I can't stand Lady Gaga. She had 2 pretty decent lightweight pop songs a year or so ago and now some how she's being held up as a huge cultural icon. Why? She's the most pompous idiot I've had the misfortune to be exposed to since Jude Law.
A couple of weeks ago she was on Jonathan Ross promoting her new song. She did so with a phone on her head. Now I know some people think that's cool, that it's cutting edge and shows that she's amazingly brave and courageous for doing so. I'm not buying that. She did it because she's an attention seeker with limited talent and knows that the rest of her album won't secure her headlines. Her voice is weak, her songs are poorly written and she's not a very good performer. Big shoulder pads, hair extensions and whore-like make up don't make someone a star. It just proves that they need to mask their lack of ability.
Her interview showed how vacuous she is. We were given no insight into her, what she does that makes her unique beyond being a cock and the only vaguely interesting line of conversation was closed down. Ross dared to ask her why Bowie is an influence on her and she refused to go into it saying it was 'private'. How did the BBC give such exposure to her when she was unwilling to go into really basic questions.
I'm really looking forward to her next album. I'm sure it's going to flop and then all of the idiots who have held her up as an icon will have to move into their next temporary idol. In the meantime, unfortunately, I'm going to have to tolerate her and all the morons who feed her ego.
Pop stars are an egotistical bunch, they have to be to take all the knocks and put downs they get. Gaga takes the piss though. Whereas Bono is undoubtedly a self promoting dick, but he's got a mountain of platinum selling albums and has raised millions for AIDS. Geldof might not have the glittering back catalogue but again has done enough to justify the ego. Gaga hasn't so should get back to reality, take the phone off her head and try to write some decent songs
Sunday, 21 March 2010
Tuesday, 16 February 2010
Hold the Headline
Does anyone else find it incredibly irritating that we’re constantly fed uninteresting/unimportant American news in our TV bulletins, online and radio?
Take last week for example. Bill Clinton had to make a trip to hospital as he’s got a bit of a dodgy ticker (too much weed, cigars and ‘sexual relations’ I reckon). This made it into a fairly prominent position on the BBC website and was one of the leading stories on the telly. Bill Clinton was an excellent President. He helped push through the Northern Ireland peace process, lowered unemployment in the states and brought about unity in the international community. However, he was US President. He had no (direct) control over the UK. No British person cast a vote for him and he certainly hasn’t lived here since being President.
Why then, does this displace UK or European news from the headlines? Had he been involved in a kidnap plot, actually died or maybe had another affair then it might be worth hearing about. What next, is George W having a pedicure going to be the lead story on News at 10?
Our news should cover stories that matter to us. I’m sure that day a pensioner was mugged in the street, or a child was hit by a car. That is unpleasant news but it matters. We need to know that these things happen so that we can lobby for better policing or ensure that people have respect for older people. I couldn’t care less if Bill has a dodgy heart. It’s obviously a concern for his family or any women that happens to find themselves beneath him, but it doesn’t affect my daily life. If there is a mugging in my local area, or somewhere else in the country, then I’ll be more aware and can look out for similar things happening. It’s got to the point where we were being told about record snow on the East coast of America. IT DOESN’T MATTER TO US!!!!!!!! We’re in the UK!!! Tell me about something important.
What makes this worse is that there is rarely any information about anywhere beyond the States or our immediate European cousins. When there is a flood in Bangladesh we hear about it for 5 minutes on one day and then it’s forgotten. If there’s a fire in tower block in Kenya we don’t hear about it at all. Sure, the news from the States might be very easy to get hold of as the TV networks are more developed, but one of the roles of the BBC is to bring the UK news from the whole world. That’s why millions of pounds of licence fee money is spent on sending correspondents to all corners of the globe.
Reporting of banal news only helps to build the general malaise in UK society.
In the UK, and London in particular people have no respect for their local environment. People throw rubbish on the ground, spit in public and let their dogs shit wherever they like without cleaning it up. We need to be energised about local issues, know what the problems are and take appropriate action. Of course, there are local news bulletins and pages on websites but they’re generally poor quality and a lot of the news reporters take the word ‘lightweight’ to a new floatier level.
To summarise I want the following:
- UK news to be given greater prominence across UK news organisations
- Local matters to be made more important
- ‘World News’ to truly be global, not just USA
Thursday, 11 February 2010
A big kinda problem...
Business meetings are often amazing places. You meet with some of the brightest clients, suppliers and colleagues to learn exciting, interesting information or tips to help you think about things differently and do your job better. They help to move important issues forwards and can solve many problems.
Unfortunately they can also be intensely boring and irritating. As I find an increasing percentage of my time in meetings, I’ve started to notice clear traits and expressions that drive me mad. There are people who don’t speak loudly enough, those who speak too loudly (I think I’m one of these people), those who fidget, pick their nose, leave their ringtones on and many who simply sit there bored, unable or unwilling to contribute.
However, there’s one that has started to drive me mad beyond belief. It’s people saying ‘kinda’. I work in the media industry and I think that means I’m more exposed to the ‘kinda’ plague than most. There’s a lot of hot air spouted and very few interesting or insightful things to say.
Unfortunately they can also be intensely boring and irritating. As I find an increasing percentage of my time in meetings, I’ve started to notice clear traits and expressions that drive me mad. There are people who don’t speak loudly enough, those who speak too loudly (I think I’m one of these people), those who fidget, pick their nose, leave their ringtones on and many who simply sit there bored, unable or unwilling to contribute.
However, there’s one that has started to drive me mad beyond belief. It’s people saying ‘kinda’. I work in the media industry and I think that means I’m more exposed to the ‘kinda’ plague than most. There’s a lot of hot air spouted and very few interesting or insightful things to say.
There are 2 problems with ‘kinda’:
1. The use of ‘kinda’
‘Kinda’ has evolved beyond the basic word you use to fill pauses while you speak. There are many of them. ‘basically’, ‘in terms of’, ‘erm’... It seems as though ‘kinda’ is a word people use when they’re trying to sound knowledgeable. What the user doesn’t realise though is that it’s demonstrating the exact opposite. For example:
• “I think that we kinda have to spend more on X...” NO! You don’t ‘kinda’ think. You do think that.
• “ I’ve put together a kinda business plan” Is it a business plan or not? I want a business plan, not a kinda business plan. If it’s not a business plan then turn it into one. Fast!!!
• “What this graph kinda shows is...” If the graph doesn’t totally show us what you’re trying to show then it isn’t a good graph to show. Try again.
2. ‘kinda’ is not even a word!!!!!
Why is it appropriate to use a fake word in front of important people? If people were saying ‘kind of’ then I’d be slightly less irked by the situation. I also reckon people would start to use the phrase less if they thought about what it actually means. By masking behind a fake word, the protagonist has introduced a shroud of false knowledge that perhaps they even they believe.
Now I’d like to point out that I don’t immediately think you’re no good at your job or presenting if you use ‘kinda’. I’ve been guilty of using it myself in the past. I would, however, urge you to listen out for it and put a stop to using it before I turn in Michael Douglas in Falling Down.
1. The use of ‘kinda’
‘Kinda’ has evolved beyond the basic word you use to fill pauses while you speak. There are many of them. ‘basically’, ‘in terms of’, ‘erm’... It seems as though ‘kinda’ is a word people use when they’re trying to sound knowledgeable. What the user doesn’t realise though is that it’s demonstrating the exact opposite. For example:
• “I think that we kinda have to spend more on X...” NO! You don’t ‘kinda’ think. You do think that.
• “ I’ve put together a kinda business plan” Is it a business plan or not? I want a business plan, not a kinda business plan. If it’s not a business plan then turn it into one. Fast!!!
• “What this graph kinda shows is...” If the graph doesn’t totally show us what you’re trying to show then it isn’t a good graph to show. Try again.
2. ‘kinda’ is not even a word!!!!!
Why is it appropriate to use a fake word in front of important people? If people were saying ‘kind of’ then I’d be slightly less irked by the situation. I also reckon people would start to use the phrase less if they thought about what it actually means. By masking behind a fake word, the protagonist has introduced a shroud of false knowledge that perhaps they even they believe.
Now I’d like to point out that I don’t immediately think you’re no good at your job or presenting if you use ‘kinda’. I’ve been guilty of using it myself in the past. I would, however, urge you to listen out for it and put a stop to using it before I turn in Michael Douglas in Falling Down.
Tuesday, 2 February 2010
Get in line
Security at airports. The least enjoyable part of plane journey. Long queues, getting undressed and being touched by strangers. Oh yes, and they’re now taking naked photos of you too. If a club tried doing that it’d be closed down and the owners locked away. We all hate it but it’s a necessary evil to stop terrorists blowing us into many pieces.
However, last time I was at an airport I saw something that really hacked me off. I don’t travel frequently enough to know of it’s available across the board, but Luton Airport charge £3 to enable people to queue jump. How dare they? How is this possible?
Security is something that everyone has to go through. You can’t turn up at the post office and pay £3 to go to the front of the queue. Who made it acceptable for a rich business traveller or a well to do family to skip to the front of a queue, leaving the great unwashed to stand miserably watching the great and the good breeze by.
Some might argue that it’s a choice. You can pay £3 if you want to get through faster, or you can wait in line for free. This is nonsense as offering a £3 premium service automatically makes the rest of us have to wait longer. It slows down the standard service, which is already painfully long.
I think it’s unfair on parents to have to justify the situation to their kids. They already get to see how people in 1st class travel by being forced to traipse through that section on the way to the back of the plane with the plebs. Now there’s another sign that you’re not good enough for you kids. That you’ve not tried hard enough or worked hard enough to be able to provide the best for the family. A family holiday is expensive and it’s disgusting that a two tier structure is created where it is not welcome.
In my eyes this is a thoroughly disgusting practice and should be stopped immediately.
However, last time I was at an airport I saw something that really hacked me off. I don’t travel frequently enough to know of it’s available across the board, but Luton Airport charge £3 to enable people to queue jump. How dare they? How is this possible?
Security is something that everyone has to go through. You can’t turn up at the post office and pay £3 to go to the front of the queue. Who made it acceptable for a rich business traveller or a well to do family to skip to the front of a queue, leaving the great unwashed to stand miserably watching the great and the good breeze by.
Some might argue that it’s a choice. You can pay £3 if you want to get through faster, or you can wait in line for free. This is nonsense as offering a £3 premium service automatically makes the rest of us have to wait longer. It slows down the standard service, which is already painfully long.
I think it’s unfair on parents to have to justify the situation to their kids. They already get to see how people in 1st class travel by being forced to traipse through that section on the way to the back of the plane with the plebs. Now there’s another sign that you’re not good enough for you kids. That you’ve not tried hard enough or worked hard enough to be able to provide the best for the family. A family holiday is expensive and it’s disgusting that a two tier structure is created where it is not welcome.
In my eyes this is a thoroughly disgusting practice and should be stopped immediately.
Thursday, 28 January 2010
Registering my disapproval
Something has been winding me up recently. It’s not a major world issue or some kind of life or death problem, more a little annoyance. I hate little annoyances.
It’s registration forms on websites. This doesn’t apply to all sites, just those that you’re paying for a product or service and they insist on you registering first. Take Virgin trains for example. I never use Virgin Trains but have to use them this week for work. I went to the site, found my ticket and tried to buy it. Only problem is that they want all of my details when all they really need is a phone number, credit card and email address. And they only need them once for that transaction as I don’t intend using the service again anytime soon.
Instead, they want my full address and other details that they just don’t need. It’s obvious why they do it, so they can mail me with offers and info and sell my details to 3rd parties. Only problem is that I always uncheck those boxes. I’m not interested in a half price special to Runcorn or discounted entry to Chester Zoo. All I want to do is buy 1 return ticket, get my train and be done with it.
Dominos pizza do it well. They give you the option to register to make future purchases easier, but they don’t insist on it. I guess the point is that I have an option to use another pizza company, but by the way our rail network is set up, I have to pay Branson to use the rail network that our taxes have paid for. Branson knows this so we doesn’t have to give us the option not to register.
The net result (pun very much intended) is that my web experience is slowed down and I dislike Virgin Trains before I’ve even used the service. As I mentioned, I’m not against all registration. If I’m getting a service or content for free then chances are I’ll give my details as a trade off. When a money grabbing billionaire want to sell my details and market to me, even though I’m forced to use ‘their’ trains, well that’s a different story.
Update
To make matters worse, Branson also charges for using wifi on his trains. £4.90 an hour. How is that justified? A web cafe charges around £1 an hour tops. Why is it nearly 500% more on his/our train? The East Coast line provides it for free. As a further kick in the teeth it is impossible to get anything approaching a decent signal on O2 anywhere on the 2 hour journey I made to Chester. Guess what, you have to register again to use the web with him!
I want my web back Branson, stop demanding my details and give me free/reasonable priced wifi. It’s most ridiculous thing you’ve done since your guest appearance in Baywatch
It’s registration forms on websites. This doesn’t apply to all sites, just those that you’re paying for a product or service and they insist on you registering first. Take Virgin trains for example. I never use Virgin Trains but have to use them this week for work. I went to the site, found my ticket and tried to buy it. Only problem is that they want all of my details when all they really need is a phone number, credit card and email address. And they only need them once for that transaction as I don’t intend using the service again anytime soon.
Instead, they want my full address and other details that they just don’t need. It’s obvious why they do it, so they can mail me with offers and info and sell my details to 3rd parties. Only problem is that I always uncheck those boxes. I’m not interested in a half price special to Runcorn or discounted entry to Chester Zoo. All I want to do is buy 1 return ticket, get my train and be done with it.
Dominos pizza do it well. They give you the option to register to make future purchases easier, but they don’t insist on it. I guess the point is that I have an option to use another pizza company, but by the way our rail network is set up, I have to pay Branson to use the rail network that our taxes have paid for. Branson knows this so we doesn’t have to give us the option not to register.
The net result (pun very much intended) is that my web experience is slowed down and I dislike Virgin Trains before I’ve even used the service. As I mentioned, I’m not against all registration. If I’m getting a service or content for free then chances are I’ll give my details as a trade off. When a money grabbing billionaire want to sell my details and market to me, even though I’m forced to use ‘their’ trains, well that’s a different story.
Update
To make matters worse, Branson also charges for using wifi on his trains. £4.90 an hour. How is that justified? A web cafe charges around £1 an hour tops. Why is it nearly 500% more on his/our train? The East Coast line provides it for free. As a further kick in the teeth it is impossible to get anything approaching a decent signal on O2 anywhere on the 2 hour journey I made to Chester. Guess what, you have to register again to use the web with him!
I want my web back Branson, stop demanding my details and give me free/reasonable priced wifi. It’s most ridiculous thing you’ve done since your guest appearance in Baywatch
Wednesday, 20 January 2010
Pubs part 2
Following swiftly on from the Thai Food issue, my next problem with pubs is thus:
I was in Amsterdam recently for a trip away with some mates. One of the things that really stood out for me was the how different each bar, cafe and coffee shop was. Each had their own style, music and atmosphere. The owners and staff were all friendly and helpful and you could tell that they really bought into the place that they worked.
Contrast that with London, and England as a whole, and you'll find that the majority of what we can offer are bland homogenised chain pubs. They generally have the same sticky carpet, worn seats and staff with a glazed look on their face. There are some notable exceptions, the Queen's Larder in Holborn and the Red Lion in Yorkshire, but by and large it's the same cheap prices and poor quality offering across the board.
Of course, there are times that I've been to these places and had a great time, mainly as a student. But now when I see the places I think that I'd rather just go home. Or (and I'm writing this as quietly as possible) go for a coffee instead. Actually scrap that last idea, that's ridiculous. If you glance into a wetherspoons or such like you'll see 2 types of people.
1. Students.
2. Pensioners
As the majority of the population sits within the 2, I don't think it's a big demand to want a nice pub serving varied beers at a reasonable price. I don't want to stand next to a drunk 70 year old who has clearly used his trousers as his toilet all day, or share a table with loud students spouting their opinions with no understanding of what the issues are or how little other people care about their views.
I'd like the decor to match the area or owner's personality. Food is covered in this link but in short it should not be Thai. I expect I'll have a little rant about gastro pubs one day, however, any pub that serves a burger but has no ketchup should be banned. 32 Great Queen Street I mean you!
So, in short, independent pubs are good. Chain pubs are bad. Phew I feel more relaxed now.
I was in Amsterdam recently for a trip away with some mates. One of the things that really stood out for me was the how different each bar, cafe and coffee shop was. Each had their own style, music and atmosphere. The owners and staff were all friendly and helpful and you could tell that they really bought into the place that they worked.
Contrast that with London, and England as a whole, and you'll find that the majority of what we can offer are bland homogenised chain pubs. They generally have the same sticky carpet, worn seats and staff with a glazed look on their face. There are some notable exceptions, the Queen's Larder in Holborn and the Red Lion in Yorkshire, but by and large it's the same cheap prices and poor quality offering across the board.
Of course, there are times that I've been to these places and had a great time, mainly as a student. But now when I see the places I think that I'd rather just go home. Or (and I'm writing this as quietly as possible) go for a coffee instead. Actually scrap that last idea, that's ridiculous. If you glance into a wetherspoons or such like you'll see 2 types of people.
1. Students.
2. Pensioners
As the majority of the population sits within the 2, I don't think it's a big demand to want a nice pub serving varied beers at a reasonable price. I don't want to stand next to a drunk 70 year old who has clearly used his trousers as his toilet all day, or share a table with loud students spouting their opinions with no understanding of what the issues are or how little other people care about their views.
I'd like the decor to match the area or owner's personality. Food is covered in this link but in short it should not be Thai. I expect I'll have a little rant about gastro pubs one day, however, any pub that serves a burger but has no ketchup should be banned. 32 Great Queen Street I mean you!
So, in short, independent pubs are good. Chain pubs are bad. Phew I feel more relaxed now.
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
Pubs part 1
So it's been a little time since I last blogged and you'll be pleased to know that I'm still as grumpy as ever. The delay is mainly down to my laptop setting on fire as I was using it (it's old and the fan gave way). No new laptop yet so the next post may be similarly late. Apologies.
The Pub. A fantastic place. To be honest. one of my favourites. A great pub is a place that you'd happily spend, hours, days, weeks of your life in.
In the winter they have the warmth of an open fire, strong ale and red cheeked people escaping the cold and catching up on gossip. During summer they have beer gardens, BBQs, live football on TV and a refreshing, thirst quenching larger (spritzer for the ladies).
However, there are 2 major things that are spoiling them for me right now. I'll discuss one now and return to deal with the next one later on. I'm sure the suspense is killing you.
Right, so. Here's my problem. You're out on a freezing cold day shopping/going to the football/having a walk/insert what you like to do outside here, and you feel peckish. You remember there's that lovely old pub round the corner that you've been meaning to go into for ages and it might be perfect for a bit of pub grub. You get all excited a picture a nice sausage and mash or pie and chips in your head and pick up the pace. The cold doesn't seem so bad anymore as you round the corner and see the pub. Then you notice the dreaded sign. One that has plagued you on many a lunch time trip out the office. "Thai Food Served Here". Your heart shatters, head drops and the cold feels more biting than it ever did before. This was not what you'd imagined.
Before you start saying "I like Thai food, it's an interesting and exciting mix of Indian and Chinese", I'd like to point out that I kind of like Thai food. In fact I find it an interesting and exciting mix of Indian and Chinese.
My problem is that this is a pub. Not a Thai restaurant. I'm all for diversification amongst publicans who battle against insolvency but this is not the way to go. Pub food should be pub food. Pie and chips, fish and chips, scotch eggs at the bar. Simple.
The quality of the Thai food you get in pubs is awful and standardised. No interesting flavours, vibrant colours or imaginative combinations. It makes a good pub bad and I will avoid giving it custom out of principle.
Publicans of Britain please take heed (I'm sure there are loads of you reading my blog), if you serve Thai food I shall not frequent your establishment.
The Pub. A fantastic place. To be honest. one of my favourites. A great pub is a place that you'd happily spend, hours, days, weeks of your life in.
In the winter they have the warmth of an open fire, strong ale and red cheeked people escaping the cold and catching up on gossip. During summer they have beer gardens, BBQs, live football on TV and a refreshing, thirst quenching larger (spritzer for the ladies).
However, there are 2 major things that are spoiling them for me right now. I'll discuss one now and return to deal with the next one later on. I'm sure the suspense is killing you.
Right, so. Here's my problem. You're out on a freezing cold day shopping/going to the football/having a walk/insert what you like to do outside here, and you feel peckish. You remember there's that lovely old pub round the corner that you've been meaning to go into for ages and it might be perfect for a bit of pub grub. You get all excited a picture a nice sausage and mash or pie and chips in your head and pick up the pace. The cold doesn't seem so bad anymore as you round the corner and see the pub. Then you notice the dreaded sign. One that has plagued you on many a lunch time trip out the office. "Thai Food Served Here". Your heart shatters, head drops and the cold feels more biting than it ever did before. This was not what you'd imagined.
Before you start saying "I like Thai food, it's an interesting and exciting mix of Indian and Chinese", I'd like to point out that I kind of like Thai food. In fact I find it an interesting and exciting mix of Indian and Chinese.
My problem is that this is a pub. Not a Thai restaurant. I'm all for diversification amongst publicans who battle against insolvency but this is not the way to go. Pub food should be pub food. Pie and chips, fish and chips, scotch eggs at the bar. Simple.
The quality of the Thai food you get in pubs is awful and standardised. No interesting flavours, vibrant colours or imaginative combinations. It makes a good pub bad and I will avoid giving it custom out of principle.
Publicans of Britain please take heed (I'm sure there are loads of you reading my blog), if you serve Thai food I shall not frequent your establishment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)