Worth noting, in a depressing kind of way

Gordon Brown is a busted flush – and he's taking us down with him

Not much more to add. How can we be in 2009 and still have a system that allows such a failing leader endure?

It doesn't matter if it was/is his fault. He is like Captain Queeg in charge of the Titanic, looking for the next iceberg to hit, yet still is till 'doing his job'.

Spring Cleaning

Time to rethink the blogging.

Junkk is still well worth it, as relationships can get established that drive the site, and its missions, well.

This one... not so much. Though actually I think I will retain it as a 'release valve'.

But I have found I spend a wee bit too much time on other sites, and their value, and certainly the value to me or my causes, is hardly worth the effort of engaging.

It is a pity, as many, if not most can offer a wealth of valuable opinion and onward information, but the ratio of trolls and other negative influences make even the time invested in reading hardly worth it. As to go so far as engaging, the replies can now be less than pleasant, and almost designed to threaten or inhibit dialogue.

It was, and is, interfering with my work, and indeed mood. So time to haul back.

I doubt my absence will be noted, and hence missed. Too many too invested in pushing their prejudices I fear.

But maybe a chance for me to get back to what's a bit more urgent , and important in these crunchier times. I just wonder if that doesn't rather play into the hands of those who would prefer the more moderate aspects of the Internet didn't prove quiet so effective at finding things out, being told stuff and interacting. Making a venue an unpleasant place to be is a very good way of driving away custom, no matter how good it is intended to be.

Ah well.

You put the right story in, the left story out...

... you do the hokey-cokey, what's that all about?

This morning I noted a story on the Newsnight blog.

A bit political, so I shared it with a few folk on a political blog.

Then I went back to check... and it had 'gone'.

Now, as the BBC have more than a little form in this area, I am less inclined to think I dreamt it up, and indeed feel the need to make some kind of record (including page catures) lest I be accused of fibbing.

Here's what I wrote to them....

Speaking of Michael Crick's 'Top Story' (Here's Michael Crick with details of tonight's top story - Not, I suspect 'Anorak's Corner from Friday 23rd Jan), is it linking to the right one?

And I could have sworn he had the latest slot in this blog roll this morning with this:

Spelman Decision Soon?

But now it seems to have gone, not just from here, but his own page too.

Which may explain the odd linking, but otherwise has me a tad confused.

Quote of the Day - Control systems

Actually it's pretty old, but I think worth noting as I was reminded of it...

"You can control the language and you control the debate. You control the debate and you control the media. You control the media and you win the war."

Glen Beck - (I make no comment on the actual topic, just the quote. Though... 'this is not an issue of debate, but one of 'emerging truth' ', which is another nifty quote)

It has emerged... or it will if it suits us...

A blogger alerts me to an oddity, and asks...

'Why does the BBC page on Dawn Butler's letter from Barack Obama show the version of the letter without the House of Commons portcullis? Could someone ask the BBC to explain why..'.

I'm not from the BBC of course, but there could be a few reasons...

1) It is part of an 'emerging truth', with the bit that might not help with the truth not quite emerging as much as it might... yet. (I must get the leader of the free world to slap his John Hancock and a piece of paper I have to hand... he seems a trusting sort, and I have some prime swamp land in Florida. Just hope those tinkers at the CIA don't think up a similar wheeze to get him to OK something he shouldn't...)

2) Susan Watts and the Newsnight crew have been sharing their expertise on 'rejigging' anything with Pres. Obama associated with it to suit the narrative.

3) This is an 'event' that need 'interpreting', and that bit at the top may just have confused a few simple folk in to asking what the heck was going on, not to mention in the tiny minds of all the protagonists.

But I 'm sure someone from the BBC will be better placed to clarify.

Oh, this just in, Jeremy has called to say his man on the pulse in Gaza says his brother heard his cousin say it's all kosher... but then the line went dead for some reason. Possibly along with the cousin.

Aunty, you are becoming a bad joke, like most of mine here. Trouble is, I am not laughing to the tune of £139.50pa, and Mr. Ross tonight is unlikely to improve my mood.

Telegraph - BBC in more trouble over edited pieces

BBBC - I was interested in the link to Dowdification:

The omission of a word or a phrase in order to reframe a quote and alter its meaning.
This is usually done to help an author portray a particular viewpoint and is very common amongst weblogs.

The term is named after the New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd.

Times - Did Barack Obama really write about Labour MP Dawn Butler?

Synonyms of Omission

Inspired by a keen-eyed poster on a site who made the point that - in the first example below - 'Demand' and 'Urge' are not synonyms, I have decided to create this little evolving list.

A pity, if no surprise, that it is kicked off by the BBC.

The disconnect between headlines, subheads, first paras, subsequent paras and what is said/written and what some would wish should be said/written (especially pertinent online in a time poor, eye-skimming age) is getting to be a bad joke.

Examples like this are not just sloppy. When in headline especially, they are either by accident or design changing, and hence misrepresenting the whole communication.

And hence are plain wrong.

Such examples should be logged and archived.

I have suggested, and start here 'Synonyms of Omission'

Though admitedly this might not adequately cover the egregious effect of not just leaving out something crucial, but going so far as to totally change everything.

BBC
H/L: UN demands flow of goods to Gaza
Para 1: UN humanitarian chief John Holmes has urged Israel to fully open all crossings with Gaza to allow a free flow of goods.

There's no news like old news

A piece in Newsnight has moved me to comment...

Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein and Me: The Full Story!

When I were a lad, on a student exchange scheme in a wee town in Texas, the local paper masthead had a line that struck a chord then, and still does now:

'Hew close to the line; let the chips fall where they may'.

And, being a small town, I was subsequently privileged to meet and chat with the editor.

Charming chap, but despite the relative lack of news 'excitement' around his patch, ruthlessly devoted to the whole 'who, what, why, when..' thing and... especially... confirming the story.

Don't think he'd have thought much of a news environment, especially in the MSM where, to use Jon Humphry's words, 'stars' like him are there to 'interpret' what's happened for us.

I presume that includes adding, or subtracting something between what has actually happened, and what we need to know about. Often that's necessary to make it a well-structured story. But often it can be a�little extra 'value' according to personal taste or corporate dictat, and go too far for my comfort.

And especially, of late, with the uncritical throughput of facts where provenance gives way to speed.

'It may not be true, but we were told it first' may be good enough for ratings, and indeed subsequent deniablity, but really isn't responsible reporting any more, is it?

I wonder what Bob and Carl think of the MSM they, amongst others, inspired to the standard it is today?