Category Archives: media

Is GDPR turning us all into sheep?

I dunno bout you but I’m getting extremely p’d off by all the changes that GDPR has introduced to make our lives better.

The purpose of the GDPR is to provide a set of standardised data protection laws across all the member countries. This should make it easier for EU citizens to understand how their data is being used, and also raise any complaints, even if they are not in the country where its located.”

That’s what the Privacy Trust says. Well guys you have actually done the opposite.  It used to really easy to block cookies and stop people using your data – but now you get things like this appearing – and yes, this from the Privacy Trust’s own website!

We use cookies to see how many people use our site, and which parts are the most popular. Can we continue to use cookies? You can say NO and it won’t have a major impact on how you view our site.

More informationYes

Do you see that we aren’t being offered a yes/no option we’re actually being offered a say yes or we’ll make you spend more time than previously needed to block us?  Where’s the NO option?  Answer there isn’t one!

Clicking the More information link takes you here – https://www.privacytrust.com/about/privacy.html and I defy you to tell me where the NO option is.  I have contacted them and they say they’ll be back in touch within 3 days – I’ll update this post if/when they do 🙂

And of course if you decide you want to block their irritating cookies you’ll get the same damn irritating messages every time you try to view the content they’re pushing out –  believe me, I reckon a number of websites out there will be looking at dropping visitor figures and not thinking positive thoughts about the law makers!  I’ve already blocked plenty!

In addition to (if that wasn’t bad enough!) these extremely irritating cookie/data messages there’s the whole issue of GDPR causing the EU individual’s view of the world to become more insular.

Have you not noticed that a number of your favourites information sources are now displaying messages along these lines – this one’s from Lee Enterprises – they publish 46 daily newspapers across 21 US states:

“451: Unavailable for legal reasons

We recognise you are attempting to access this website from a country belonging to the European Economic Area (EEA) including the EU which enforces the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and therefore cannot grant you access at this time. For any issues, e-mail us at support@qctimes.com or call us at 563 383 2200”

I’ve lost count of the number of hyperlinks that appear in my daily Google alerts about subjects related to my day job that end up with something like that – or they just hang – a blank white screen like the LA Times …great – I’m lovin’ it – NOT!  So, how long is “temporarily unavailable”?  I think we should be told, lest we turn into an insular little country with a jaundiced view of the world – a sort of small USA!

And it’s the combination of the measures that GDPR has inflicted on us web browsers that fills me with dread.  From memory it was Oscar Wilde who famously stated that “The law is an ass!” Well clearly he wasn’t wrong.

I’m of the view that all this nanny-state nonsense is reducing out ability to think for ourselves, and naturally that’s not a good thing in an era where we need all the thinking we can get to sort out the real problems facing our very existence e.g. the people making these laws as well as the Trumpster himself.

Or are you all just sheep?

 

 

 

 

Political correctness – sorry, but yes it has gone mad!

2016-02-01-1195outragePolitical correctness
noun
the avoidance of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.

The definition from Dictionary.com and there’s one absolutely KEY word and that is “perceived” – perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult..etc etc.  Perceived by whom?

There are plenty of people out there who are prepared to “educate” us about how we should be using language e.g. Tess Thorson, Ph.D. Fellow at Aalborg University, based in New York, researching intersectional representations in film and media – I perceive her analysis of a Jonathan Pie video as both deep and deeply patronising at the same time – but I welcome the fact that she has the freedom to express it.

In the last few days we’ve seen stories in the news about students no longer clapping but using “Jazz Hands” instead to make events more accessible to those suffering anxiety.  And we can no longer show the Shetlands in a box on a map…although authorities can avoid complying with this if they provide “information” about their reasons!!

Now I’m not saying that there aren’t plenty of bits of language that we shouldn’t use – there are – although I perceive that there do seem to be more and more…and yet still more being added to the list – almost daily!

Take “black” and “white” for example – the meaning behind these two has changed dramatically in the past 30 years.  My first wife was black, no sorry that should be Afro-Caribbean – or should it be BAME?  Well when I was in Jamaica there was a clear divide amongst the locals which was dependent on their own perceptions of skin colour – black skin was perceived to have a higher status than brown skin – their perception not mine!  My nickname , as given by the smiling, cheeky, kids on the hillside outside of Mo’ Bay was “whiteman” – I certainly wasn’t insulted, I felt accepted!  Yet today “White” is an insult, a term laced with denegration and meant to demean.

We are constantly being told that we need to be more considerate, more inclusive, yet at the same time some people – comedians for example – are perceiving that they are far more constrained, that they now have less opportunity to poke fun at the things and people that damn well need to have fun poked at them!!  Here’s Frankie Boyle back in 2015.

I find it incredibly worrying that we no longer need to hear the actual content of the thing we’re told to be offended by. We hear of people being arrested for tweets without the tweet being reported; comics are blasted for routines that aren’t printed; newspapers hire lip-readers to find something to get offended by at the tennis and then print the resulting fuckfest as asterisks. And who decides whether we should be outraged at something we haven’t seen or heard? The press. Our seething collective Id. None of us would trust a journalist to hold our pint while we went to the bathroom, yet we allow them to be ethical arbiters for the entire culture.

..and it’s not just journalists, see the good Dr listed earlier plus this article by Julia Watson which won The Economist’s Open Future essay competition in the category of Open Society – there are plenty of people keen to reduce your and my ability to use langauage.

To me, a believer in a meritocracy, a lover of language, and a lover of good comedy we need the freedom to be perceived as being “politically incorrect”- even though comedy is inevitably at someone or something else’s expense.  It’s been at “my” expense, my late wife and I both howled at the numerous hard-core cancer gags that Frankie Boyle delivered at the New Theatre in Oxford back in 2012 (she died in 2013) – we didn’t perceive that he was being politically incorrect – just painfully funny.

And do you know what is the most worrying thing of all here?  It’s the fact that it’s some appalling behaviour by no less a character than (yes you’ve guessed it!) Donald Trump that has pointed out the issue really is about perception.

Kurdish journalist ‘proud’ to be called ‘Mr Kurd’ by Trump.

Rahim Rashidi told Middle East Eye in an email on Friday that he felt “proud” and “honoured” being addressed as “Mr Kurd”.

“For a long time, the Kurdish people have been denied their self-right to Kurdish ethnicity,” Rashidi explained.

“Kurds have experienced assimilation and genocide, simply for being Kurdish. To be addressed as ‘Mr.Kurd’ means a lot to me. To recognize my identity when it has always been denied is a great deal for me. Especially by the president.”

Wow!  I mean double-wow!  Good on you Mr Rashidi – I applaud you!

Of course there are boundaries that normal life applies to the use of language to “highlight” various groups in society – and these boundaries and the groups they “highlight” differ from culture to culture – but all cultures have limits on what is acceptable, what is politically correct and what you can get away with.  Embracing different groups and cultures is vitally important, we shouldn’t be seeking to exclude them BUT #FFS are you happy that:

  • In 2007, Santa Clauses in Sydney, Australia, were banned from saying ‘Ho Ho Ho’. Their employer, the recruitment firm Westaff (that supplies hundreds of Santas across Australia), allegedly told all trainees that ‘ho ho ho’ could frighten children, and be derogatory to women. Why ? Because ‘Ho Ho Ho’ is too close to the American (not Australian, mind you) slang for prostitute.
  • ‘Reliable’ and ‘hard-working’ – surely the two keystone employers look for in an employee? Well, maybe not: a Hertfordshire recruitment agency boss was once told she could not request those qualities – Jobcentre Plus in Thetford, Norfolk, told her such an advert could be “offensive” to unreliable people.
  • Undoubtedly the rudest-sounding dish in your recipe book, Spotted Dick is  pudding made with suet, raisins and currents. It dates back centuries – the earliest reference is 1849 – but that didn’t stop one overly concerned council from changing the name to Spotted Richard. Flintshire County Council was apparently sick of all the jokes, so changed the name – much to the chagrin of everyone else.
  • Oxford University’s Equality and Diversity Unit tried to accuse people who avoid eye contact with others of ‘racist micro-aggression’ — before it was pointed out that such advice might be seen as discriminatory against people with autism who may struggle to look others in the eye.
  • Suffolk County Council stopped using traditional signs warning drivers ‘Cat’s eyes removed’ after fears that real cats may have been killed to manufacture these reflective road safety measures. Ipswich resident Rebecca Brewer was reported as saying: ‘I have a five-year-old daughter who was very upset the first time she saw the sign — she really thought cruel people were torturing cats.’ Instead, signs across the county now state: ‘Caution, road studs removed.’
  • Use of this braided hairstyle by white people is said to represent cultural appropriation. When the designer Marc Jacobs was criticised for using a group of predominantly white models wearing dreadlocks in a show, he argued — not unreasonably — that this was similar to black women straightening their hair. This was met with further outrage from (mostly white) commentators who complained that hair-straightening had been ‘forced upon the black community due to beauty ideals based on white archetypes’.

Well let me tell you – I’m not happy about that list.  In fact the Daily Mail, that arbiter of good taste (NOT!) provides a complete A-Z guide for you to peruse and make your own minds up about – because it really is about you and how you perceive things.

perception

But really you just need to be nicer to people – on a one to one basis, face to face.  Be sensitive to other people’s situation but do not, never ever, stop highlighting what you perceive to be injustice, exclusion, racism, sexism or any other kind of ism and remember those words from your childhood…

Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.

I urge you, if you still have the stomach for it to watch Jonathan Pie’s Hammersmith Apollo show – there is an entire section on political correctness and despite what some might say – it’s spot on the mark!   In fact let’s keep “political correctness” as a term specifically for politicians – those lying, mendacious, self-publicising egomaniacs who use and abuse language on a daily basis – causing offence to many, avoiding questions, taking our money and continually getting away with it – Trump, Johnson etc etc you know who you are.

 

Politicians – you’re an omnishambles

Given that their job is (supposed to be) deeply serious and significant why is it that so many seem to get caught in the most ludicrous situations?  Remember Neil Kinnock on the beach and latterly on his back in the water?  Remember Boris strung up (oh there’s a nice thought) on a zip wire?  Remember David Davis’ Thick of It moment? (yes who was he?)…  They just cannot help themselves – which on one hand provides hours of amusement for us but on the other hand must give their PR people instant grey hair!  I mean can you imagine Malcolm Tucker’s response to some of these?  It hardly enhances their public standing or innate authority to carry out the roles they’re in!

..and let’s not even mention the number of times the BBC has mispronounced Jeremy Hunt’s name (couldn’t happen to a nicer guy) – oops I just have 🙂

You would think that it’s a case of “You had just one job…” but clearly it isn’t!  They seem incapable of behaving in a normal manner and instead make themselves look like – well, complete imbeciles isn’t too harsh a description.  OK I know that some of them are complete imbeciles, Donald Trump has to be the #1 as his imbecility has gone beyond humour into hatred – just look at his behaviour when challenged to make a statement about the recently deceased Senator John McCain.


Now compare that with the statement from Barack Obama, Trumps’s immediate predecessor in the role, and a political opponent of McCain.

“John McCain and I were members of different generations, came from completely different backgrounds, and competed at the highest level of politics.  But we shared, for all of our differences a fidelity to something higher – the ideals for which generations of Americans and immigrants alike have fought, marched and sacrificed.  We saw our political battles, even, as a privilege, something noble, an opportunity to serve as stewards of those high ideals at home, and to advance them around the world.  We saw this country as a place where anything is possible – and citizenship as our patriotic obligation to ensure it forever remains that way…”

Fine words indeed from a fine man – as opposed to silence from a scumbag!

But back to humour element, and for this we can thank our own PM Theresa May – and on this occasion she most certainly did!!  What was she thinking?  What were her people thinking?  I’d say a total lack of any risk assessment here…


I meant it’s not just bad, it’s hilariously, embarrassingly bad!  So bad in fact that Michael Jackson would not have used the word “bad” to describe it.  One glimpse and he’d be moon-walking off into the distance – pronto!!  However the thing here is that May has history, lots of it.  Laughing on the front bench in a manner that made her look like some weird form of alien, displaying a complete inability to eat food without looking like a demented OAP and well just look at some of these images – the final one is beyond description!


At this point I think I need to be physically ill!

There’s only one way out of this and that’s to watch the entire output of The Thick of It – life actually imitated art when Ed Miliband described a George Osborne budget as an “omnishambles” – listen to him if you really must.  It was a word coined on The Thick Of It by Malcolm Tucker – so why not!

Just take my damn money…please!

Look I’m all in favour of Tim Berners-Lee’s idea that the World wide Web should be free for everybody but sadly there are too many people out there today who insist on screwing it up by riddling the useful content with shite, highly intrusive, extremely irrelevant and hugely irritating advertising!  It’s got so bad that I’m coming round to the idea that for some things I’d actually be prepared to pay a monthly fee to make these damn pieces of time-wasting crap disappear!

..and don’t think I’m not talking about you Spotify – you’ve got the nerve to take my money and then send me crap about new releases by those artists who are able to pay you enough to invade my privacy on their behalf!

There are a number of aspects to this…

  1. what am I prepared to pay for
  2. how much will I be prepared to pay
  3. why online advertising is so shite, highly intrusive, extremely irrelevant and hugely irritating.

Let’s start with the “What”:

The birthplace of the web was CERN – Tim Berners-Lee, a British scientist at CERN, invented the World Wide Web (WWW) in 1989. The web was originally conceived and developed to meet the demand for automatic information-sharing between scientists in universities and institutes around the world.  See that…the sharing of information.  And the definition of sharing is?

To allow someone to use or enjoy something that one possesses. 

No mention of charging for it anywhere is there?  That came a lot later when less pure minds that Sir Tim’s decided that all these people provided an opportunity to make money – and lots of it, shed-loads of it in fact – big huge aircraft-hanger sized shed-loads of wonga!  And like me, Sir Tim’s not a happy man, although his beef is probably purer than mine which is just about advertising.  He’s more concerned with the rollback of net neutrality protections, the proliferation of fake news, propaganda and the web’s increasing polarisation!

“Gas is a utility, so is clean water, and connectivity should be too,” said Berners-Lee. “It’s part of life and shouldn’t have an attitude about what you use it for – just like water.”

So what am I prepared to pay for?

Stuff that I want to consume – stuff that entertains me like music, (that’s why I pay Spotify each month for a service I can’t stream to my hi-fi because the quality is designed for mobile phones and my GigaClear 50MB broadband is so flaky – and the router is a piece of poo! – that streaming hi-res is a non-starter!) and I’ll happily pay Amazon for the ability to read a book while I’m on holiday (Agios Stefanos NW Corfu since you’re asking!) or maybe to stream a movie as part of my Prime subscription – that’s cool, I’m happy to do that.

I’ll even pay for knowledge or software that helps me to consume and to create – such as specific training or apps from Adobe or even bloody Microsoft’s Office 365!

But I won’t pay for news!

That should be part of Sir Tim’s original idea about sharing information.  The WWW is meant to be a tool to enable us ALL to understand what’s going on in the world, to bring us closer together (yeah well done Boris you twat!) and generally make the world a better place.   However I WILL accept a limited amount of advertising to get this as I realise that information providers (except the BBC and I already pay my licence fee £150+) aren’t charities – they need to make money to pay their staff!  But I won’t pay them a subscription as it’s not worth it – not to me anyway!

And how much will I pay?

Well, this is more of a case of how much am I already paying!!  If you total up your household outgoings on things like your TV licence, SKY, broadband, mobile phone data, Spotify, Netflix, Amazon Prime etc etc you’ll be amazed by the figure you get to.  I reckon I’m spending over £1,000 per year!  And I’ve cut back!  It’s easy to spend more than £1,500, maybe even £2k!!  OK, don’t be pedantic, I know that SKY tends to be delivered over satellite – it’s the overall cost of accessing content that’s important here!

As these things are pretty much standard across UK households today, and with the average take home pay of <£21k per annum, you’re likely to be spending over 7% of your annual income on this stuff – maybe as much as 10%.  Now 7% may not sound a lot but imagine if your salary was cut by 7% – how much harder would that make life?? Exactly!

The huge expansion of the digital world has made it particularly hard for some companies, notably newspapers, and apart from the rag that is the Daily Mail they aren’t really succeeding (The Mail was always full of small ads anyway so it was a natural development for them, and their readership).   And I’m not going to help them by paying to get past their firewalls while the likes of Twitter are around – it’s quicker, more opinions so you can read both sides of an argument and of course it’s free – except for the sneaky ads!!

In fact it’s Twitter, or rather another player in the arena of social media that provided the straw that has broken the camel’s back –  so to speak.

So I’m now at the stage where I would be happy to pay for access to certain social media applications (it begins with a “F”) in order to avoid bloody advertising – if nothing else I’m sure the saving in blood pressure medicine would offset it!! (Relax that’s just an analogy I’m not on beta-blockers or anything similar)

So, why is online advertising so shite, highly intrusive, extremely irrelevant and hugely irritating?

….to the extent that now I’ll even pay to avoid it!

Well let’s go back to a bit of online business 101.

First off, if you’ve got that great idea, you want everyone to know about it and the web is really helpful here, as it allows you to reach a lot of people.  Let’s say these people like your great idea and flock to it – hey presto you have what is called in the trade “an audience” or lots of “eyeballs”.  So whereas people used to have to stick posters up in the street, things developed as people could get newspapers to print stories about their great ideas which other people then thought, hey if they like that maybe they’ll like mine to so I’ll make sure information about my great idea is in there too.  Next came TV which offered an even bigger channel to the audience and even more people started to “advertise” their great ideas, although now there so many great ideas – they weren’t all great!

With the growth of the web a number of great ideas got really, really, popular – like billions of people popular!  And the people who owned these great ideas thought to themselves…hmm I can make money out of this – it’s called “monetization” by the way!  So they started to allow advertising on their great ideas.

Look at possibly the best great idea ever – Google!  Originally just lists of stuff that matched your search term. Then 3 “sponsored” results appeared at the top of the page.  Today?  Maybe on the first page you’ll be lucky enough to find 3 “natural results” amongst the 20+ “sponsored” ones – that’s what Google calls advertising btw!  And Google make a massively, gigantic shed-load of money from it – as do some other great ideas.

What they also do is get make of these ads pop up on other websites you might visit – and have you noticed the order in which websites load?  The site’s branding is followed by all the adverts and only then does the content you actually wanted in the first place appear – naughty, naughty!  In other words it’s highly intrusive and hugely irritating!

But what about extreme irrelevance?  Surely, you shout, they’ve got algorithms that make sure that the advertising you see is relevant to you!  It’s true that if you search for something via Google or Bing (does anybody actually use Bing? And what a stupid name!) you’ll be bombarded with ads for whatever that was for ages – EVEN AFTER YOU’VE BOUGHT IT!  How relevant is that?  And let’s not even go into the activities of travel sites that rack up the prices if you leave and then come back!!

OK time to get to the absolute nub of this rant!  Facebook, yes Marky boy this one’s on you, recently decided to make life difficult for their profile users.

“As of August 1, Facebook no longer allows third-party platforms to post to personal Facebook profiles. As a result, Hootsuite no longer supports scheduling and posting to personal Facebook profiles.”

They wanted to stop us using the likes of Hootsuite, WordPress et al to automate/schedule our posting to our personal profiles.  They still allow scheduling to “pages” just not “profiles”.  So what do I do?  I choose to create a page from my profile, and to be fair it didn’t take too long to achieve that but once I’d “published” it, the troubles started.

Clearly Facebook believes that if you’ve got a page you’ve got money to spend, so they put an “advert” on your news feed (which only you can see) prompting you to spend money promoting your page.  Now that’s fair enough, their business model is about making money so I let the first one go..and the second, and the third.

But when I realised that they were bloating my news feed with multiple – and here I mean it might be one of their ads every 3 real posts – adverts, on and on and on.  Different creative suggestions but loads and loads and loads.

Now in amongst the reams of “help” they allegedly provide there is absolutely NOTHING about how to stop this.  Basically I don’t think you can and frankly I’m, not prepared to hang around to see if they eventually give up, so I’m deleting my page – screw ’em!

I’m going to publish my content elsewhere, I’m going to prompt readers of my social media diatribes to read the content on other platforms and even though they won’t give a damn – I’ll feel a lot better – and that’s the important thing here 🙂

What would really help me, and I’m sure millions of other people, is if some philanthropist kinda person decided it would be really cool to provide an open source advertising free or a subscription based social media channel.  I’m pretty sure that it would have a rapid uptake.  If Camelot allows me to win the Euromillions lottery this Friday I promise I’ll have one built and if Sir Tim permits I’ll call it TimsWeb, or Tim’s Place or Worldies or something similar!

 

 

The “A” to “B” of advertising standards

So, it seems that the UK Government has got it in for Amazon, and despite me thinking that Bezos is not a very nice man, and that his company’s customer service can be really poor at times, I don’t think this attack is fair.

It seems that one of their adverts has been banned for being misleading.  Now I find it interesting that they can take action against one of the world’s largest companies yet they seem unable to apply the same logic, values and even advertising laws to the Brexit debate.

I’m referring to those adverts, speeches the bus even which all displayed the line about giving the £350m we paid the EU to the NHS.

I find it especially interesting as we all now that that claim was a lie!  So, not even misleading, but a downright lie!

Do you remember it now?

Well apparently the UK advertising regulator (ASA) has said that it received 280 complaints, mostly from Amazon Prime customers who reported not receiving their packages within a day.  The basic premise of the Prime delivery service is that you WILL get your package within a day – and from personal experience – it works!  However these 280 good fellows weren’t satisfied so they complained and, well looky here, the ASA agreed!

From memory trading standards and advertising laws do allow for a degree of flexibility, you don’t have to deliver what you promise EVERY TIME, just most of the time – missing a few is fine.  It seems that Amazon does pretty well, in 2017, Amazon shipped over 5 billion items worldwide through Prime – almost one for every person alive!  So you’re roughly talking about 280 complaints based on 50+ million deliveries in the UK.

If that was my business I’d be deliriously happy – if I was a lawyer I’d consider that claiming a one day service was ok with that data – proving it beyond any reasonable doubt.  But not the ASA.

Interestingly the most complained about ad last year was a KFC one – 755 said it was disrespectful to chickens and distressing for vegetarians.  Thankfully the ASA thought this lot were barking mad and let it go.

They felt the same way about 8 of the top 10 most complained about ads actually – the other 2 were withdrawn so never investigated…so lesbian kissing, gay men kissing, a woman in a wheelchair eating maltesers and having a spasm were fine (and I’m totally in agreement with that!) but only, apparently, achieving a 99.999% delivery on your promise just isn’t good enough!!

BUT!!!

..downright lies ARE ok!  The UK Statistics Authority no longer says that the £350m claim is potentially misleading, but misleading plain and simple – Nigel Farage has admitted that it was a “mistake” to promise that £350million a week would be spent on the NHS if the UK backed a Brexit vote, and Treasury figures clearly show Britain’s EU budget rebate was £4.9bn. Deduct that from £17.8bn and you get £12.9bn – or £248m a week. This is the sum now recognised by the independent fact-checking organisation Full Facts!

So nobody took any action.  The misleading claim was allowed to continue to be broadcast within any retraction demanded, no penalties applied and Boris and his chums simply allowed to ride roughshod over the general public.

I mean c’mon – what’s the bloody ASA for if it isn’t for this?  Would you rather have 280 unhappy people or would you rather **** the country for decades to come?

Don’t answer that because we already know that Jacob Rees-Mogg has shifted his companies finances away from the UK – and guess where – yup, the bloody EU!

Indoor voice please or just pay me £50

Why is it that when you’ve paid £60 £70 £80 or even more to go and see an open air concert that you seen to be surrounded by assholes who just seem to want to have very loud conversations about stuff that’s got absolutely nothing to do with the concert.

Yesterday we were at British Summer Time and it seemed no matter where we stood the loudmouths were there, right next to us!!

Listening to Eric Clapton, playing an acoustic number, and behind me I heard this woman say “ah this is my favourite” and then she went on to chat about I don’t know what it was it was but it was irrelevant, nothing to do with the music!!

So why do people do this?

Do they just not speak to people in their normal daily life, so when they go to big open-air gigs they have to shout at each other to hear themselves over the music, despite standing right next to each other!!

I’d like to take them back to Barney the giant purple dinosaur from whichever television children’s television programme it was – maybe some of these people need to use their indoor voices outdoors!

I do have a plan though….

I’m going to hire Hyde Park, put in place all the necessary infrastructure – security, food, drinks, toilets, a big PA but I’m not going to book any acts, no way José!! I’ll arrange to play my Spotify library, or some other licensed music playlist, over the PA so there’s plenty of music going on for people to talk other…and then I’m going to charge people a flat £50 to get in.

Kerching… 🙂

NSU, a barium enema and the trumpster

I just found this on the Northern Exposure wiki – hey we’re talking top TV from the turn of the century – you really need to check it out…..

“Joel Fleischman is a nebbishy Jewish doctor from New York City, and a fresh faced medical school graduate. He’s also about to begin the four year service contract he promised to the state of Alaska, who financed his education. But he just happened to forget reading some of the stipulations in his contract, that has assigned him to the small post of Cicely, Alaska. A town of 215 people that welcomes it’s newest resident with open arms. As he contends with the daily lives and rituals of these all too normal and trusting folk, Joel just might realize that Cicely’s quieter ways are probably more civilized than the hustle and bustle of Manhattan. Made up of Cicely’s various residents, patients and friends of Fleischman include wealthy former astronaut Maurice Minnifield; feisty pilot Maggie O’Connell; mayor and saloon owner Holling Vincoeur; his sweet, naive waitress girlfriend Shelly Tambo (who’s old enough to be his daughter); intellectual ex-con and disc jockey Chris Stevens; Joel’s far wiser and very quiet receptionist Marilyn Whirlwind; kindly store owner Ruth-Anne Miller, and avid film buff Ed Chigliak.”

It’s a snippet of a conversation between Joel the NY doc dumped into Cicely Alaska and Chris Stevens the local philiosopher, Harley Davidson rider and radio DJ.

Joel: Nonspecific urethritis. Ya hear what I’m sayin’? Ya hear what I’m talkin’ about? It’s not catchy, but you ought to keep the falcon under wraps for a awhile. Otherwise, we’re gonna have to clip his wings. Ya hear what I’m sayin’, Valentino.
Chris: Yeah, I hear ya. (car horn honks)
Joel: Hey! Hey! I’m crossin’ here! I’m crossin’ here! You don’t talk to a learned physician that way! Same to you, pal! Can’t wait to get that jerk in the examining room. I got a barium enema with his name on it. Yeah, let me take you to Donald Trump. He’s a friend of mine.
Chris: You know Donald Trump?
Joel: Oh, yeah. I started him out in the business, actually.
Chris: Whoo, boy!

I just love the juxtaposition of nonspecific urethritis, a barium enema and the Trumpster!

Now wouldn’t that be fun?  Perhaps someone could arrange that for the 13th?

Remixes – good thing or bad thing?

I was on my way to work this morning, driving down a particularly quiet M4 and listening to the Chris Evans Breakfast show on Radio 2 – which is quite often my wont! The “long song gong” went just after 8 and Chris informed us listeners that we were going to here the whole 6 minutes and 7 seconds of Unfinished Sympathy…hooray I thought…unfortunately the euphoria lasted about 6.07 seconds!!

What started playing wasn’t the 1991 classic but something else – apparently according to a quick search on Spotify the Paul Oakenfold remix – no no NO, Chris, wrong wrong WRONG!!!

I don’t want to hear his remix, nor the Nellee Hooper one (not even the 12″ one) – I want the one that has got over 30m plays on Spotify – that was originally released back in 1991! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MassiveAttack-UnfinishedSympathy.ogg It’s the one I remember from the first time around.

Now I’m not against a good remix – after all a remix can turn an average/good song into an absolute classic (I believe the youf call them “bangers”) – take the case of Republica’s Ready to Go… The original is a very keyboard heavy song that is interesting but not stunning – a remix by renowned American producer Ben Grosse, switching its keyboard focus for driving guitars, is just about the best song ever for driving along an open road. I defy you to keep still and stop your toes tapping – it just can’t be done.

A quick bit of googling and hey presto there are loads of people who are clearly making a damn fine living from remixing… “list of famous remixers” not that I’ve heard of any of them!! Although I have heard of Nelle Hooper – what that man did with 6 Underground by the Sneaker Pimps is stunning

On the other side though to add balance Fatboy Slim and Simon Thornton’s remix of the Mock Turtles “Can you dig it” is an abomination – sound weird sucking noises that have been added to spoil the original clean cut!!

So in summary the message here is – think very carefully Mr/Mrs Mixer before you decide to do your own “thang” with a tune – sometimes less is actually more!!

Wikipedia – it’s a secret sect you know!

secret societies I do a bit web building for fun sometimes and I’ve been working on a wikipedia page for a while – it’s just been deleted.  I was told there was a discussion about it but I wasn’t told that it had been deleted….I am not a happy bunny! So I’ve told them – and I’ll tell you too 🙂

As I have just been informed that several hours of my work has been deleted I wanted to write and say just how disappointed I was with the decision. Disappointed on several levels

  1. The clique that edits wikipedia pages seems to have double standards
  2. You use your own language – you don’t make it easy for occasional editors/creators such as myself
  3. Your system of communication is not user friendly

So let’s look at Double Standards – XXX XXX’s page was deleted – yet Linda Morand‘s is allowed to exist without attack – despite the individual being no more “notable” and having no more references that can be proven within the confines of the web. And whilst I’ll accept that Naomi Campbell is far more notable to claim that XXX’s page was “self-promotion” when Naomi Campbell‘s isn’t??? That’s just ludicrous.

Your own coding, your own language your own little discussion groups and committees – it’s like the inner workings of the catholic church or some sect. It’s seems that you make your won rules and then ignore them when it takes your fancy!

Communication – well for those of us who do not only live within the wiki-world we have other means of communication – one’s we are required to give wikipedia when we register and ones we are far more likely to use (email perhaps!). I was aware that there was a discussion but I was not personally informed that the page was being deleted – nor that someone had decided that I had a conflict of interest in this matter. Where was the notification of that.

I don’t expect the situation to be resolved anytime soon but it made me sooo mad!!

No! Here’s the thing with Ad Blockers!

Here’s The Thing With Ad Blockers (I love ’em!)

We get it: Ads aren’t what you’re here for. But ads help us keep the lights on.
So, add us to your ad blocker’s whitelist or pay $1 per week for an ad-free version of WIRED. Either way, you are supporting our journalism. We’d really appreciate it.

No! Here’s the thing with Ad Blockers!

You really don’t get it! We don’t visit your sites for the ads – we visit them for the content. I visit hundreds of websites and I’m sorry but if you insist on placing copious quantities of auto-running ads on your pages then more fool you. First it was Forbes telling me:

“We noticed you still have ad blocker enabled. By turning it off or whitelisting Forbes.com, you can continue to our site and receive the Forbes ad-light experience.”

BTW the text relating to the ad-light experience can only be viewed by hovering over the link – here’s what you then see.

forbes.fw

Even they describe it as a “less intrusive advertising experience” FFS!  They expect me to “enjoy” that?

Well now I’ve noticed that Wired have joined the ad blocker spoiler party – that’s their stuff in the opening paragraph.

I totally understand that these guys are delivering “free” content to me.  I appreciate that and I’m quite prepared to see a few non-invasive ads to help them pay for their expenses but I do not want the following – free or paid for:

  • Slow loading pages that refuse to display the content YOU want until THEY’VE loaded all the ads THEY want you to see.
  • Ads that auto-run annoying videos which have audio tracks – even if you’re already listening to some audio for the content you actually WANT to hear!
  • Adverts that load and block your view of the content you want to see, and then make you struggle and waste valuable time trying to find the miniscule “x” to turn the damn thing off!

Not only does this sort of website p*ss me off – I stop visiting it completely – so even your acceptable ads don’t get shown and you have to charge your advertisers more to make ends meet and they end up saying – WTF – you haven’t got much of an audience anymore, your page views are in decline – I’m outta here!  And your business fails…

And my view on that?

Tough luck suckers!