I think I'm starting to see the problem.

Scroll down and see the video of Peggy Joseph.

Be a good American: Pay my mortgage

Meanwhile, over the pond back here....

Is it 'cos I is untouchable?

I was just going to let this headline (and, I presume, an accurate quote) speak for itself (and the main protagonist).

It stopped me in my tracks.

Then I read this and this. They seem to go together.

Interesting also that the 'issue' was prompted by one party merely wondering if blowing vast amounts on ancient perceived affronts (especially nice little earners for those on the gravy train) was sensible.

Obviously some think it is, if they can get away with it.

Job crisis sorted

30 Million working productively. 30 Million 'employed' to 'monitor' each one.

Spying on 60 million people doesn't add up

Indeed.

People in glass houses...

... are lucky that some in the media are hard of seeing. Apparently.

The 'situation' regarding the ex-head of RBS is beyond parody. But then, so is the response of some in government and those who , er, report*, upon their words and deeds.

Driven to distraction

9. At 12:11pm on 27 Feb 2009, djlazarus
Obviously the irony of getting a gold plated pension and perks for doing a job incredibly badly is lost on Mr Prescott.

Reading the author's (what's his job again?) original post, I'd suggest Mr. Prescott is not the only one.

However, as we are now in favour of not rewarding those who have and/or are sucking us dry whilst not offering much by way of public service worth a damn, or indeed making things worse, covering up badly and all round just digging deeper holes, let's see where else our gazes and direct debit cancellations may alight:)

23. At 12:36pm on 27 Feb 2009, subedeithemomgol wrote:
If Prescott reads the replies to his blog on the Guardian site he'd be quickly disabused about the public opinion - he called for Sir Fred's pension to be shredded, most replies wanted to see his pension shredded.

Order-Order - Prescott's Pension Hypocrisy

Guardian - Sir Fred's just one of millions to do better under Labour - there's what the readers and viewers think, and then there's what such as the BBC and Guardian thinks

Telegraph - Meanwhile, Gordon Brown is getting ever deeper into denial - feeling confident in our 'leadership', are we?

Indy - Ministers criticised over civil service bonuses - I am still grappling with why and how a bonus culture exists in public service at all.

*I have just 'learned' that the BBC 'has learned' that the PM will be telling activists that Sir Fred's unacceptable behaviour is the most serious issue of the moment. If he, and they, say so. I think this episode and how it has been handled says a lot more about them, though.

Telegraph - Gordon Brown has as little shame as Sir Fred Goodwin - Ah, Dear Leader has waited and weighed in... and in as competent a way as always.

I really guess I shouldn't have... but...

Anyone can let a typo slip in, but somehow I thought the tone deserved a reply.

'And, congratulations is in order after Newsnight triumphed'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam

I'm sure they, um... are.

I am sure capturing a new and younger audience is just what's required.

And next year...?

Best 'Interpreting of Events'

Craftiest Edit To Suit Agendas

Most Cooperative Assistance to the Emergence of Truths?

Most Ratings-driving Rabid Extremes Twofer at the Expense of Rational Debate

Highest Cranked Eyebrow and Sneer Whilst Interrupting

Me, I just like my news as objective facts, and opinion well balanced, and will vote for those any day.

The haves, and the have to earn a livings

As I watch the morning news, I am struck by a worrying imbalance.

And this is the sheer number of folk, from the public sector, quangos, 'not for profits', charities... and the media... all of whom are paid, and often paid well, pontificating about how those no so blessed as they should spend their money or behave.

It really seems a bit of a cheek in many cases to be doing so, without much concern for the consequences on paying mortgage, utility bills, fees (and fines).

I see a breaking point fast approaching. As I bang on on Junkk Male RE:view about growing populations and finite planet areas to sustain them, this is even worse.

As more and more move from productive, income-generating work to whatever the heck it is most of these parasites do, there will become a tipping point where the bean-makers can't sustain themselves and the new legions of bean-counters, commenters, etc, and all will starve.

After whom, I wonder?

We will put people first, not bankers

At time of writing, 721 replies. None that I could see in support by the time I gave up reading. In the Guardian.

I guess it is one of all those talents in Government to unify people so, though perhaps not intended in this way.

Now, what might that 'explain' to any author that is not totally delusional.

Careful what you wish for

What a perfect revenge on the arch snooper

It comes to something of an unpretty pass when it all boils down to media tips, 'outed' 'snitches' (interesting precedent in that not wholly less than inflammatory word when your 'report' ends up plastered all around. I presume these guys were willing to give up their names for their 15 minutes of flame), etc, when... and it may have been mentioned and I missed it... surely the police and other record holders know and have records of exactly where she was, is and doubtless will be.

I can see the last might need to stay a secret, but surely this might all have been dealt with easily and above board without recourse to the very dubious systems that are hanging our hapless home sec and her rep out to dry?

Were that some other 'friendly' media as keen to stay on top of a fairly clear case of foot in... well, across the wrong threshold, when so obviously looking at best a case of multiple laws for an ever-growing multiplicity of 'standards' between those who tell us what to do, and what they do themselves.

When in doubt, ask an ex... er... luvvie

Friday, 20 February, 2009 Newsnight & Newsnight Review

'Instead of inviting Christine Odone & David Aaronovitch to comment on the change in the terms of Jade Goody's fiance's curfew, couldn't Newsnight have found someone who actually knew something about the criminal justice system'

Made my day.

I believe it comes under 'enhancing (or, in this case, perhaps more accurately shaping) the narrative'.

Of course, it can't hurt the ratings, either.

Who needs informed, objective news reporting and commentary anyway?

Unique.

Don't panic... er...

In interesting insight into our current leadership...

A transcript of half-truths, exaggerations and Brownies

I feel like we're back in some earlier century, where the Establishment can't, or won't, get to grips with a clearly insane individual who is clearly dragging all the rest down with them.

The law is an awl.

An awl is a long pointed instrument. Hence it can also be used to inflict as little or as much pain as the user who wields it sees fit.

And if law can be so vague as be rejuggled to read as awl, the effect is the same.

Driving on the phone isn't dangerous

I would like to know if Joyce is right, because that makes the specific case cited very different and pretty clear cut.

I have Bluetooth handsfree, on the presumption that it is 'legal'. But I have to confess that I don't think my attention to driving is a good compared to without. Obviously. So it is, at the very least 'more dangerous'. However, the same can be said for having a passenger in conversation. Maybe even worse as one tends to glance across. So one gets into areas of relativity and practicality.

Hence I merely respond, in agreement, only to the point you make: 'Either hands-free phones are legal to use or they are not.'

I have major concerns with this, and a lot of other driving-related 'laws'... AND others across every aspect of one's existence in this blighted isle, where there are way too many grey areas of definition that somehow can get escalated to perfect clarity to impose fines and/or prosecutions if the authorities feel so disposed.

It used to be 'ignorance of the law is no excuse'. I'm sorry, but if the law is incapable of making itself clear such that the law-abiding can know how to obey it... THAT is inexcusable.

More on 'narrative enhancing'?

Another £100 billion of public spending from the CBI?

'When I heard the BBC tell me this morning that the CBI had called for £100 billion extra public spending in order to prevent a deeper recession I was ready to blog about the CBI’s economic illiteracy. When I read their Press Release I was interested to see the CBI said no such thing.'

For example

Despite that cover-up by establishment stooges, Ms Smith is guilty of thievery (and I dare her to sue me)

Let's see who comes out well in this.

I'm guessing the country won't be.

Gaurdian 'journalist' has problem with bloggers scooping stories they'd rather keep quiet shock

Analysis of a storm in a teacup

'...really useful public service journalism on the net.'

I'd love a definition of that, as I rather suspect there's the 'I work for the MSM and hence get to tell you what I think you need to know, and in a way that helps you think the 'correct' way' notion, espoused by some not too far away from here and their 'narrative enhancing', 'events interpreting' mates, and the few left... oddly mostly bloggers... who seem to report facts, usually check them, and then let these, supported by clear links (and, as in this case) be the story. Mr. Draper is rather 'involved' in a fair bit of political activity, connected at senior level, is he not? I found this story rather interesting, am glad it was raised and credit those who did. As do most who read such things online, from what I can see. Hence the few sniffy dissenting views are more than interesting by being so out of step.

But, and I look in the mirror as I write this, there may be some merit in the whole 'pot/kettle' thing in having concerns with one writer plying their trade by mainly dissing another. But I think that ship has sailed.

How did that slagging off the Sun guy's story from Israel pan out anyway?

QUOTE OF THE DAY - Telling it like it is

From this Newsnight.

Actually the author didn't make much of it, but I thought it great...

'Gordon will say he was acting on the information he was given i.e. not my fault gov. '

With of course, the URL associated: NotMyFault.gov.uk/Gordon

Wish I could buy that one. I'm pretty sure it would be a major hit.

Well I never...

I admire folk who say what they think.

I may not agree with them, at least not always, but a bit of passion certainly stirs the soul...

Just what exactly do you stand for, Hazel Blears - except election?

And this... in the Guardian. Hmn.

It's good to have standards. Just...not more than one at a a time.

If Jeremy Clarkson must apologise to Gordon Brown, then Margaret Thatcher is owed an apology too

I have followed this for a while. Time to weigh in.

Uniquely funded; uniquely run.

At the very least, on top of some very questionable personal agendas masquerading as policy, there does seem to be a multiplicity of standards (certainly more than two) at the institution I am required to co-fund.

What is most worrying is the mindset in 'the bubble'. This programme, (which I have to say I have followed and enjoyed enormously over the years, and indeed found most of the two above named protagonists pretty funny when they don't descend into left-leaning 'right-on' ad hominems to an easy to whip up crowd), is 'live' is it not? Or at least topical to a few days.

Did it not occur to any involved that, especially with Ms. Brand present, that what they deem acceptable and 'edgy' might to others be as offensive, if not more so in its mass broadcast form, as something that may have been said in private but got a set of collective PC knickers in a twist and various folk running to teacher? I'd like to think if it had been 'Have I Got News For You', Ms. Brand at least might have found herself on a rather uncomfortable end of the others' wit, as did the unfortunate original presenter.

It's like there is a cloak of immunity over the gilded ones who grace our public airwaves, so long as they conform to, or better yet enhance the groupthink. From Gaza to gobby comics, I am getting a bit tired of being included in what the BBC and its invited, restricted-membership 'in-crowd' thinks I think (or at least thinks I should), and presumes to represent or claim on my behalf.

Actually, for all that actually happens tangibly in reaction, there might well be.

This is not the service promised. I want my refund.

ps:

Not that I am within the sound of Bow Bells, but I wonder if there are certain senior ladies from the politico-media establishment elite who have taken it upon themselves to be 'guardians of our thinking' (and I am sure Ms. Brand will be on board with the sentiment if not the targets) who, in this new phrasing-cautious era, might be referred to as 'a bit of a Jay Hunt'?

pps:

On a more serious, or at least less trivial note, this latest episode really represents another concerning metaphor for the culture of image vs. reality, and process vs. result that is being foisted upon us by our elected, and often totally unrepresentative (and very definitely unelected) 'masters' and 'mistresses' (or whatever the heck collective term they can come up with and deem now required over a taxpayer-funded outreach weekend).

A person who does not believe themselves at fault and says so can find the full force of the law thrown at them. A totally unrepentant felon briefly mouths some weasel words and the legal system rewards them with limitless concessions.

Sorry is no longer the hardest word; it is now, in some quarters, without value, at least to those of us not interested in just the words but also the deeds, and refuse to engage with the silly semantic games that so entertain, and seemingly satisfy too many who should know better, and betray their positions by indulging so easily in them.

Being seen to be something, or not, is now of more value than actually doing anything, or not. A slippery path across the board, with no good outcome for any of us, complicit or not.

Addendum - I have often wondered what racism/being racist is; it seems at best a rather moving/evolving entity. Just been led to this: racismtest.com - not going to go near it, at least online, for all sorts of reasons, but interesting that it's there.

Now, who would have thunkit?

Some my have noticed I am 'concerned' about emerging truths, enhanced narratives, interpretation of events , etc, by our public broadcaster.

BBC accused of portraying refinery strikers as racist by editing quotes

Do you really wonder why?

BBC apologises for misleading edit of striking worker - An 'apology'. That's all right then.

Not right>>> Right not>>> Right no>>> Right on!

It's all in the edit

When the Guardian notices, and is uneasy, and says so, there is more than a slight problem.

As a few have noted, there is a certain amount of 'form' at play here.

Lords of the ratings war

In a 24hrs that sees a furore over a private conversation between some people resulting in a firing:

Big Brother for children: Channel 4 demonstrates why it should be closed down

Yesterday's BBC Breakfast sofa was positively cooking with various folk promoting this... public ser... er.. study... er... rampant ratings grab in the guise of god knows what. To be fair there were a few 'uneasy' at the psychological aspects, so they 'understood' the anguish of parents desperate to be on the telly watching their kids desperate to be on the telly not exactly enjoying the experience of being on the telly. And, without having watched it (my small protest), having been through the edit suite to 'enhance the narrative' I bet most liked the result even less.

Ill-conceived and cynically executed from pitch meeting to press releases. With a complicit MSM ready and waiting to savour the incoming... and fallout. Sick.

Oh, and really, this alone rather puts the whole sorry charade in context: '...without their parents or other outside adult influences (apart from the adult camera crew which films everything they do).

ie: a complete fabrication with no value, but somehow a licence for some adults to mentally torture some minors for some money.