watched one such 'representative' yesterday given national news coverage to demand, it seemed, that he be involved in the police investigative process from the outset.
If granted, can I please sit in on meetings where speed cameras get sited in my area?'
If only because it happens so often in the environmental debate. 'The people of the UK want..' gets bandied about by both sides, when I suspect (how can I do any more without asking 60M people?) most wish they'd all shut up and go away and leave it to those who are trying to do something to just get on and help make things better.
I had to pitch in to this: No Special Treatment
'This seems a game with no winners, except maybe those who create conflict and those who feed on it.
I think all parties playing it, especially some press, needs to assess the creation, acceptance and status accorded 'community leaders'.
Are they elected? If not, who says they speak for anyone other than themselves and their own agendas? Interviews with these guys (and gals) seem at best lazy and at worst ratings-driven (to extremes) reporting. And it’s frustrating to be fed a politician or ‘leader’ claiming to speak for the majority, when the only credible evidence of any frequent contact they do have is with a news channel researcher’s speed dial.
I watched one such 'representative' yesterday given national news coverage to demand, it seemed, that he be involved in the police investigative process from the outset.
If granted, can I please sit in on meetings where speed cameras get sited in my area?'
If only because it happens so often in the environmental debate. 'The people of the UK want..' gets bandied about by both sides, when I suspect (how can I do any more without asking 60M people?) most wish they'd all shut up and go away and leave it to those who are trying to do something to just get on and help make things better.
When blogging goes bad
Blogs can be great. But the system can frustrate both poster and readers, as highlighted by this from a Newsnight post I took part in (and couldn't resist answering):
Ref: vikingar
Or... it might be the system is not working too well.
Calm down, dear, it's only a cock-up.
Usually after posting you get an immediate return to the board with an acknowledgement. These days 2 out 3 I have tried (I used to and still do make the same mistake) either result in half an hour of the spinning pizza of death (I have a Mac - maybe the cause?) and/or eventually a failure sign.
So you retry later. Well, YOU don't, but some of us do because we don't know if it has been received or not. It has and is happening all over the board.
That said...
As it is moderated one wonders why the moderator can't just lop out the duplicates?
And I agree that of all major media I appreciate most the immediacy, reassurance and openness of the Guardian system. Though I have seen a few folk complain they have been removed with no good reason (must take something pretty egregious). The Telegraph is very good - or bad, depending on your view - at moderating out stuff it doesn't fancy, which in a free press is editing that can rather make one doubt their commitment to balanced debate. Despite the BBC’s rather unique status this one is pretty good, but again I have seen folk complain they are not being heard and can only wonder why. Maybe that's why Duncan editted down to repost later?
ps: I'm a MORON - that's Middle Of the Road, Outside Nomenclature – and proud of it. I find political labels (or any mild pejorative, such as 'denier' or 'mentalist' in the enviro debate) to be often inaccurate and lead to further name-calling. A view is a view and you can span the political spectrum without slavishly adhering to one doctrine.
Ref: vikingar
Or... it might be the system is not working too well.
Calm down, dear, it's only a cock-up.
Usually after posting you get an immediate return to the board with an acknowledgement. These days 2 out 3 I have tried (I used to and still do make the same mistake) either result in half an hour of the spinning pizza of death (I have a Mac - maybe the cause?) and/or eventually a failure sign.
So you retry later. Well, YOU don't, but some of us do because we don't know if it has been received or not. It has and is happening all over the board.
That said...
As it is moderated one wonders why the moderator can't just lop out the duplicates?
And I agree that of all major media I appreciate most the immediacy, reassurance and openness of the Guardian system. Though I have seen a few folk complain they have been removed with no good reason (must take something pretty egregious). The Telegraph is very good - or bad, depending on your view - at moderating out stuff it doesn't fancy, which in a free press is editing that can rather make one doubt their commitment to balanced debate. Despite the BBC’s rather unique status this one is pretty good, but again I have seen folk complain they are not being heard and can only wonder why. Maybe that's why Duncan editted down to repost later?
ps: I'm a MORON - that's Middle Of the Road, Outside Nomenclature – and proud of it. I find political labels (or any mild pejorative, such as 'denier' or 'mentalist' in the enviro debate) to be often inaccurate and lead to further name-calling. A view is a view and you can span the political spectrum without slavishly adhering to one doctrine.
Thursday, February 01, 2007
We're sincerely flattered #2
Dave of Solarventi has nagged, and when he nags I have to move quicksmart.
So...
"This one is a definite must ... …. for inclusion on www.junkk.com – crisp bags as CD covers!"
He is, of course, right. It's nifty.
And I have suggested he 'homage' it on our Suggest page.
And readers are welcome to peruse our Ideas pages for something to send in, as nothing with Junkk's or my name on it will get a showing.
For instance, in a similar vein that I use the liner from cereal packets as lunch bags for the boys, often sealing them with one of those pocket heater gizmos.
Time to don my Batman outfit
First Tesco Tel; now this. Who do I have to nobble to get us noticed?
Today in the mail was this book. It's a nice little selection of eco-websites in the UK, and while we know almost all of them (and a few more besides) it's a 'sure, why not?'.
Thing is, we're not in it. Not under the Re's or even packaging. And at last I am seeing how it can be hard as a journalist to remain truly objective. Rest assured, I must be:)
The next slot in the newsletter is taken, but I will review it, as that is what I presume it was sent to us for (unless it was a very expensive way to rub our noses in it). And I will also note that its publishers are Eden Project, who we drove to visit a few years ago to see how we could help each other. Sadly, they (or at least their PR folk) were too busy saving the planet to want to deal any further with us, having dragged us to Cornwall to see them.
It can all... test... you at times.
OK, tell me how to get past his genius gatekeepers
Terry Leahy: Don't blame us: we can't get rid of all packaging
"As we work to reduce our environmental impact on every level, we will continue to look for ways to cut excess packaging and offer our customers rational choices."
I'd say we are one. I've been trying for 3 years. And M&S. And Boots. And Morrisons...
I've just written to the Indy's Editor:
Dear Sir,
"As we work to reduce our environmental impact on every level, we will continue to look for ways to cut excess packaging and offer our customers rational choices."
I'd say we are one. I've been trying for 3 years to get through. And M&S. And Boots. And Morrisons...
Can you help us get past the pen-pushing, bean-counting, career and hence profit-obsessed minions inbetween initiatives like ours and Sirs Terry and Michael, etc and their new-found green commitments. Or indeed Ministers like Miliband, Bradshaw, etc, as they keep churning out more 3rd sector, we must engage with social entrepreneur guff?
Our site is free. It gets good editorial. The public likes it. It makes the environment fun. And it needn't cost anyone (biz, gov or tax/ratepayer) a penny. In fact, by finding ways to reuse packs and packaging it may even add to the marketing, PR and CSR stories of these businesses in a very non-greenwash manner.
When are people going to stop talking long enough to listen to others outside their elite circles who may have complementary solutions on offer.
If you can help I'd be grateful.
BBC - Ask Tel
"As we work to reduce our environmental impact on every level, we will continue to look for ways to cut excess packaging and offer our customers rational choices."
I'd say we are one. I've been trying for 3 years. And M&S. And Boots. And Morrisons...
I've just written to the Indy's Editor:
Dear Sir,
"As we work to reduce our environmental impact on every level, we will continue to look for ways to cut excess packaging and offer our customers rational choices."
I'd say we are one. I've been trying for 3 years to get through. And M&S. And Boots. And Morrisons...
Can you help us get past the pen-pushing, bean-counting, career and hence profit-obsessed minions inbetween initiatives like ours and Sirs Terry and Michael, etc and their new-found green commitments. Or indeed Ministers like Miliband, Bradshaw, etc, as they keep churning out more 3rd sector, we must engage with social entrepreneur guff?
Our site is free. It gets good editorial. The public likes it. It makes the environment fun. And it needn't cost anyone (biz, gov or tax/ratepayer) a penny. In fact, by finding ways to reuse packs and packaging it may even add to the marketing, PR and CSR stories of these businesses in a very non-greenwash manner.
When are people going to stop talking long enough to listen to others outside their elite circles who may have complementary solutions on offer.
If you can help I'd be grateful.
BBC - Ask Tel
Enough already.
I've had to write to Newswatch.
"Though there is an objective news aspect, I think we can agree that BBC Breakfast also serves a few agendas, some worthy and some self serving, but certainly including a social one.
On the day Jeremy Paxman publishes a critique of 'mixed messages' in the Times, I wonder how the BBC reconciles placing a slot advocating, indeed selling, space tourism (RyanTrek?) next to one with a celeb selling the latest planet saving effort.
While a why not/better than nothing, this seemed more of an ad for Toyota's Prius, inaccurately stated as the solution to all car-related eco-issues (it is not). And the fact that he was gushing next to Mr. Blair, whose record on eco-cosistency is chequered at best was laughable."
Are you Hello! or a informative news source with decent analysis?"
"Though there is an objective news aspect, I think we can agree that BBC Breakfast also serves a few agendas, some worthy and some self serving, but certainly including a social one.
On the day Jeremy Paxman publishes a critique of 'mixed messages' in the Times, I wonder how the BBC reconciles placing a slot advocating, indeed selling, space tourism (RyanTrek?) next to one with a celeb selling the latest planet saving effort.
While a why not/better than nothing, this seemed more of an ad for Toyota's Prius, inaccurately stated as the solution to all car-related eco-issues (it is not). And the fact that he was gushing next to Mr. Blair, whose record on eco-cosistency is chequered at best was laughable."
Are you Hello! or a informative news source with decent analysis?"
OH. MY. GOD!
I just watched the piece on BBC Breakfast TV with the bouffant and the blonde gushing over the latest Celeb, Josh Hartnett, who with many other celebs met Mr. Blair to discuss green issues.
Plus side. There is another website to 'make a difference': globalsomething (oddly the URL not mentioned).
Down side. What was mentioned, twice, was that you should buy a Toyota Prius to save the planet. I don't think so.
I doubt they'll publish this either: "One appreciates Josh's sincerity, but Mr. Blair as a role model? And rather than being an complete ad for Toyota Prius (twice), it may be worth pointing out that it may not be the best car to save the planet in certain non-urban circumstances."
ADDENDUM:
I have added several of these posts to Newsnight's blog. Annoyingly they have taken them selectively and /or out of sequence. Here's my latest.
After the piece selling a contest for space tourism, we now have on TV this morning Hollywood star Josh Hartnett, who with many other celebs met Mr. Blair to discuss green issues... as above.
In addition to my comment on the irony of these two items being back-to-back, on top of Jeremy's comments in the Times today, I doubt they'll publish this either: "One appreciates Josh's sincerity.. as above"
There's doing. There's seen to be doing. And there's simply doing what's right and works.
It would be good if the major media could help us decide on the basis of objective information and not ratings-driven hype.
BBC - Josh goes globally cool
Express - Concert
Plus side. There is another website to 'make a difference': globalsomething (oddly the URL not mentioned).
Down side. What was mentioned, twice, was that you should buy a Toyota Prius to save the planet. I don't think so.
I doubt they'll publish this either: "One appreciates Josh's sincerity, but Mr. Blair as a role model? And rather than being an complete ad for Toyota Prius (twice), it may be worth pointing out that it may not be the best car to save the planet in certain non-urban circumstances."
ADDENDUM:
I have added several of these posts to Newsnight's blog. Annoyingly they have taken them selectively and /or out of sequence. Here's my latest.
After the piece selling a contest for space tourism, we now have on TV this morning Hollywood star Josh Hartnett, who with many other celebs met Mr. Blair to discuss green issues... as above.
In addition to my comment on the irony of these two items being back-to-back, on top of Jeremy's comments in the Times today, I doubt they'll publish this either: "One appreciates Josh's sincerity.. as above"
There's doing. There's seen to be doing. And there's simply doing what's right and works.
It would be good if the major media could help us decide on the basis of objective information and not ratings-driven hype.
BBC - Josh goes globally cool
Express - Concert
Oh, the irony..
No sooner do I note the piece in the last blog, inspired by a piece in the Times, look what I came across a bit further on...
Praise for bubblewrap could get you into space
I'll pass for now the issue of consistency on the Times' part (though they will argue they are only here to pass on the news), but.... bubblewrap!!! There are a lot of other much better ways to pack things that don't use plastic, guys!
Praise for bubblewrap could get you into space
I'll pass for now the issue of consistency on the Times' part (though they will argue they are only here to pass on the news), but.... bubblewrap!!! There are a lot of other much better ways to pack things that don't use plastic, guys!
Trouble in paradise?
I was once a star copywriter at an agency, responsible for the vast majority of the won pitches and work that went through. So when I felt things were not being run as well as they could, I felt secure in sharing my wisdom. Which is how I ended up founding my own agency. No one is indispensable.
Which is why I must envy someone who obviously is: You're wasteful hypocrites on being green, Paxman accuses BBC bosses
Maybe he has read my blog on some of the inconsistencies we have, are and doubtless will be seeing between what they say and what they do.
Like the Breakfast TV programme I currently watch as I write. Just saw a piece about a contest to become a space tourist (I don't think NASA has quite yet got the bio-fuel thing cracked yet). Ironically (to me at least, though I doubt they saw it themselves), this was followed immediately by a promo for a piece about a major Hollywood star who is going green, billed as 'saving the planet'.
I doubt they'll publish my comment: "I take it you have not read, taken on board (excuse the pun) or agree with, one of your colleague's views on the BBC's consistency of message as regards climate change and ways to mitigate it"
I merely observe, whilst being relieved I do not take it upon myself to impose:
From the Newsnight blog (and Indy):
"Imagine my surprise this morning opening my copy of The Times to read that my esteemed colleague Jeremy Paxman has offered a devastating critique of the BBC's failures to be Green enough, failures on recycling, failures to cut power consumption, failures to help save the planet.
Great stuff, I thought. Then imagine my surprise because in the BBC office Jeremy and I share with Kirsty and Emily, the computer and monitor (which we also share) were left switched on all night. The culprit? Hmmm. Who could it possibly be wasting all that electricity? Well, the last log-in that I could discover was "Paxmanj." Any ideas? "
Couldn't resist:
Though Mr. Esler refers it in the blog intro this afternoon, I'm guessing guessing Mr. Paxman wrote it yesterday, and this seems the only place to offer an opinion, if not answer, to his question:
The biter bit? Next thing we'll be hearing people are dropping folk in it for fines by leaving stuff with their names on in bins. Imagine if the nanny state figured that was enough to convict?
As a slight attempt to help JP in mitigation should he be 'guilty', there is the notion that some hi-tec PCs need continual updates. Another is that the hardware decay from shutting down and rebooting is actually worse eco-wise than spinning. I'm still deciding, but err on monitor and printer off, CPU on standby... for now.
It's all about being green. Not always black and white.
Still, it again proves a point I often try to make. One knocks, and the comeback is often a bigger 'two wrongs make a good knock' back. Doesn't help the planet much, though, does it?
BBC - How green is my Auntie?
Which is why I must envy someone who obviously is: You're wasteful hypocrites on being green, Paxman accuses BBC bosses
Maybe he has read my blog on some of the inconsistencies we have, are and doubtless will be seeing between what they say and what they do.
Like the Breakfast TV programme I currently watch as I write. Just saw a piece about a contest to become a space tourist (I don't think NASA has quite yet got the bio-fuel thing cracked yet). Ironically (to me at least, though I doubt they saw it themselves), this was followed immediately by a promo for a piece about a major Hollywood star who is going green, billed as 'saving the planet'.
I doubt they'll publish my comment: "I take it you have not read, taken on board (excuse the pun) or agree with, one of your colleague's views on the BBC's consistency of message as regards climate change and ways to mitigate it"
I merely observe, whilst being relieved I do not take it upon myself to impose:
From the Newsnight blog (and Indy):
"Imagine my surprise this morning opening my copy of The Times to read that my esteemed colleague Jeremy Paxman has offered a devastating critique of the BBC's failures to be Green enough, failures on recycling, failures to cut power consumption, failures to help save the planet.
Great stuff, I thought. Then imagine my surprise because in the BBC office Jeremy and I share with Kirsty and Emily, the computer and monitor (which we also share) were left switched on all night. The culprit? Hmmm. Who could it possibly be wasting all that electricity? Well, the last log-in that I could discover was "Paxmanj." Any ideas? "
Couldn't resist:
Though Mr. Esler refers it in the blog intro this afternoon, I'm guessing guessing Mr. Paxman wrote it yesterday, and this seems the only place to offer an opinion, if not answer, to his question:
The biter bit? Next thing we'll be hearing people are dropping folk in it for fines by leaving stuff with their names on in bins. Imagine if the nanny state figured that was enough to convict?
As a slight attempt to help JP in mitigation should he be 'guilty', there is the notion that some hi-tec PCs need continual updates. Another is that the hardware decay from shutting down and rebooting is actually worse eco-wise than spinning. I'm still deciding, but err on monitor and printer off, CPU on standby... for now.
It's all about being green. Not always black and white.
Still, it again proves a point I often try to make. One knocks, and the comeback is often a bigger 'two wrongs make a good knock' back. Doesn't help the planet much, though, does it?
BBC - How green is my Auntie?
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Space 1999
Time for another picture. Just saw it in the carpark. It's a Honda Insight. It just made me wonder why it is that almost all cars with a future-planet-saving bent seem to look like they were designed for a 70s Gerry Anderson show? I guess some bumps are due to squeezing in eco-bits, but why the back wheel cover? If it is really a streamlining thing why has no other car I've seen got them?
RE:porting losses
Neither of these two examples are to do with the environment, but both happened today and gave me further cause for concern on standards of reporting. Which always gest me going.
The first was on rape. Unless I misheard, the problem seemed to be that only 1 in 20 reports ended in a conviction. This is of course pretty awful, unless only 1 in 20 were proven beyond all reasonable doubt to have been a rape. In which case I get a tad concerned for all single men (and a few married ones) if a target ends up needing meeting no matter what. I did gather some sloppy police procedure is at the heart of the critique and the % figure, but in the slot I watched very little was allowed for 'proven innocent until guilty'. It just seemed assumed and accepted that this figure was not high enough. What is suggested? Forget whether a crime has been committed and go straight to 75%?
The other was about the Birmingham terrorist alert. Some guys have been arrested for allegedly plotting to kidnap a soldier, and was heralded under the banner "Is terrorism taking a more sinister turn?'. What, exactly, could be more sinister than sidling up to a mum and baby in a Tube and trying to blow them up?
The first was on rape. Unless I misheard, the problem seemed to be that only 1 in 20 reports ended in a conviction. This is of course pretty awful, unless only 1 in 20 were proven beyond all reasonable doubt to have been a rape. In which case I get a tad concerned for all single men (and a few married ones) if a target ends up needing meeting no matter what. I did gather some sloppy police procedure is at the heart of the critique and the % figure, but in the slot I watched very little was allowed for 'proven innocent until guilty'. It just seemed assumed and accepted that this figure was not high enough. What is suggested? Forget whether a crime has been committed and go straight to 75%?
The other was about the Birmingham terrorist alert. Some guys have been arrested for allegedly plotting to kidnap a soldier, and was heralded under the banner "Is terrorism taking a more sinister turn?'. What, exactly, could be more sinister than sidling up to a mum and baby in a Tube and trying to blow them up?
Better the devil...?
A political snippet passed to me by Dave of Solarventi:
MP quits to focus on climate campaign
Movements in the Westminster village are always interesting, as much as for where they have been as where they are going. Not to mention why. In this case it seems very helpful that his vacating the seat allows a Minister to pop across the boundary line... if he wins.
I'm not sure, but this may be the same guy I wrote to the PM to ask why he was not arrested for calling upon Jeremy Clarkson to be done away with (which I blogged an age ago), and came off pretty poorly for the exchange with that gentleman.
While one can admire the passion and belief, I have to wonder if this is a good thing or a bad thing in terms of having such an extreme individual running about without a clunking fist to keep him in line.
MP quits to focus on climate campaign
Movements in the Westminster village are always interesting, as much as for where they have been as where they are going. Not to mention why. In this case it seems very helpful that his vacating the seat allows a Minister to pop across the boundary line... if he wins.
I'm not sure, but this may be the same guy I wrote to the PM to ask why he was not arrested for calling upon Jeremy Clarkson to be done away with (which I blogged an age ago), and came off pretty poorly for the exchange with that gentleman.
While one can admire the passion and belief, I have to wonder if this is a good thing or a bad thing in terms of having such an extreme individual running about without a clunking fist to keep him in line.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)