The return of the Silver Surfer: an ode to Nana

This popped up on my news feed on Saturday, a little note from Mum to attract the attention of me, two sisters, four cousins, an auntie and a Dutch second cousin:

“Note to all. The Silver Surfer’s internet is down. It doesn’t mean she has left the country (again) and it doesn’t mean she doesn’t love her grandchildren if her little face doesn’t pop up on skype while you are doing your coursework or marking x”

The Silver Surfer in question is Nana, my 79 year old Facebook friend, Skype contact, and JibJab elf partner in crime. I accidentally encouraged her to join Facebook when I went travelling last year and her net savviness has just escalated from there. She was bought a webcam for Christmas and my uncle spent hours (literally) trying to set her up with, and explain the wonders of, Skype. So now, when I’m sitting at my laptop invariably avoiding work its always a welcome distraction when Nana pops online and we have a very brief hello-how-are-you-wave-goodbye web chat.

And what is so lovely about it is that she can catch up with all her family scattered around various parts of the globe. Or those in the same post code. My cousin is out gallivanting round New Zealand at the moment, so like the rest of us Nana gets to share all of her joy and tears and  laughter and adventure via the wonderful worldwide web. She’s even made her first Facebook friend not to be a member of the immediate Thorpe family: her late sister’s son’s wife’s mother is a fellow Silver Surfer over in the States – I’m glad to say Nana heeded to the rules of stranger danger before accepting her friend request and checked out all of their mutuals first thenceforth verifying their acquaintance.

So I’ve missed her the last few days that she’s been internetless. A Nana-shaped hole has yet to be filled. No one gives you the same amount of love as a grandma does on Facebook. It’s like a hug in a comment. And the knowledge – I received a very informative post telling me the merits of rice when cleaning decanters the other week. Our current ongoing debate is regarding scones- jam or cream first? She’s called friends in Devon to add a much needed expert opinion on the matter but we’re still clueless.

I read that a council in Salisbury has given the go-ahead for a ‘silver surfers club‘ to be formed to give computer and internet lessons to those over 50, an initiative that I hope is rolled out across other areas too. None of my other grandparents could even be remotely described as tech-smart. My Grandad has a computer but Dad has to go over to switch it on for him. The internet opens up massive opportunities and possibilities for the older generation: social, practical, consumer, entertainment. So stick that in your Big Society D-Cam – what better way to encourage community, social enterprise and the forging of familial links than through’t web. That’s the way absolutely everything is going these days anyway; the digital revolution should enlist the elders to its ranks and my Nana can be the vanguard.

P.S. In case you were worried, the Silver Surfer has returned:

“Watch out. The silver surfer is BACK. Thanks Paul, Missed you all!! Its good to be back!! Missed the chat!! Luvxxxx”

Tags: Silver Surfers

Choosing a fantasy Question Time panel. AKA the best assignment that has ever been set

The Brief:

You are the researcher on Question Time

It will come from Manchester

Come up with an appropriate panel to fit the format

The context

Gove does a U-turn on schools – academies scrapped

More train and tube strikes

Pope allows Catholics to use condoms

Spain asks IMF for emergency bailout

Gordon Ramsay about to go bust?

Lembit Opik seriously ill after choking on bugs on I’m a Celebrity

The strategy

So this piece of coursework was set just before Christmas (and is due next Monday – surprisingly ahead of schedule yes I am). And it is shaping up to be the most enjoyable piece of written work I have done in a very long time. But the more I agonise over the dream panel the more difficulties I’m finding myself in.  Diversity needs to be taken into serious consideration – political, gender, ethnic, age, religion, region – and I worry I’m just starting to go round in circles. And perhaps over-analysing everything just a tad. I’m sure a real Question Time researcher wouldn’t be having the sleepless night(s) that I am (Gordon Ramsay and Bob Crow both took lead roles in a dream last night, Amanda Platell was more of a supporting cast member) I’d imagine it’s a little bit like deciding on the table plan for a wedding.

The contenders

In the red corner:

Bob Crow; Alan Johnson; Peter Mandelson; Ruth Kelly

In the blue corner:

Philip Hammond; Theresa Villiers; Boris Johnson; Iain Dale

In the (under-represented) yellow corner:

Floella Benjamin; David Laws

In the no-colour corner:

Piers Morgan; Eamonn Butler; Amanda Platell

So. What to do what to do? Ruth Kelly ticks a lot of my boxes – Catholic, former MP for Bolton West, former Secretary of State for Education AND Transport. She’s also a bit of an EU fan. So I think she gets a resounding yes. One red down.

Would love old Bob Crow on there as well – tube and train strikes are obviously his forte, and he’s a stalwart of the No to the EU – Yes to Democracy front. But am I leaning too Left?

And then there’s Iain Dale. A very good talker I’d imagine but would he count as my something blue?

Philip Hammond: Tory- tick, transport – tick. Boring? I think tick.

Mandy. He’d sure be a goodun. But I’ve already got Ruth and potentially Bob so I can’t have another Labourite can I?

It’d be nice to shake things up a bit in there, throw a Richard Dawkins shaped cat in amongst the RC pigeons.

Or get Bob and Boris to finally have it out with one another. There’ll be no more striking, commuters of the country rejoice as Big B and Blond B finally kiss and make up. But Boris is too London really isn’t he?

Oh goodness me. I’m getting in a pickle. Am I over-analysing? I fear that may be the whole point of the exercise; I now commend all Question Time researchers. And actually quite fancy having their jobs. Alas I’m still a long way off from formulating any semblance of a coherent argument so will remain unemployed.

Current line up (draft #4 – likely to change a fair few more times yet)

Dr Eamonn Butler

Floella Benjamin

Ruth Kelly

Bob Crow

Iain Dale

I’m already sensing a reshuffle.

 

Tags: BBC, Bob Crow, Boris Johnson, Floella Benjamin, Gordon Ramsay, Iain Dale, Lembit Opik, Philip Hammond, Question Time, Ruth Kelly

Rupert Murdoch and his bid for world domination. Cheers Rupes, you’ve ruined my Bank Holiday

I have an ethics piece to write about Rupert Murdoch, the BSkyB takeover bid, ownership, plurality, business, the lot. Having done a typical, it’s Bank Holiday Monday, I have zero time to write it and subzero will. So I’m going to bash out some of my ideas here and hope to find some coherence to my mind’s rambling thoughts.

When the title of said essay was set at the beginning of December, dear Vince Cable was yet to be unassumingly fleeced by the Daily Telegraph. He hadn’t (openly) declared war on Murdoch, nor had he boasted of his Superman-esque ability to bring down the government. The takeover issue was bumbling along nicely, and my only thoughts on the satellite broadcasting giant were simply regarding what to Sky+ over Christmas.

But then along came Vince the Vociferous (or Cable the Calamitous – you say potato I say…) and all hell sort of broke loose. The Business Sec has been stripped unceremoniously of his ‘war’ powers (and his man powers?) and Jeremy Hunt (I will not lower the tone and repeat the James Naughtie/Andrew Marr gaffe of the year) is undoubtedly dead chuffed to now be granted above mentioned authority. He’s now mulling over Ofcom’s take on the issue, and bob’s your uncle we’ll probably see a very different outcome to the issue than if, oh I don’t know, Vince had kept schtum.

So what does all this mean for democracy, and the Press, and freedom of expression, and competition? Well, the implications of News Corp’s total acquisition of BSkyB can only be guessed at, but I’d say take a look over the pond to the good ol’ USofA if you want an idea. Or to Italy, if you want a really pessimistic outlook. The anti-Murdochites (and he does have a fair few haters) have already lined up to voice their disdain of the prospect. Back in October many a  mogul of British media signed up to petition against the bid, joining hands from across the political and multimedia spectrum to unite against the might of the Murdoch. Mark Thompson stood next to David Abraham, who took his place by Sly Bailey who was next to Andrew Miller. Left to Right, print to broadcast, they all said no to the deal, arguing against the prospective plurality of the media that could ensue if Rupert gets his way.

Even the British public opposes the takeover. An ICM survey revealed last week that 44% of people were against the bid, compared to a tiny 5% in support of the plan. Perhaps more importantly, 84% believed that it was important that no single company was allowed to control too much of the news media; 4% disagreed with the statement. It IS important that a media monopoly is avoided, for the simple reason that news is a powerful monster that needs to be tamed through moderation and balance. Impartiality is something that we have come to expect in a lot of our broadcast output, and while newspaper bias is a commonly accepted practice, the lines could well be blurred come News Corp’s takeover and then where would we be? Neutrality should be lauded, and variety should remain the spice of life.

And what of the probable political implications? Televised news output, and thus influence, across the Pond is heavily dictated by affiliation. So much so that Fox could feasibly (and rightfully?) claim that it was them wot won it for Bush in 2000. While the media should uphold its position as an arbitrator of democracy, it should not go so far as to dictate the process, the outcome or the consequences of governance.

We must still wait a couple more weeks for the next chapter of the ongoing saga that is Rupert Murdoch and his Bid for World Domination. The White Knight has already been slain and it remains to be seen as to whether J-Hunt and  Ofcom turn out to be the fairy godmothers for British media, or the poison apples.

Lots of fairytale references there, but I hope the metaphor is still tangible.

Tags: BSkyB, Daily Telegraph, Jeremy Hunt, News Corp, Rupert Murdoch, Vince Cable

The WikiLeaks Cables: in the public’s interest or just malicious gossip?

The latest WikiLeaks bombshell has gone off with perhaps an even louder boom than the previous Iraq and Afghanistan war log disclosures. The release of over 250, 000 US diplomatic cables has sent shock waves around the globe, and the American government is using every trick in the book to clear up this unprecedented diplomatic mess. What we have been given an intimate insight into, courtesy of Mr Julian Assange, is essentially the United States’ very own slam book. The power of the slam got Li-Lo into serious trouble in Mean Girls; has Obama not learnt from the mistakes of Ms Lohan and co?

Embarrassment aside, and to say that politicians are scrambling around Washington as we speak trying to salvage some titbit of dignity would surely be an understatement, how justified are Assange et al in choosing to release all of these cables into the ether, with as yet unknown ramifications? In the second line of their mission statement, WikiLeaks maintains that:

“Our goal is to bring important news and information to the public.”

But how far are these latest leaks in the interest of the public; is Cablegate just heavily disguised gossipmongering, used by the WikiLeaks higher-uppers to damage American credibility and international standing? Certainly, many of the documents leaked pertain to issues of national significance – China’s growing acceptance of a united Korean peninsula, for example, is particularly pertinent given the current PRK-ROK tensions – but there are also a large number of the cables that are no more than gossip designed to humiliate. Prince Andrew’s outburst has garnered much attention in the UK press, as have State Department character assassinations of various world leaders. But is citing freedom of expression enough of a justification for the defence of the Wiki disclosures? Are public figures, world leaders, civil servants and the like not entitled to an ounce of privacy? Mr Assange certainly guards his personal life very closely. An increase in transparency and a decrease in corruption do not necessarily correlate to the mass dumping of highly sensitive material. With the international climate in such a precarious state as it currently is, Assange and WikiLeaks may have gone one step too far this time in their quest for absolute knowledge to be put in the hands of the people; the diplomatic fallout, I suspect, will reverberate for many months to come.

Tags: Cablegate, Julian Assange, US State Department, WikiLeaks

AV, or not AV: that is the question

Old-school Labour heavyweights have come out in force today to voice their opposition to next year’s referendum on electoral reform. John Prescott, David Blunkett and Margaret Beckett have all pledged their support to the ‘no’ campaign, which I’m sure will come as (yet another) blow to party leader Death-Ray Panda (did I say DRP? Sorry I meant Ed Miliband) who openly declared his intention to back a change to AV during his leadership campaign. That’s almost an aside though, perhaps another time and place for a breakdown of those growing anti-Ed rumblings in the Labour camp…

The No to AV campaign is now shaping up to be quite the who’s who of political powerhouses, and has started to take on a really strong, cross-party shape. Prescott, Blunkett and Beckett will be joining the likes of Tory old-timers William Hague and Ken Clarke in a concerted effort to block the Cleggster’s AV master-plan.  Who actually supports the reforms? Ben Bradshaw, who’s heading Labour’s campaign for the Alternative Vote, told the New Statesman last year that: “If one of the reasons that we want reform is to rebuild public trust and confidence in politics, make MPs more accountable, give more power to people and establish a political and parliamentary system that more reflects the will of the public, then AV doesn’t deliver that.” Sparkling accolades there then. A quick Google search to see which MPs are out-and-out backing the Yes to Fairer Votes campaign turned into quite a long Google search, trawling through pages and pages just trying to pinpoint any supporters of note.

What should Nick Clegg take from all of this? Well honestly, I think he sold his party and the electorate out by compromising on the issue when the Coalition Agreement was being drawn up. And now what we have is a dud referendum being called on an issue that deserves far greater care and attention than to be bandied around the Coalition as some kind of hand out David Cameron has used to mollify his Deputy. Clegg seems to be making quite a habit of backtracking, but he would do well to stick to his guns this time and stand by his earlier (and correct) assertion that AV is in no means proportional, and is in fact no more than a “baby step in the right direction.”

The electoral process does need reforming, but AV does not offer the proportionality that is being sought. I fear that the wrong decision now *cough, Labour leadership, cough* will lead to irreparable damage to a campaign that has taken years to reach the public and political agenda. It is such a shame that the quest for PR has been lampooned by a man desperate for power, at all costs. We should support the No campaign on May 5th next year, and just hope that somebody else comes round very soon who will give the electoral reform agenda all the love and care and attention that it so desperately needs.

Tags: AV, Death Ray Panda, Nick Clegg, no to av, referendum

What a royal hullabaloo

Clarence House today announced the engagement of Prince William and his on-off girlfriend Kate Middleton. Quelle surprise. The rumour mill has been a-rumbling, well lets be honest for years, but in the last few weeks its gone into overdrive. Only yesterday a ‘spokesman for England’s future king’ flatly denied HRH had popped the question. Fast forward 24 hours and oh ho ho it’s official. The statement was short and sweet:

“The Prince of Wales is delighted to announce the engagement of Prince William to Miss Catherine Middleton. The wedding will take place in the spring or summer of 2011, in London.”

And meltdown. It’s all over everywhere. Even my Nana holidaying in Antigua knew about it pretty well as soon as I did. The Telegraph proclaims “A great day for our country”, The London Evening Standard goes with “From student lover to princess, Kate Middleton’s nine-year wait is over”. It’s gone global too, with Australian news channels offering the lovely “No more waity for Katy”. Nice.

The reaction from my generation has been particularly interesting. The last royal wedding of significance was probably Charles and Di’s, back in the summer of 1981 when we were all but glints in our fathers’ eyes. The ‘wedding of the century’ was watched worldwide by over 750 million people. Two million spectators lined the route of Diana’s procession, waving their flags and doing their happy thing. The couple had (for some reason I just cannot fathom) 27 wedding cakes. I’m inclined to say that Wills and Kate will not receive such a reception. Despite #royalwedding overload, tweets so far have been, um, lukewarm at best.

[An array of tweets to now digest:]

‘So some posh prick is marrying another posh prick where the taxpayer will have to front up the cash? So exciting.’

‘BONG! Posh, horse faced slapheaded German proposed to dull, thin lipped middle class girl. BONG!’

‘”Prince William has also sought permission from Ms Middleton’s father.” Well thank GOD for that. We can expect a moderniser in Will then.’

NB The views expressed above are not shared by the author. She is actually very excited by aforementioned nuptials.

So. Are we all just now a bunch of tradition shunning anti-institution republican cynics? I’m not sure. Where does the monarchy really fit in today’s society? (Or, come to think of it, in D-Cam’s Big Society? Another time maybe) Were there just as many detractors when the Prince and Princess of Wales announced their engagement? And marriage. What does all this say about the state of modern matrimony? Is it such a terrible thing that William asked Mr Middleton for his daughter’s hand? I for one find it really quite romantic. He is the heir to the throne, if he doesn’t espouse tradition then who will and/or should?

As a budding journo, I obviously share the excitement held by all my colleagues vis a vis the opportunities that this royal extravaganza holds for me career wise. Local news stations across the country today were scrambling for any link, however tenuous, to their patch and the happy couple. This won’t stop for the next nine months. Finding a new, creative, credible angle to the story may just be what gives us newbies the chance to shine. It’s the  stuff media dreams are made of. But really, in the gloom of this winter’s discontent, is it such a bad thing that today’s, and probably this week’s, most talked about news story is not all death/war/poverty/deficits but is in fact love, happiness and optimism?

*Vom*

Tags: kate middleton, prince william, royal engagement, royal wedding