Guess whose ex-editor now does their PR?
Google
The Editors' blog is moving
13 years ago
6.9.08
It's only a game...isn't it?
What to do about Gordon - Part One
I fear for my country when it is being suggested by a top political insider from our national broadcaster that a credible scenario (avoided only by fear of discovery) is that 'we' limp along (some might argue going further downhill) until our leader pulls a fake sicky to avoid looking silly when arriving at the precipice.
I fear for my country when it is being suggested by a top political insider from our national broadcaster that a credible scenario (avoided only by fear of discovery) is that 'we' limp along (some might argue going further downhill) until our leader pulls a fake sicky to avoid looking silly when arriving at the precipice.
5.9.08
Form a queue...
Which quango shall we scrap first?
All merry japes and all, and big up to the likes of the TA and yourself for stirring the pot a tad, but I would dearly love to understand how these entities came to be, how they are different from government departments, who pays for them, what they spend, what they deliver, how they are accountable, etc.
Just so I can at least be fair in any critique.
Take just one, WRAP - http://www.wrap.org.uk/ - in a sphere I am interested in: the environment.
They seem awash with directors and premises and regional reps on all manner of things, but I am having a lot of trouble figuring out where the money they get comes from and why, and where it then gets spent and how well.
I recall a few tabloids getting excited about board level bonuses at one stage, but can't for the life of me figure out how anyone in such a place could be entitled to one. They have a comms budget that runs to multi-millions, but then if rewards are based on public awareness then surely shunting money into ad campaigns rather than tangibles is almost a dead cert, if not a slight conflict of (my kids' future) interest?
Is there anywhere such oversight, in a sensible way, is carried out? And if it is not by my elected representatives in government and an already well-stocked, paid and pensioned collection of first tier civil servants... why the heck not!???
All merry japes and all, and big up to the likes of the TA and yourself for stirring the pot a tad, but I would dearly love to understand how these entities came to be, how they are different from government departments, who pays for them, what they spend, what they deliver, how they are accountable, etc.
Just so I can at least be fair in any critique.
Take just one, WRAP - http://www.wrap.org.uk/ - in a sphere I am interested in: the environment.
They seem awash with directors and premises and regional reps on all manner of things, but I am having a lot of trouble figuring out where the money they get comes from and why, and where it then gets spent and how well.
I recall a few tabloids getting excited about board level bonuses at one stage, but can't for the life of me figure out how anyone in such a place could be entitled to one. They have a comms budget that runs to multi-millions, but then if rewards are based on public awareness then surely shunting money into ad campaigns rather than tangibles is almost a dead cert, if not a slight conflict of (my kids' future) interest?
Is there anywhere such oversight, in a sensible way, is carried out? And if it is not by my elected representatives in government and an already well-stocked, paid and pensioned collection of first tier civil servants... why the heck not!???
4.9.08
Gone, but not forgotten
My brief adventure with Google's Chrome
Just wondering how many big PR successes ex-BBC employees have and might yet enjoy thanks to their mates.
I wonder if such access to a national audience is factored in when assessing and paying market rates?
Just wondering how many big PR successes ex-BBC employees have and might yet enjoy thanks to their mates.
I wonder if such access to a national audience is factored in when assessing and paying market rates?
Getting a gripped
Newsnight
In addition to exposing the woeful state of journalism, editorial and communication abilities we are being served up these days, what a neat mindset example of how our supposedly intelligent, considered and objective media act, more worryingly think, and even more jaw-droppingly think they act.
At least this time we have a poster to thank for having a clue as to what the heck got changed. Usually the howler gets changed retroactively leaving those that have pointed it out to be left hanging.
And then there is another to point out that what 'news' that is spun to 'grip' us is more often down to the agenda and ratings interests of an isolated media minority than any reflection of public interest.
Here's a little news flash for the 4th estate... get back to finding real news and simply reporting on it. Not trying to make it up and then hyping to suit.
I want the facts, not what you think, and certainly not what you (or your PR mates) have decided I need to think.
In addition to exposing the woeful state of journalism, editorial and communication abilities we are being served up these days, what a neat mindset example of how our supposedly intelligent, considered and objective media act, more worryingly think, and even more jaw-droppingly think they act.
At least this time we have a poster to thank for having a clue as to what the heck got changed. Usually the howler gets changed retroactively leaving those that have pointed it out to be left hanging.
And then there is another to point out that what 'news' that is spun to 'grip' us is more often down to the agenda and ratings interests of an isolated media minority than any reflection of public interest.
Here's a little news flash for the 4th estate... get back to finding real news and simply reporting on it. Not trying to make it up and then hyping to suit.
I want the facts, not what you think, and certainly not what you (or your PR mates) have decided I need to think.
1.9.08
No news is... bliss
I wasn't going to post today.
Technically I am still on hols. Back in the UK and at home (no thanks to the joys of charter flying and the M25) after two weeks in SW Turkey of sun, sea and, well not much else. Certainly news. There were papers each day of course, at silly prices, but they were all tabloids so I paid little heed (and even if I had I suspect I might have remained none the wiser on most issues of import). And hence the economy, Olympics... even that small war... all passed me by. And I felt a lot better for it.
So why I made the mistake of switching on the BBC news just now escapes me.
In just two slots our esteemed national broadcaster had me climbing the wall. Already. Again.
First up was some awful family tragedy playing out where again it seems the odd and frightening new notion of dealing with failure is to compound it with infanticide followed by suicide. So I was treated to some reporterette rushing around trying to find out again how another community 'feels', and if they fail to come up trumps insert some utter tosh to fill a few minutes. We had a murder near here once, a 'crime passionelle'. As it was more than the end of my road way I had no clue who the protagonists were, and though sad to find those who are close can so violently be driven apart would have had little if anything to opine on the matter if asked. However I am readying my best yokel vox pop in case of the next within a few hundred square miles, as it seems a crew will be sent to fill a day trying to fill the airwaves with nothing very much that helps around the 'story': 'Ar... not the the best murder we've had in the village but we're giving it a 5 out of ten for style, a six for effort and a definite ten for slow news top billing quality, my duck'.
Then we lurched on to pictures of a hurricane hitting the US near where Katrina had wreaked her havoc. Thing is, it looked windy and wet, but that was about it. And the interviewees didn't seem to be cooperating either by pointing out that hurricanes have happened there before and they weren't too fussed so far. But the studio double act blonde and bouffant seemed almost to be willing levees to burst and scenes of carnage to unfold again. As far as I could make out the theory was that the last one was good for media stories, so this one could be made to be as well. Only, so far, it's... well, weather.
Having had the seductions of warm, balmy Turkey to seduce me, along with the cold variety of no actual intrusion of any 'news' to catch my jaundiced eye, I can only hope I might find the strength to resist the 24/7 drivel that is pumped out here under the 'news' banner these days.
Yeah, right.
Technically I am still on hols. Back in the UK and at home (no thanks to the joys of charter flying and the M25) after two weeks in SW Turkey of sun, sea and, well not much else. Certainly news. There were papers each day of course, at silly prices, but they were all tabloids so I paid little heed (and even if I had I suspect I might have remained none the wiser on most issues of import). And hence the economy, Olympics... even that small war... all passed me by. And I felt a lot better for it.
So why I made the mistake of switching on the BBC news just now escapes me.
In just two slots our esteemed national broadcaster had me climbing the wall. Already. Again.
First up was some awful family tragedy playing out where again it seems the odd and frightening new notion of dealing with failure is to compound it with infanticide followed by suicide. So I was treated to some reporterette rushing around trying to find out again how another community 'feels', and if they fail to come up trumps insert some utter tosh to fill a few minutes. We had a murder near here once, a 'crime passionelle'. As it was more than the end of my road way I had no clue who the protagonists were, and though sad to find those who are close can so violently be driven apart would have had little if anything to opine on the matter if asked. However I am readying my best yokel vox pop in case of the next within a few hundred square miles, as it seems a crew will be sent to fill a day trying to fill the airwaves with nothing very much that helps around the 'story': 'Ar... not the the best murder we've had in the village but we're giving it a 5 out of ten for style, a six for effort and a definite ten for slow news top billing quality, my duck'.
Then we lurched on to pictures of a hurricane hitting the US near where Katrina had wreaked her havoc. Thing is, it looked windy and wet, but that was about it. And the interviewees didn't seem to be cooperating either by pointing out that hurricanes have happened there before and they weren't too fussed so far. But the studio double act blonde and bouffant seemed almost to be willing levees to burst and scenes of carnage to unfold again. As far as I could make out the theory was that the last one was good for media stories, so this one could be made to be as well. Only, so far, it's... well, weather.
Having had the seductions of warm, balmy Turkey to seduce me, along with the cold variety of no actual intrusion of any 'news' to catch my jaundiced eye, I can only hope I might find the strength to resist the 24/7 drivel that is pumped out here under the 'news' banner these days.
Yeah, right.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
