Again, I get interested in a bit of science reporting.
Losing sustainability in the urban canyons
I was simply intrigued by the back of envelope calculations, but my enquiry did provoke an interesting response, which at least allowed me the opportunity to expand and clarify (plus indulge in a little blogger teasing:)....
Just looking at the nice picture at the top, I merely wonder what the consequences might be as the sun moves and certain areas end up in the shade of various tall structures around and abounding. At least in the original piece there was a caveat on the wind contribution, though again I have to wonder to what extent there may be problems from the wind patterns around such urban canyons. I am sure if Mr. Cameron had a penthouse overlooking Central Park we may have some better idea. So no matter what people can and then decide to do, even en masse, I'd still be keen to know what the realistic generation capacities might be, bearing in mind the ambient climatic and architectural conditions, from someone who might know. I am still hoping in matters of renewable energy deliverables, historical data and professional experience and calculations can get pretty close to a reasonable estimate. Perhaps a tad closer than the current rough calculations? This indeed may be of value to the journalists from Bulgaria, India, Kenya and Peru, and the numerous interest groups represented at the meeting, who I am sure have flown in from far and wide to appreciate all the facts about what causes climate change... and possible high enviROI mitigations, of course. Though some terribly reasonable optimistic level lampooners may still prefer to stick a finger up in the air. To measure, of course.
After this, it kind of fell apart on the moderation, which seems to be almost inevitable.
So my questions on the science get buried under stupid finger pointing. Again. Nice one, Aunty.
Showing posts with label Blog. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Blog. Show all posts
Friday, May 15, 2009
Monday, March 02, 2009
Are you.. one of us?
Stated like that... would you want to be?
Obama harnesses the green power of the crowd
I really felt like kicking back, despite a desire to support any positives. It was just all... so... smug
a movement that will battle for action on global warming
If they are rallying behind the cry of 'Global warming' I rather fear it's not the best of starts.
This has rather been discredited as a major motivator. Even the next incarnation, climate change (at least shared by Ms. Tolkan, Jesse or Jessy?), is now being scheduled by some for another incarnation.
I maintain my view that while the message may well be pretty vital, and some elected representatives seem pretty sensible, the number of unelected messengers and their often rather contradictory if not rather 'elitist' 'one of us' (at best) messages does not seem to be moving the masses terribly well.
I wonder why?
Obama harnesses the green power of the crowd
I really felt like kicking back, despite a desire to support any positives. It was just all... so... smug
a movement that will battle for action on global warming
If they are rallying behind the cry of 'Global warming' I rather fear it's not the best of starts.
This has rather been discredited as a major motivator. Even the next incarnation, climate change (at least shared by Ms. Tolkan, Jesse or Jessy?), is now being scheduled by some for another incarnation.
I maintain my view that while the message may well be pretty vital, and some elected representatives seem pretty sensible, the number of unelected messengers and their often rather contradictory if not rather 'elitist' 'one of us' (at best) messages does not seem to be moving the masses terribly well.
I wonder why?
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
What's your excuse
Blog Traffic Is Getting Bigger and Bigger
Do you write for a blog?
If so................why?
Money. I realised that I read a lot to help stock my site, so it wasn't a stretch to stick links to what I read on my blog and add a comment or two.
People like what I find and/or share, and some even like my comments.
So they visit more. More visitors=more money.
Plus I get invited to things.
Which is neat, 'cos I don't get out much.
The irony is of course, that until I put AdSense or something on here, I am not making a bean. So it must be for love, not money. Go figure.
Do you write for a blog?
If so................why?
Money. I realised that I read a lot to help stock my site, so it wasn't a stretch to stick links to what I read on my blog and add a comment or two.
People like what I find and/or share, and some even like my comments.
So they visit more. More visitors=more money.
Plus I get invited to things.
Which is neat, 'cos I don't get out much.
The irony is of course, that until I put AdSense or something on here, I am not making a bean. So it must be for love, not money. Go figure.
Sunday, June 01, 2008
Of buckets and blogs: a salty tale
This one has it all: Of buckets and blogs
Worth reading to see where we are, hwo we got here... and where it's all going.
Yo, ho, oh, sh*t.
Worth reading to see where we are, hwo we got here... and where it's all going.
Yo, ho, oh, sh*t.
Sunday, May 04, 2008
Bank Holiday Meddling
You know the saying, 'If it ain't broke, get bored on a wet Sunday and meddle?' Oops.
I hope I haven't messed things up.
It all started with my creating a new blog, 'El Burro Hotay!', to take postings that really have no bearing to environment, even loosely. Stuff I just need to get off my chest and/or archive.
And, in so doing, I discovered Blogger has a bunch of new toys under its layout palette, such as Blog site links (with luck EBH! is there now), etc. Watch this space.
I hope I haven't messed things up.
It all started with my creating a new blog, 'El Burro Hotay!', to take postings that really have no bearing to environment, even loosely. Stuff I just need to get off my chest and/or archive.
And, in so doing, I discovered Blogger has a bunch of new toys under its layout palette, such as Blog site links (with luck EBH! is there now), etc. Watch this space.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Drop when you shop?
Watching BBC News, which is pitching a 'brilliant idea' to deal with plastics recycling: the introduction of a 10p deposit on bottles.
Now, while I am not sure this hasn't been mooted before, I look forward to the details as it seems fine in principle. Trouble is, as of 7.09am the detail is a bit shy. In fact all we do know is there is some resistance (yay!..controversy!), and 'the food and drinks industry has yet to comment'.
I'd also be interested in comment from retailers and the authorities, as to work there needs to be a bunch of new relationships and logistical routes established.
Because at the very least, when you take your bottle of HDPE 37 to the till, it will need to be identified, stored and then transported. And you will need to engage in a financial transaction (receipt...VAT... tax???).
It has been done, and seemed to work before. I recall collecting cans and bottles for pocket money (maybe getting the community on board... for money... would be a plan? Junkk.com stands ready to help).
But on past and present evidence, why do I see this as a quick, flip punt by the media on a few-day 'eco-issue', with a benign nod from the authorities as it takes the pressure off all their failings to sort things out.
Addendum - 7.41am
'Experts' Neil Hamilton (green sceptic) and the BBC's Newsnight Ethical Man and now One Show reporter Justin Rowlatt 'debate' the issue. Er... one says it's a daft idea and one says it isn't. Big surprise: an extremes twofer. I continue to await the detail on... HOW IT WILL WORK.
At least... by the end the consensus had admitted that the variety of plastics was not, as such, exactly helping the enviROI. In fact the only clear winner, and reason for it all, seemed to be the anti-litter brigade. Seems a lot of money and unclear systems being alluded in going to help reduce a target... if a worthy one.
Still nobody who knows anything tangible about the issue to be seen or heard.
Newsnight - Are supermarkets to blame?
This morning, on BBC Breakfast TV, there was a piece about a proposal to bring back the deposit system, this time with plastic bottles.
At least we now have two protagonists how might be able to shine a tad more informed light on the issue beyond 'experts' Neil Hamilton (green sceptic) and ex-Ethical Man and now One Show reporter Justin Rowlatt, who 'debated' the issue. That is... one said it's a daft idea and one said it isn't. Big surprise: an extremes twofer. I continue to await the detail on... HOW IT WILL WORK?
Now, accepting that this has been mooted before, I look forward to the details promised earlier, as it seems fine in principle. All I have so far is that there is some resistance (yay!..controversy!), and 'the food and drinks industry has yet to comment'.
So I am interested in answers from retailers and the authorities, who are even more at the coalface of this proposal (being where we consumers come in and who ends up with what we drop off) as to what there is in place... and needs to be doen in getting a bunch of new relationships and logistical routes established.
Because at the very least, when you take your bottle of HDPE 37 and 3/4 to the till, it will need to be identified, assessed, separated, stored and then transported (at what enviROI?). And will you then need to engage in a financial transaction (receipt...VAT... tax???).
It has been done, and seemed to work before. I recall collecting cans and bottles (what about metal and glass?) for pocket money (maybe getting the community on board... for money (if this stuff has value, then let's share the end-benefits:)... would be a plan? My organisation stands ready to help).
But on past and present evidence, why do I see this as a quick, flip punt by the media on a few-day 'eco-issue', with a benign nod from the authorities as it takes the pressure off all their failings to sort things out in the totality of the whole recycling chain?
PRW - UK litter campaigners want 10p deposit on plastic bottles - I am not sure saying 'it's going to make our lives difficult/expensive' is the stance I would have adopted, mind.
PRW - Bill Bryson's deposit plan fails to sway drink makers - Well, hardly unexpected, really.
117 April, 17.44 - Newsnight - just watched the piece with Justin King and the Govt. Minister. Not sure any questions posed on the blog were actually shared. Nor any answers given. Mr. Paxman gave all sides a pretty tough time, and there were a few occasions when Sainsbury's could have spun a better tale, but the key questions on what, when and how we get our stuff recycled here...woeful.
The new blog posting system is also in, and it does look like a great improvement. No more 502 Errors, but a lot of BIG issues taking over.
Now, while I am not sure this hasn't been mooted before, I look forward to the details as it seems fine in principle. Trouble is, as of 7.09am the detail is a bit shy. In fact all we do know is there is some resistance (yay!..controversy!), and 'the food and drinks industry has yet to comment'.
I'd also be interested in comment from retailers and the authorities, as to work there needs to be a bunch of new relationships and logistical routes established.
Because at the very least, when you take your bottle of HDPE 37 to the till, it will need to be identified, stored and then transported. And you will need to engage in a financial transaction (receipt...VAT... tax???).
It has been done, and seemed to work before. I recall collecting cans and bottles for pocket money (maybe getting the community on board... for money... would be a plan? Junkk.com stands ready to help).
But on past and present evidence, why do I see this as a quick, flip punt by the media on a few-day 'eco-issue', with a benign nod from the authorities as it takes the pressure off all their failings to sort things out.
Addendum - 7.41am
'Experts' Neil Hamilton (green sceptic) and the BBC's Newsnight Ethical Man and now One Show reporter Justin Rowlatt 'debate' the issue. Er... one says it's a daft idea and one says it isn't. Big surprise: an extremes twofer. I continue to await the detail on... HOW IT WILL WORK.
At least... by the end the consensus had admitted that the variety of plastics was not, as such, exactly helping the enviROI. In fact the only clear winner, and reason for it all, seemed to be the anti-litter brigade. Seems a lot of money and unclear systems being alluded in going to help reduce a target... if a worthy one.
Still nobody who knows anything tangible about the issue to be seen or heard.
Newsnight - Are supermarkets to blame?
This morning, on BBC Breakfast TV, there was a piece about a proposal to bring back the deposit system, this time with plastic bottles.
At least we now have two protagonists how might be able to shine a tad more informed light on the issue beyond 'experts' Neil Hamilton (green sceptic) and ex-Ethical Man and now One Show reporter Justin Rowlatt, who 'debated' the issue. That is... one said it's a daft idea and one said it isn't. Big surprise: an extremes twofer. I continue to await the detail on... HOW IT WILL WORK?
Now, accepting that this has been mooted before, I look forward to the details promised earlier, as it seems fine in principle. All I have so far is that there is some resistance (yay!..controversy!), and 'the food and drinks industry has yet to comment'.
So I am interested in answers from retailers and the authorities, who are even more at the coalface of this proposal (being where we consumers come in and who ends up with what we drop off) as to what there is in place... and needs to be doen in getting a bunch of new relationships and logistical routes established.
Because at the very least, when you take your bottle of HDPE 37 and 3/4 to the till, it will need to be identified, assessed, separated, stored and then transported (at what enviROI?). And will you then need to engage in a financial transaction (receipt...VAT... tax???).
It has been done, and seemed to work before. I recall collecting cans and bottles (what about metal and glass?) for pocket money (maybe getting the community on board... for money (if this stuff has value, then let's share the end-benefits:)... would be a plan? My organisation stands ready to help).
But on past and present evidence, why do I see this as a quick, flip punt by the media on a few-day 'eco-issue', with a benign nod from the authorities as it takes the pressure off all their failings to sort things out in the totality of the whole recycling chain?
PRW - UK litter campaigners want 10p deposit on plastic bottles - I am not sure saying 'it's going to make our lives difficult/expensive' is the stance I would have adopted, mind.
PRW - Bill Bryson's deposit plan fails to sway drink makers - Well, hardly unexpected, really.
117 April, 17.44 - Newsnight - just watched the piece with Justin King and the Govt. Minister. Not sure any questions posed on the blog were actually shared. Nor any answers given. Mr. Paxman gave all sides a pretty tough time, and there were a few occasions when Sainsbury's could have spun a better tale, but the key questions on what, when and how we get our stuff recycled here...woeful.
The new blog posting system is also in, and it does look like a great improvement. No more 502 Errors, but a lot of BIG issues taking over.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
To blog, or not to blog, that is the question?
Many of my blogs here are as a result of my writing on other blogs. A kind of e-BOGOF, for me anyway.
I can pop a promo for Junkk in another place, and end up with content for here.
Moderation considerations aside, I have had almost no issues at all with the technicalities of posting. They can happen, and indeed have on the Junkk Forum, for instance when I managed to kill something with my Mac O/S!
But on the whole, they work pretty well. Why not? They need not be too complex.
Except, it seesm, those deployed, at vast expense, with hordes of staff, by the BBC. It was getting almost impossible to post, or know if your post got through.
But what really got to me was how cavalier they have been over the last several months, especially when I know others beside me must have been keeping them well apprised of what is going wrong.
Yes, I have had the odd 'Thank you for your feedback; we're sorry (but really couldn't care less... what can you do about it? Withdraw your patronage or payment?) and we're working on a fix'. But at no time have I seen anything remotely like an advice to explain what might happen and where they are doing something.
Well, now we have. Worth reading the replies, too:
Blog problems - a solution is nigh
I can pop a promo for Junkk in another place, and end up with content for here.
Moderation considerations aside, I have had almost no issues at all with the technicalities of posting. They can happen, and indeed have on the Junkk Forum, for instance when I managed to kill something with my Mac O/S!
But on the whole, they work pretty well. Why not? They need not be too complex.
Except, it seesm, those deployed, at vast expense, with hordes of staff, by the BBC. It was getting almost impossible to post, or know if your post got through.
But what really got to me was how cavalier they have been over the last several months, especially when I know others beside me must have been keeping them well apprised of what is going wrong.
Yes, I have had the odd 'Thank you for your feedback; we're sorry (but really couldn't care less... what can you do about it? Withdraw your patronage or payment?) and we're working on a fix'. But at no time have I seen anything remotely like an advice to explain what might happen and where they are doing something.
Well, now we have. Worth reading the replies, too:
Blog problems - a solution is nigh
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Glimmers of sense, if not hope
Crunch time for social enterprises
A great piece, with some excellent links. Thank you.
A few years back I was invited as a guest at one of these shindigs. Usual suspects. Different minister. Same platitudes.
http://junkk.blogspot.com/2006/08/asking-for-thirds.html
I wasn't there (see below), but one thing that I do sense has not moved on is the acknowledgement of those in high office of the sheer breadth and scope that can be brought under this vast umbrella that is 'social enterprise', or even if anyone has yet managed to come up with a decent definition of what one actually is. Maybe that is the problem, there cannot be 'one'. Especially as we all, inevitably, end up competing to survive.
Because I for one find it very hard to lump together those doing invaluable work with, say, drug addicted street kids - which by any measure hardly seems a consumer group likely to lead to a self-sustaining business model any time soon - and compare it with what I'm up to. And that can have an effect. It does often rather feel that the truly vocational are also placed side by side with those who have a for-profit model when it comes to awards and funding, but with unspoken agendas at play which can lead to vast commitments of time and funds which often stand no chance of success from the off.
I had a rummage and some might find this - a purely personal view from one at the sharp (and, it seems, usually wrong) end interesti... well, another view, at least:
http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/03/beam-me-up.html
There is a lot of good to be done, and businesses to be run, successfully, doing it, but I do fear that at the moment the thrust of support and guidance given is not from the best qualified or able, and even if with the best intentions, perhaps not with the best results. Especially in terms of value for money/ROI to those doing the investing or those in theory intended to benefit.
Addendum:
SEC - Response to BERR's enterprise strategy
A great piece, with some excellent links. Thank you.
A few years back I was invited as a guest at one of these shindigs. Usual suspects. Different minister. Same platitudes.
http://junkk.blogspot.com/2006/08/asking-for-thirds.html
I wasn't there (see below), but one thing that I do sense has not moved on is the acknowledgement of those in high office of the sheer breadth and scope that can be brought under this vast umbrella that is 'social enterprise', or even if anyone has yet managed to come up with a decent definition of what one actually is. Maybe that is the problem, there cannot be 'one'. Especially as we all, inevitably, end up competing to survive.
Because I for one find it very hard to lump together those doing invaluable work with, say, drug addicted street kids - which by any measure hardly seems a consumer group likely to lead to a self-sustaining business model any time soon - and compare it with what I'm up to. And that can have an effect. It does often rather feel that the truly vocational are also placed side by side with those who have a for-profit model when it comes to awards and funding, but with unspoken agendas at play which can lead to vast commitments of time and funds which often stand no chance of success from the off.
I had a rummage and some might find this - a purely personal view from one at the sharp (and, it seems, usually wrong) end interesti... well, another view, at least:
http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/03/beam-me-up.html
There is a lot of good to be done, and businesses to be run, successfully, doing it, but I do fear that at the moment the thrust of support and guidance given is not from the best qualified or able, and even if with the best intentions, perhaps not with the best results. Especially in terms of value for money/ROI to those doing the investing or those in theory intended to benefit.
Addendum:
SEC - Response to BERR's enterprise strategy
Sunday, January 20, 2008
Today is the first Sunday of the rest of my blogging life
More pondering, sorry.
I've just completed the Sunday Times. I say 'completed' but it would be very inaccurate to say I read it all. I have certainly seen each page (except the Sports section, which is now ready to light the fire, along with several ad inserts), and indeed many have been torn out and lie ready to prompt me to hit the online page of the forthcoming week to capture links and maybe make a comment or two.
Thing is, it all took a good couple of hours. And while there were more than a few eco bits in there it has all become a chore, and frankly I question how relevant it is whether some sqillionaire has warmed his outdoor pool with ground heat or Audi has made a 27 litre diesel supercar. Not my zone really. Nor is it likely to be that of most reading here or surfing Junkk.com for a nice idea on what to do with their TV dinner packaging tray.
So I have decided to give the rest a miss. No Observer. No Indy. No Telegraph. So I guess I might miss out on how to offset my ski holiday by doing a Husky-swap with a Finnish family who are over to stock up on organic cheddar in one's farmhouse weekend retreat.
I think I still may keep up with some of the e-mailed dailies to stay abreast of a few things (frankly I can see most of the press releases I get at Junkk.com here reprinted in most, and pretty much verbatim), and when something truly relevant to moving the enviROI crops up add it to the pot.
SO I can then spend the time on perking up the bits that may help sell the site a bit more to the audience I really want to reach a bit better.
Mind you, once I can afford to get a bit of help I probably won't resist getting back in the sniping set again. It is, after all, quite fun seeing a pompous green balloon self-inflating at 1000 metres... and then trying to pop it.
I've just completed the Sunday Times. I say 'completed' but it would be very inaccurate to say I read it all. I have certainly seen each page (except the Sports section, which is now ready to light the fire, along with several ad inserts), and indeed many have been torn out and lie ready to prompt me to hit the online page of the forthcoming week to capture links and maybe make a comment or two.
Thing is, it all took a good couple of hours. And while there were more than a few eco bits in there it has all become a chore, and frankly I question how relevant it is whether some sqillionaire has warmed his outdoor pool with ground heat or Audi has made a 27 litre diesel supercar. Not my zone really. Nor is it likely to be that of most reading here or surfing Junkk.com for a nice idea on what to do with their TV dinner packaging tray.
So I have decided to give the rest a miss. No Observer. No Indy. No Telegraph. So I guess I might miss out on how to offset my ski holiday by doing a Husky-swap with a Finnish family who are over to stock up on organic cheddar in one's farmhouse weekend retreat.
I think I still may keep up with some of the e-mailed dailies to stay abreast of a few things (frankly I can see most of the press releases I get at Junkk.com here reprinted in most, and pretty much verbatim), and when something truly relevant to moving the enviROI crops up add it to the pot.
SO I can then spend the time on perking up the bits that may help sell the site a bit more to the audience I really want to reach a bit better.
Mind you, once I can afford to get a bit of help I probably won't resist getting back in the sniping set again. It is, after all, quite fun seeing a pompous green balloon self-inflating at 1000 metres... and then trying to pop it.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
A smaller glass for your wine, Mr. Falstaff?
Going green in a Hummer?
Glad to see that question mark. Because we go from '..to get..' to '..is proving..' to '..currently working on...' to '...he predicts...' in short order.
Sadly this kind of proves a point. If he had being doing his mileage job on a Civic how many in the media firmament would care? Or write about it?
Which kind of glosses over acknowledging that if we do need personal transport, then maybe instead of using technology to make the bloated behemoths some have 'better', it might be more productive to first cut down to more reasonable sizes and then play with them.
Which is why hydrogen powered Hummers for Arnie and 7 series for rose (or rather green)-tinted 'Captains of Eco-mmerce' kinda wash over me. Seems they can't quite do modest in all their efforts to show the rest of us the way to go.
ADDENDUM - Speaking of Hyrdogen - ST Letters - Can't vouch for the science (which makes these 'replies' objects of caution as the media seldom clarify at ll, much less later), but it is worth bearing in mind.
ADDENDUM 2 - ST Letters - I was watching out for this, which shows as much about the way debates can get streeeecthed out so they lose coherence, as much as the 'facts' being debated, when they are. Don't know about you, but I am none the wiser now.
ADDENDUM 3 - ST Letters
Glad to see that question mark. Because we go from '..to get..' to '..is proving..' to '..currently working on...' to '...he predicts...' in short order.
Sadly this kind of proves a point. If he had being doing his mileage job on a Civic how many in the media firmament would care? Or write about it?
Which kind of glosses over acknowledging that if we do need personal transport, then maybe instead of using technology to make the bloated behemoths some have 'better', it might be more productive to first cut down to more reasonable sizes and then play with them.
Which is why hydrogen powered Hummers for Arnie and 7 series for rose (or rather green)-tinted 'Captains of Eco-mmerce' kinda wash over me. Seems they can't quite do modest in all their efforts to show the rest of us the way to go.
ADDENDUM - Speaking of Hyrdogen - ST Letters - Can't vouch for the science (which makes these 'replies' objects of caution as the media seldom clarify at ll, much less later), but it is worth bearing in mind.
ADDENDUM 2 - ST Letters - I was watching out for this, which shows as much about the way debates can get streeeecthed out so they lose coherence, as much as the 'facts' being debated, when they are. Don't know about you, but I am none the wiser now.
ADDENDUM 3 - ST Letters
2k & counting!
Just noticed that we have slid past 2,000 posts.
Some kind of milestone I guess:)
Thanks to all who have contributed... and read.
Some kind of milestone I guess:)
Thanks to all who have contributed... and read.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
But carry a big pointy stick
Tread Lightly is a new(ish Guardian blog site. Some nice ideas and useful debate.
Trouble is, I'm having a problem working it as will be gathered by my posting on the section. However, I have my reasons.
EnvironmentEditor Comment No. 76060October 29 16:17 Blimey, what fantastic tips...
Yes, tips are good. Long may they be shared.
And this looks like a good place to share them. However I must confess to having a few navigational problems.
This thread, obviously, is about light bulbs. And I have more I'd like to share on other things in other enviro-areas. But this is not so easy.
Take my main area of reuse. There is a link to a more promising zone of the Tread Lightly Section, Waste, but when I tried to read more and contribute to Reuse or throw away? the link didn't work and comments were closed (so please go to http://www.junkk.com/ideas.asp?slevel=0z622&parent_id=622 to get some hopefully useful options by way of a contribution to that section).
Is it possible to keep such things archived and open a bit longer?
Trouble is, I'm having a problem working it as will be gathered by my posting on the section. However, I have my reasons.
EnvironmentEditor Comment No. 76060October 29 16:17 Blimey, what fantastic tips...
Yes, tips are good. Long may they be shared.
And this looks like a good place to share them. However I must confess to having a few navigational problems.
This thread, obviously, is about light bulbs. And I have more I'd like to share on other things in other enviro-areas. But this is not so easy.
Take my main area of reuse. There is a link to a more promising zone of the Tread Lightly Section, Waste, but when I tried to read more and contribute to Reuse or throw away? the link didn't work and comments were closed (so please go to http://www.junkk.com/ideas.asp?slevel=0z622&parent_id=622 to get some hopefully useful options by way of a contribution to that section).
Is it possible to keep such things archived and open a bit longer?
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Playing the playing field
BBC Environment reporters
Many issues have cropped up in the blogosphere lately, but more than usual surrounding Al Gore's legal and Nobel adventures, especially at at time of increased concern (if not at the level of our Government, it seems) in matters MWCC. Of course things have turned nasty, and now we are seeing the people who play the person and not the ball in turn being played. All very disconcerting. However, sometimes it is worth knowing more about those who would (and indeed are often paid) be trusted to serve us objective, informed facts. I just caution against missing the wood for the trees.
It is of course preferable to have those who share scientific news with us, especially where journalistically challenging, to be as qualified as possible. However to an extent I find this a slight red herring, and by playing the person we ignore not just the ball but the playing field.
In matters of Global Warming, climate change, MMCC or man-worsened climate change, from Mr. Gore to the IPCC to Bjorn Lomborg to... [it's a long list] there are a bunch of folk who either are, or quote, scientists who I presume have told them stuff. And I can honestly say that black could still equally be white in matters green from what I see served.
For sure a trusted reporter with the skill sets should be able to cut to the quick, but if the agenda surrounding him/her/them is not too keen on personal integrity (which all too easily can become subjective opinion), then it really matters little what the mouthpiece is. It's more who decides to stick 'em up there and what they get told, or choose to mouth.
I don't think he could have been trusted as an expert on much more than Spitfires (if he was more qualified I apologise to his memory), but I certainly hung on every fact that Raymond Baxter came out with as much as those from James Burke on Tomorrow's World. Because I trusted the system and the programme. Of course, I now wonder what I may have been spun even back then.
I have 2/3 of a vet degree (sheep breathe easier) and a Civ. Eng (Hons), but in the sound bite culture of today... so what? I still would prefer to see pols challenged by a Paxman... so long as he is well, and objectively, briefed.
And speaking of pols in this context, is it not amazing that we are lead at Cabinet level by folk who often get rotated in matters of months between amazingly diverse and complex areas of expertise. How many posts did Dr. (of what?) Reid hold?
But I totally agree with the basic critique in this case. Mr. Harrabin seems incapable of even getting basic facts straight, let alone challenging scientific matters of interpretation adequately.
Weekly Spin- An Ethical Look at Fake News - Not about e-stuff, but it serves here. And illustrates the pretty pickle 'we' face with what we are served... at every level. Both us, the audience, but also the time-poor, cash-strapped journos.
You get served up a nifty, packaged 'story' from a PR, so why not just run it? Well, it may not be the whole story, that's why. And even if it is something 'good', by not looking yourself at the back story you serve your audience as ill as you do the interests of the PR machine well.
Which is why I took recent 'stories' about 'surveys', which manged to put Tesco top and last (well, of 5) in some green ranking with all the salt I could stomach. This is good stuff:
"Press releases don't dwell on controversies and never explain the other sides of an issue," he stated. "They are not interested in other points of view."
Presenting promotional material as "news" has two effects: it undermines news quality, while enhancing the impact of the PR message. "Ask any public relations professional and they will tell you they want their story in television, radio and print news ... because it is more credible. Period. If we [journalists] do a story about it, the public is much more likely to believe it."
"The average viewer does not have a way of understanding whether this is fake, phony, or real." News viewers, he said, "are sophisticated and unsophisticated at the same time. They understand a lot about when they're being manipulated. But if you see a video news release -- a piece that looks like every other network or syndicated package -- on your local television station and it's introduced by your trusted local anchors, you're going to believe that that information is from a legitimate -- read, 'independent' -- news operation that's done its fact checking and has balanced its piece."
Many issues have cropped up in the blogosphere lately, but more than usual surrounding Al Gore's legal and Nobel adventures, especially at at time of increased concern (if not at the level of our Government, it seems) in matters MWCC. Of course things have turned nasty, and now we are seeing the people who play the person and not the ball in turn being played. All very disconcerting. However, sometimes it is worth knowing more about those who would (and indeed are often paid) be trusted to serve us objective, informed facts. I just caution against missing the wood for the trees.
It is of course preferable to have those who share scientific news with us, especially where journalistically challenging, to be as qualified as possible. However to an extent I find this a slight red herring, and by playing the person we ignore not just the ball but the playing field.
In matters of Global Warming, climate change, MMCC or man-worsened climate change, from Mr. Gore to the IPCC to Bjorn Lomborg to... [it's a long list] there are a bunch of folk who either are, or quote, scientists who I presume have told them stuff. And I can honestly say that black could still equally be white in matters green from what I see served.
For sure a trusted reporter with the skill sets should be able to cut to the quick, but if the agenda surrounding him/her/them is not too keen on personal integrity (which all too easily can become subjective opinion), then it really matters little what the mouthpiece is. It's more who decides to stick 'em up there and what they get told, or choose to mouth.
I don't think he could have been trusted as an expert on much more than Spitfires (if he was more qualified I apologise to his memory), but I certainly hung on every fact that Raymond Baxter came out with as much as those from James Burke on Tomorrow's World. Because I trusted the system and the programme. Of course, I now wonder what I may have been spun even back then.
I have 2/3 of a vet degree (sheep breathe easier) and a Civ. Eng (Hons), but in the sound bite culture of today... so what? I still would prefer to see pols challenged by a Paxman... so long as he is well, and objectively, briefed.
And speaking of pols in this context, is it not amazing that we are lead at Cabinet level by folk who often get rotated in matters of months between amazingly diverse and complex areas of expertise. How many posts did Dr. (of what?) Reid hold?
But I totally agree with the basic critique in this case. Mr. Harrabin seems incapable of even getting basic facts straight, let alone challenging scientific matters of interpretation adequately.
Weekly Spin- An Ethical Look at Fake News - Not about e-stuff, but it serves here. And illustrates the pretty pickle 'we' face with what we are served... at every level. Both us, the audience, but also the time-poor, cash-strapped journos.
You get served up a nifty, packaged 'story' from a PR, so why not just run it? Well, it may not be the whole story, that's why. And even if it is something 'good', by not looking yourself at the back story you serve your audience as ill as you do the interests of the PR machine well.
Which is why I took recent 'stories' about 'surveys', which manged to put Tesco top and last (well, of 5) in some green ranking with all the salt I could stomach. This is good stuff:
"Press releases don't dwell on controversies and never explain the other sides of an issue," he stated. "They are not interested in other points of view."
Presenting promotional material as "news" has two effects: it undermines news quality, while enhancing the impact of the PR message. "Ask any public relations professional and they will tell you they want their story in television, radio and print news ... because it is more credible. Period. If we [journalists] do a story about it, the public is much more likely to believe it."
"The average viewer does not have a way of understanding whether this is fake, phony, or real." News viewers, he said, "are sophisticated and unsophisticated at the same time. They understand a lot about when they're being manipulated. But if you see a video news release -- a piece that looks like every other network or syndicated package -- on your local television station and it's introduced by your trusted local anchors, you're going to believe that that information is from a legitimate -- read, 'independent' -- news operation that's done its fact checking and has balanced its piece."
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Autumn Cleaning
It was only in looking at some stuff about Blog Action Day just now that I realised one could change the blog format. Well, D'uh.
So I had a play. Hope you like it. I think this clean style is more reflective of the main site.
If not... we can change. Don'tcha just love digital!
So I had a play. Hope you like it. I think this clean style is more reflective of the main site.
If not... we can change. Don'tcha just love digital!
Thursday, September 27, 2007
BLOG ENHANCEMENTS
Well, I hope you will feel that's the case!
I pretty much live on this blog. For one thing there's a lot coming in each minute to comment upon, but also Google has a wadge of wonga to throw around that has made its interface really, really... really easy. And new toys appear weekly. Pictures, audio, polls...
Sadly, while Junkk.com's main site is a design masterpiece, its back-end is steam driven, and until I get help I am sadly leaving a lot that could and should be up there for when I can afford or get supported with help to post the HTML bits to help make what I write look as spiffy there as it can here.
And as I write blog posts, I've just realised that all manner of stuff comes in. Press releases, competitions, conference advisories, etc. And to now I have tended to file away and hope to get to them... which I usually don't.
So I am planning now to create categorise and forms on this blog that reflect the simple facts I have been given so they are at least posted and shared in a timely manner.
I doubt there will be much by way of commentary, but you know I can't resist the odd thought (and they can be very odd). But, as always, I would caution viewing such things always very much 'as supplied'.
These will be filed in the post labels using a selection of the main site categories as follows Junkk - [Category], usually with the name and a few other useful pointers attached to help if you are searching.
Hope it works and is useful. The tastier ones will also get an outing in the newsletter, when I get round to that!
ps: And if anyone would like to help me get the on-site archive up-to-date and usefully in complement, feel free to get in touch!
ADDENDUM:
What would be a BIG HELP would be to use our templates to help me help you if you'd like your PR to go up quickly. Here's one for EVENTS (there are others for AWARDS, etc, on site):
MONTH -
FIELD: Enviro, Biz, AD, etc
WHEN: Date, time
WHAT: Event title
WHAT... MORE?: A few more key details
WHERE: Postcode is always helpful to search
WHO: Speakers (Note: Here at Junkk we also do weddings, Bar Mizvahs:)
HOW: Much. We prefer free, naturally.
URL: Your www. here
COMMENTS: This is for us... we know things
I pretty much live on this blog. For one thing there's a lot coming in each minute to comment upon, but also Google has a wadge of wonga to throw around that has made its interface really, really... really easy. And new toys appear weekly. Pictures, audio, polls...
Sadly, while Junkk.com's main site is a design masterpiece, its back-end is steam driven, and until I get help I am sadly leaving a lot that could and should be up there for when I can afford or get supported with help to post the HTML bits to help make what I write look as spiffy there as it can here.
And as I write blog posts, I've just realised that all manner of stuff comes in. Press releases, competitions, conference advisories, etc. And to now I have tended to file away and hope to get to them... which I usually don't.
So I am planning now to create categorise and forms on this blog that reflect the simple facts I have been given so they are at least posted and shared in a timely manner.
I doubt there will be much by way of commentary, but you know I can't resist the odd thought (and they can be very odd). But, as always, I would caution viewing such things always very much 'as supplied'.
These will be filed in the post labels using a selection of the main site categories as follows Junkk - [Category], usually with the name and a few other useful pointers attached to help if you are searching.
Hope it works and is useful. The tastier ones will also get an outing in the newsletter, when I get round to that!
ps: And if anyone would like to help me get the on-site archive up-to-date and usefully in complement, feel free to get in touch!
ADDENDUM:
What would be a BIG HELP would be to use our templates to help me help you if you'd like your PR to go up quickly. Here's one for EVENTS (there are others for AWARDS, etc, on site):
MONTH -
FIELD: Enviro, Biz, AD, etc
WHEN: Date, time
WHAT: Event title
WHAT... MORE?: A few more key details
WHERE: Postcode is always helpful to search
WHO: Speakers (Note: Here at Junkk we also do weddings, Bar Mizvahs:)
HOW: Much. We prefer free, naturally.
URL: Your www. here
COMMENTS: This is for us... we know things
Who's in charge
I am personally uninspired and professionally constrained enough to have no real political affiliations, such that my greater allegiance is to the Currently Can't Reasonably Really Abide Any Party Party.
However, I do care a lot on how we are run, and those who would claim to be doing so. Which means currently there is one mob more than any other in my sights. As has been noted here before, it's a lot more effective to be in power and doing than out of it and talking. Especially to those of us lacking in patience on certain issues.
So, even though it was naught to do with the environment, I felt motivated to weigh in a tad having seen a Newsnight the other night that left me less than impressed with our Government and national broadcaster: British investment in Burma
As this 'discussion' 'unfurls' (or, possibly more accurately, oozes to oblivion), I am I supposed to be getting nearer to some clue to what's going on? If so that's no thanks to the Political Leadership of this country or the national broadcaster. What a team!
If this is how we are being represented at government level in matters of explanation and negotiation involving Foreign Affairs I think I'd best start building a bunker. And if this is how the competence of those entrusted with our country's future are to be effectively challenged to explain themselves, I guess I'll... um... what can I do, again?
Other than the half dozen left or so who might be so inclined to look back in archive, this whole mess will be lost, leaving any with some memory of the original exchange still in deep confusion and disappointment.
Whatever happened to professionalism? We had a pol who could barley restrain his loathing of all in front of him (beside camera and at 'tother end) as inconveniences to the grand plan (Version 2. Version 1 now deleted, and WE MUST NOT FORGET IT), and a celebrity interviewer who could barely restrain his loathing of that fact.
Sorry, no, that’s wrong. Neither did restrain anything, barely or otherwise. Save getting and offering enlightenment on topic.
They just let egos rip, with truth and clarity and respect for the electorate and viewership flying out of the window. And I bet now the principals can blame various unidentified minions for letting them down, and the whole thing can whizz off on a distracting tangent leaving the actual issue unaddressed and many questions hanging. Way to go guys!
Is this how we are now to be (micro)managed? An authority figure appears on air and appears to know nothing and commit to less. Then a spat ensues that solves nothing, leaving us to be drip fed undebated sound bites subsequently, to pick up on a website if we can find them?
And while I find it hard to imagine how a few score of those who do stay with such as these blog pages can really be worth the effort, it is proving a trial trying to pick around the stuff that is getting lobbed in here by the spinners at the expense of some worthy comment and attempt at debate.
There are what could be press releases drafted by spin doctors on both sides, masquerading as ‘Joe Public', and now a new quirk, the spoiler. These are the quite frankly bizarre ramblings that are either designed to discredit one side (by association) or the other (by being too obviously designed that way). Or, most likely, simply the process. Sadly this is a moderated blog's (and I recognise the necessity here) greatest weakness. I'm now seeing those who would seek to deliberately get moderated just to raise doubts as to the objectivity of the totality.
Are we really at a point where those theoretically in charge and/or representative of our interests are so irrelevant in comparison to those we can’t see (or vote for/against)? Especially when they see their mission as being to pull any strings necessary to have things simply being seen to be done as they see fit?
While of some value, that's why blogs (and most editable print) can never compare to live, streamed, noddy-free broadcast. Until now. As all parties seem to have found a way to render even this meaningless.
Sad.
BBC - Newsnight - Online analysis
Reading my previous post, looking at what happened subsequently (not much) I reckon I was not far off.
Interesting. A full six posts since Thursday at time of writing (Saturday pm - assuming this makes it), and one set are duplicates.
The country's Foreign Minister and one of the more significant broadcast interviewer/celebs on one of the few significant national broadcast news shows pretty much lock horns on key matters of fact and the viewer at the time is left bewildered as to what is going on and who knows and/or is doing what.
But fear not, all is to be clarified later on the website.
Now I know out of 60Million there are only so many who can vote and/or care about the state of the country and/or stay up that late (or catch it next day online) to watch a news show, and only a fraction of that audience care enough for sometimes a good 20 to pile in and engage on a blog.
But out of so many protagonists, 5 viewers so far on the only discussion board about the follow-up would seems to indicate that, as media milestones go, it surely ain't that great a poster child for politics or the way it gets reported upon and/or viewed these days.
However, I do care a lot on how we are run, and those who would claim to be doing so. Which means currently there is one mob more than any other in my sights. As has been noted here before, it's a lot more effective to be in power and doing than out of it and talking. Especially to those of us lacking in patience on certain issues.
So, even though it was naught to do with the environment, I felt motivated to weigh in a tad having seen a Newsnight the other night that left me less than impressed with our Government and national broadcaster: British investment in Burma
As this 'discussion' 'unfurls' (or, possibly more accurately, oozes to oblivion), I am I supposed to be getting nearer to some clue to what's going on? If so that's no thanks to the Political Leadership of this country or the national broadcaster. What a team!
If this is how we are being represented at government level in matters of explanation and negotiation involving Foreign Affairs I think I'd best start building a bunker. And if this is how the competence of those entrusted with our country's future are to be effectively challenged to explain themselves, I guess I'll... um... what can I do, again?
Other than the half dozen left or so who might be so inclined to look back in archive, this whole mess will be lost, leaving any with some memory of the original exchange still in deep confusion and disappointment.
Whatever happened to professionalism? We had a pol who could barley restrain his loathing of all in front of him (beside camera and at 'tother end) as inconveniences to the grand plan (Version 2. Version 1 now deleted, and WE MUST NOT FORGET IT), and a celebrity interviewer who could barely restrain his loathing of that fact.
Sorry, no, that’s wrong. Neither did restrain anything, barely or otherwise. Save getting and offering enlightenment on topic.
They just let egos rip, with truth and clarity and respect for the electorate and viewership flying out of the window. And I bet now the principals can blame various unidentified minions for letting them down, and the whole thing can whizz off on a distracting tangent leaving the actual issue unaddressed and many questions hanging. Way to go guys!
Is this how we are now to be (micro)managed? An authority figure appears on air and appears to know nothing and commit to less. Then a spat ensues that solves nothing, leaving us to be drip fed undebated sound bites subsequently, to pick up on a website if we can find them?
And while I find it hard to imagine how a few score of those who do stay with such as these blog pages can really be worth the effort, it is proving a trial trying to pick around the stuff that is getting lobbed in here by the spinners at the expense of some worthy comment and attempt at debate.
There are what could be press releases drafted by spin doctors on both sides, masquerading as ‘Joe Public', and now a new quirk, the spoiler. These are the quite frankly bizarre ramblings that are either designed to discredit one side (by association) or the other (by being too obviously designed that way). Or, most likely, simply the process. Sadly this is a moderated blog's (and I recognise the necessity here) greatest weakness. I'm now seeing those who would seek to deliberately get moderated just to raise doubts as to the objectivity of the totality.
Are we really at a point where those theoretically in charge and/or representative of our interests are so irrelevant in comparison to those we can’t see (or vote for/against)? Especially when they see their mission as being to pull any strings necessary to have things simply being seen to be done as they see fit?
While of some value, that's why blogs (and most editable print) can never compare to live, streamed, noddy-free broadcast. Until now. As all parties seem to have found a way to render even this meaningless.
Sad.
BBC - Newsnight - Online analysis
Reading my previous post, looking at what happened subsequently (not much) I reckon I was not far off.
Interesting. A full six posts since Thursday at time of writing (Saturday pm - assuming this makes it), and one set are duplicates.
The country's Foreign Minister and one of the more significant broadcast interviewer/celebs on one of the few significant national broadcast news shows pretty much lock horns on key matters of fact and the viewer at the time is left bewildered as to what is going on and who knows and/or is doing what.
But fear not, all is to be clarified later on the website.
Now I know out of 60Million there are only so many who can vote and/or care about the state of the country and/or stay up that late (or catch it next day online) to watch a news show, and only a fraction of that audience care enough for sometimes a good 20 to pile in and engage on a blog.
But out of so many protagonists, 5 viewers so far on the only discussion board about the follow-up would seems to indicate that, as media milestones go, it surely ain't that great a poster child for politics or the way it gets reported upon and/or viewed these days.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
You don't love me? You really don't love me?
According to this - The demand for expert generated content - research showed that less than 1 per cent trusted blogs as a reliable source of information.
Say it ain't so!
Especially when... if... 'This trend is further supported by research into the information sources web users consider trustworthy. The BBC is the UK’s most reliable source of information, according to 58 per cent of people who have faith in Auntie to provide accurate news.
If you say so, Bub.
What did and didn't surprise is that Wikipedia is only trusted by 2 per cent of the people surveyed, and recently had to remove swathes of content found to be written by prejudiced individuals. Unlike....?
Well, you know what I think of research. Until I see who asked what of whom, pinches of salt all round. Where's the Tequila?
Say it ain't so!
Especially when... if... 'This trend is further supported by research into the information sources web users consider trustworthy. The BBC is the UK’s most reliable source of information, according to 58 per cent of people who have faith in Auntie to provide accurate news.
If you say so, Bub.
What did and didn't surprise is that Wikipedia is only trusted by 2 per cent of the people surveyed, and recently had to remove swathes of content found to be written by prejudiced individuals. Unlike....?
Well, you know what I think of research. Until I see who asked what of whom, pinches of salt all round. Where's the Tequila?
Monday, August 20, 2007
Gone. And probably forgotten.
Well, I'm back.
But I must take the chance to thank co-poster Dave (and other respondents) for keeping the blog-flame (alt.energy sourced hydrogen as fuel, of course) burning.
So much has happened. So much is happening. So much yet to happen. But I think maybe it's best to simply start anew (as soon as I have cleared the e and snail post mountain that needs dealing with) rather than trying any major historical catch-ups. It's not like I was keeping up too well real-time, without trying to deal with archives as well.
It's still worth looking back a few as it needed me to get back to authorise a few replies from the control panel, and there have been some good ones, thank you.
Also, one that is a real hoot.
Catch you later.
But I must take the chance to thank co-poster Dave (and other respondents) for keeping the blog-flame (alt.energy sourced hydrogen as fuel, of course) burning.
So much has happened. So much is happening. So much yet to happen. But I think maybe it's best to simply start anew (as soon as I have cleared the e and snail post mountain that needs dealing with) rather than trying any major historical catch-ups. It's not like I was keeping up too well real-time, without trying to deal with archives as well.
It's still worth looking back a few as it needed me to get back to authorise a few replies from the control panel, and there have been some good ones, thank you.
Also, one that is a real hoot.
Catch you later.
Friday, June 15, 2007
Of Pods, Vlogs and Wormcasts
I have just returned to the blogseat having had the privilege of sharing a breakfast networking event that had as its guest speaker Heather Gorringe of Wiggly Wigglers.
Beyond the obvious inspiration of her business success, as an engaging and highly entertaining speaker it was also fascinating to be given a true 'warts and all' account of her struggles to get going, get established, and overcome hurdles.
I also learned a neat trick for post-talk Q&A time: have some giveaways ready for the first to pipe up. Breaks the ice nicely. I was, I am proud to say, the first beneficiary of this clever motivational technique. What's more, I now have another nice book to add to my Junkk RE:view section collection (with a rather embarrassing backlog)!
My question was actually about her adventures into the world of web 2.0, which are many, varied.. and highly successful. Her weekly podcast recently won a top award, and is picked up worldwide.
I really need some help and advice to make more of all that Junkk.com can engage with in this regard, and she has kindly extended an invitation to chat more and see how we can help each other, though I suspect it may be more in my direction (that said, we did pop them on our diRE:ctory years ago).
Another nice part of the event was the realisation that this area does seem to be throwing up more than its fair share of entrepreneurial spirits to complement a fairly healthy level of official interest in all things environmental. So I was also pleased to reacquaint myself with Herefordshire's new Cabinet Member for the Environment, who I hope will take me up on my invitation to visit. I certainly feel there are synergies to explore.
I'll end with a but, if only a small one. In fact it simply highlights how so much that is green cannot be easily popped in black and white pigeon holes.
Readers will recall that recently I was enthusiastic about a local initiative to encourage the practice of macerating waste and sending it down the plug hole for recovery.
So imagine my surprise and disconsternation when Heather referred to this... and was not in favour. Showing the surprising breadth of representation our fair county can throw up, she was then challenged by Sir. Colin Shepherd, who declared an interest (he apparently pioneered such things) but really rather disagreed with her. Sadly the debate did not get taken to quite to the satisfactory conclusion I'd hoped. Nor, really, did a further point from the floor regarding the use of Green Cones, about which I have also blogged in the past (but can still not persuade the sales guys to take the 10 minutes it would require to add to our diRE:ctory). Again there was some debate, as Heather rightly pointed out its positive products are 'wasted'. However I do think there are other, practical aspects of consumer behaviour she may not have truly appreciated, and for which I will accord it a 'better than nothing'. Mind you, I am feeling a DIY Junkk.com solution may be in the offing.
In chatting to another guest, more than knowledgeable on the subject, I must say it is a tricky one. Obviously any form of useful reclamation is better than none. But, if we do look at my favourite umbrella measure, the enviROI, then if the priority we face globally is reduction in airborne greenhouse gasses, recovery must come at the top. Hence, for now, I do think I am erring on the macerator route as best for my kids... with some healthy composting on top in complement.
Unless, as I think they used to say on 'That's Life"... you know different!
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
I don't think that they're betters. And I'm pretty sure they're not even my olders.
This, from Newsnight, really got the old blog-juices a-flowing (like they knew it would): The Cult of the Amateur, or, How Today’s Internet is Killing Our Culture and Assaulting Our Economy
Way-hey! The gauntlet is down. And like a petulant, ego-maniacal latter Robin, what blogging, web two-pointer worth his or her salt could resist drawing up their bow and, in fine homage style, ‘aim close to the target’s centre, letting the splinters of the previous champion’s split shaft fall where they may’.
So... “If we are all amateurs, there are no experts.”
Or... looking at it another way: “Leave it to the experts, because they have done such a good job so far. Not.” Discuss.
First, though, I have a few, I guess amateur, questions....
What, exactly, is ‘informed political commentary, seemly home video, proudly professional music and readable poems, reviews, essays, and novels”?
Or, perhaps I should rather ask; who is to say? Those unelected, self-serving ‘club’ members who have been doing so until now? I think... hope... not.
If blogs are “collectively corrupting and confusing popular opinion about everything from politics, to commerce, to arts and culture”, what can be cited from the mythical, godly mainstream that has, is and will not?
How about a liberal-left quick-hit on the TV about the Middle East, or a paper campaign on plastic bags or 4x4s, when only today I found out, and blogged on, a real and massive effort to tackle the real big issues facing the climate (link in my signature... I’d appreciate the reader numbers. You see we amateur types fancy getting paid for what we create, too, but by owing allegiance to no one what we often have to say is less prone to... influence).?
If Wikipedia perpetuates a cycle of misinformation and ignorance, then more fool those who read it without a well-cocked eyebrow. If YouTube is inane and absurd, then, er.... don’t watch it.
And if old media is facing extinction, who is more to blame?
I for one am quite happy to bid farewell to all experts (who qualify as such how, again, exactly?) and cultural gatekeepers (ditto... plus who put them in charge anyway?), if these are those who have decided what I get to see and hear based on very human motivations, ranging from self-interested to greed, and agendas that are much less edifying if not down right sinister.
That you ask what, in any case, can be done, is too facile and hilarious to really try and answer. Go Canute... go, man, go! The tide is coming, and you might squeeze a few more ratings out yet before you end up being, as well as looking, very wet.
ps: Some great replies, fellow posters. Ta for a good mid-pm read and a mind-expanding giggle or two. Peace out.
Way-hey! The gauntlet is down. And like a petulant, ego-maniacal latter Robin, what blogging, web two-pointer worth his or her salt could resist drawing up their bow and, in fine homage style, ‘aim close to the target’s centre, letting the splinters of the previous champion’s split shaft fall where they may’.
So... “If we are all amateurs, there are no experts.”
Or... looking at it another way: “Leave it to the experts, because they have done such a good job so far. Not.” Discuss.
First, though, I have a few, I guess amateur, questions....
What, exactly, is ‘informed political commentary, seemly home video, proudly professional music and readable poems, reviews, essays, and novels”?
Or, perhaps I should rather ask; who is to say? Those unelected, self-serving ‘club’ members who have been doing so until now? I think... hope... not.
If blogs are “collectively corrupting and confusing popular opinion about everything from politics, to commerce, to arts and culture”, what can be cited from the mythical, godly mainstream that has, is and will not?
How about a liberal-left quick-hit on the TV about the Middle East, or a paper campaign on plastic bags or 4x4s, when only today I found out, and blogged on, a real and massive effort to tackle the real big issues facing the climate (link in my signature... I’d appreciate the reader numbers. You see we amateur types fancy getting paid for what we create, too, but by owing allegiance to no one what we often have to say is less prone to... influence).?
If Wikipedia perpetuates a cycle of misinformation and ignorance, then more fool those who read it without a well-cocked eyebrow. If YouTube is inane and absurd, then, er.... don’t watch it.
And if old media is facing extinction, who is more to blame?
I for one am quite happy to bid farewell to all experts (who qualify as such how, again, exactly?) and cultural gatekeepers (ditto... plus who put them in charge anyway?), if these are those who have decided what I get to see and hear based on very human motivations, ranging from self-interested to greed, and agendas that are much less edifying if not down right sinister.
That you ask what, in any case, can be done, is too facile and hilarious to really try and answer. Go Canute... go, man, go! The tide is coming, and you might squeeze a few more ratings out yet before you end up being, as well as looking, very wet.
ps: Some great replies, fellow posters. Ta for a good mid-pm read and a mind-expanding giggle or two. Peace out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)