Tom Morris

After my recent spacks against Roy Moore, this article at Slate (found at Plasticbag) sums up a lot of my current feeling on the issue. I particularly liked this bit...

One is presuming (is one not?) that this is the same god who actually created the audience he was addressing. This leaves us with the insoluble mystery of why he would have molded ("in his own image," yet) a covetous, murderous, disrespectful, lying, and adulterous species. Create them sick, and then command them to be well? What a mad despot this is, and how fortunate we are that he exists only in the minds of his worshippers.

Genius.

Whilst reading some of the responses on the MeFi thread, chill said what I've thought about how young people are portrayed in the media.

OK, BBC3 sucks but don't just pull the plug, look at why it sucks (it is indistinguishable for Sky One/E4 and forgets that some "Yoofs" actually have brains) and improve upon it.

Too true. BBC3 seems to offer nothing - the 'news' on there consists of celebrity meandering (who needs the Hutton Inquiry when Justin Timberlake substitutes so well for real news?). The channel seems intent on inflicting enormous amounts of Fame Academy on the world.

My problems are endemic of how young people are dealt with by the media - as if they are idiots. Children's TV is filled with vapid personalities with little to say and big booming voices to say it in. Subtelty is a lost cause in TV-land: if it isn't wrapped round a brick and smashed through people's eardrums at maximum volume they won't "get it". And whatever problems the rest of the media has, it's amplified by childrens programming.

I don't claim to be a mastermind, but why is there some commonly held belief that all "youths" are mobile-phone toting, Max Power reading retards decked out in stripy sports gear listening to 'four to the floor' dance music. News has to be repurposed for a Radio 1 audience - given a 'beaty' background and screamed.

Perhaps we're genetic mutations, but it's nice to think that we'd be given a little bit more credit than being told that "you are interested in Justin Timberlake - no objections". The BBC is supposed to stand for more than that. Unbiased reporting and balanced, intelligent commentary. That's what I've come to regard the BBC as standing for. On BBC3 tonight, there is one and a half hours of Fame Academy, a movie, a "shocking" documentary of a U.S. GUM clinic, some tedious programme about 'beauty'. Probably all packed in typical 'punchy' style necessary to hit the youth market. And all bathed in the beautiful lack of content that distinguishes the youth media market from anything for the older generation.

I haven't really been following the Hutton inquiry, but from the little bits I've read about it, it sounds a hell of a lot more interesting than the MTV Music Awards. How fucked up is that? I'm finding more interest out of the going-ons of a government inquiry than I am for the "cool, hip" MTV that I'm supposed to spend all day worshipping. Why? Because the former is relevant to what's actually going on.

The message that needs to be learnt by dumb media execs is this: "kids aren't dumb - they don't suddenly grow brains when they are twenty-five. Stop acting like it."

Not to provide information to people around the globe. Not to provide global communication at a low cost. No. It's so you can see stick figures impersonating Christopher Walken in the Weapon of Choice video. (Thanks, MeFi)

According to a recent Wired News article, a guy is being tried in Oklahoma at the moment for writing a story. While I think it's a load of poppycock, it does raise an interesting legal point. The statute states an almost incohate offence. In Britain we have the incohate act of attempt and to prove it, it must be shown that you committed an act "more than merely preparatory". This is the sort of situation that is not even "merely preparatory" - it doesn't prepare for the act. He was just screwing around.

Flak Magazine's guide to Why the World Hates America based on it's products, services and news. Particularly good is the bit about 'crustless bread' and the accompanying pre-made crustless sandwiches. Enjoy.

An amusing look at the process of writing a textbook. (Thanks, Arts and Letters Daily)

Bill Thompson asks: is it all over for blogs? Simple answer: no. Is it all over for word processors? No. Is it all over for spreadsheets? No. Is it all over for weblogging software? No.

Things are just about to get interesting with weblogging, and this article smacks of "Ooh! Look at me! I'm so media-disconnected!" which is precisely what I had last summer when on holiday (we didn't have Internet, newspapers or any of that stuff and SHOCK HORROR: WE SURVIVED!).

Reading Julie Birchell's column in today's Grauniad makes me wonder. Does she realise that the majority of complaints about reality TV, pop music and the cult of celebrity arise from their lack of quality? I don't care about their social class or their financial futures. I really don't give a shit. What I get annoyed with is when they decide to go out in to the world of "showbiz" without having anything to say or do. No reason. There are only twenty four hours a day. I want to fill those hours when I am not otherwise engaged in work or learnin' with something that I'm going to enjoy. I enjoy listening to rock music because as Bono once said (I think): "Pop music tells you that everything is okay, rock music tells you that it isn't."

We live in a world filled with intolerant and dastardly fundamentalist Christians and lying war criminals (politicians usually). Every day some twat-in-charge decides that we ought to spend tax money on spying on private lives or 'helping out' the dying music industry. And I'm supposed to take that lying down, with a few doses of Girls Aloud to soothe me. Fuck that. I'm bitter and bitter people need hard rock. They need quiet stuff as well, but quiet means in tempo and volume not in content. Even if you are listening to electronic mumblings it's from people with something to say.

My dislike of Big Brother is not because I have something against the people on the programme or that I want to keep the contestants from escaping 'council estate' life. Bullshit. The reason I hate Big Brother is because it's meaningless, vapid and thoroughly content-free. I need something with substance. We don't have this vessel of pinky-grey matter stuck between our ears so we can waste away watching Jade Goody's life in minute detail, and I quote: "I am intelligent, but I let myself down because I can't speak properly or spell."

Sorry, but as much of an antithesis this is to Gen-X postmodern irony, I am finding it harder and harder to be amicable towards modern culture. While once I might have found the Cheeky Girls funny (I still do to some degree), it now leaves me cold and unsatisfied. Well, I see the irony in it, but I can't be bothered to bask in it's burning flash of light for much longer. I don't demand my entertainers to have a "double first from Oxford" but I do demand that they finish primary school before entering the world of entertainment, which the majority of the Top 40 can't seem to manage. I don't want to be perceived as some crusty culture vulture who looks down on opera translations, but how long before we have singing monkeys releasing songs with jokes about bums? I'm all for an open market on creativity - it should not be restricted to "poncy art students", but don't lecture me as being "hierarchy-respecting" if I think that Atomic Kitten are talentless bozos who have made no contribution to the world of music. Because they haven't.

"All reality TV means is the further democratisation of showbiz". Right, let's call bull on this. It is not a 'democratisation'. In a true democracy justice is blind and your vote is confidential to you. In showbiz, it's a matter of good looks and not all that much "up there". Unlike the judges and law lords, Simon Cowell and his cohorts do not turn a blind eye to the looks of Pop Idols and Big Brother contestants. They are picked for their looks and marketed for their nooks. It isn't democratisation. It's just taking a charade and extending it to a wider base of entries.

The creative arts are not a democracy. They are a meritocracy. The ones with merit rule over my cultural intake and the ones without lose power just like that. As with all meritocracies, if you can't prove your utility, then you're on the slag dump. That rules out all the "glitter-dusted" pop monotony-bots. They can't provide proof that they are worth the time and attention paid to them, and therefore in my mind they are worthless. In meritocracies you have winners and losers. The winner is given generations worth of respect and admiration. The losers are forgotten and can only be found as newsprint recycled for serving grub on in a dank fish-and-chip shop. In this game, Shakespeare is a winner. Jade Goody isn't.

Whilst poking about in the BBC archives I found this little gem on interactive "red button" broadcasting. I can say that these things offer ittle or no value to me - if I want to 'interact', I can go outside or on the Internet. What the "red button" world has become is TV + Commerce which just sucks. I see enough adverts on television without pressing a little button to let me see more of them. Real interactivity would be to allow real people to get involved in programmes.

Until then 'red buttons' and other screen garbage is still an annoyance and a pesterence that stops me from seeing the TV programme. Unfortunately, the programme itself is rarely worth watching either.

"A just machine to make big decisions / Programmed by fellows with compassion and vision" "What a beautiful world this'll be / What a glorious time to be free"

Everytime I turn the news there is bad stuff. Wars, poverty, famine, inequality, blackmail, politics. It's amazing that people can stay positive through it all. It's even more amazing that we can celebrate the "beautiful world this'll be". Heads up, kids - there's more to life than misery and badness.

Slashdot discuss. Here's the easy answer: provide quality content at a reasonable price and allow people to pay flexibly (read: PayPal, debit cards, cheques etc.)

You can sit and read all of this and try and understand all the funky words -- "hypersphere", "superbrains", "hyperballs" etc. Or you can just make like me and spend all your time staring at the pretty pictures. Exciting, if confusing this late at night. On the archive page linked to above, there is a very nice guide on the blogging process. (Thanks, Doc Searls for the link)

A nice bit of pop psychology on how you solve problems. I'm not sure myself - at times I'm an incrementalist (things like websites are never finished) and at times I'm a completionist (you can't hand in an "incremental" photography project or law essay can you?).

We have some nice Elvish fonts will keep the strange homo-erotic, cable-TV-watching hobbits at bay. Fellowship has no meaning **whatsoever** thanks to these diaries....

Must go now, have to raise massive demon army to scourge the earth. Also, have manicure appointment.

As well as that, there is an unbelievable amount of crossovers between LotR and Harry Potter. Not to mention the odd Simpsons crossover.

Okay, I must get some sleep and some Tolkien.

I was reading Anil Dash's recent blog post about the retail experience and I feel I ought to share my views. So I present - the Rules of Retailing.

The Universal Rule of Retailing: Do Not Piss Me Off. That's it. There is no magic formula, no quick-n-easy method - just this simple unalienable truth: if you want to get money from me, don't piss me off. Because a pissed off customer isn't going to be buying anything, and he is quite likely to put a damper on other's purchases.

Rule #1 of Retail: Retail sucks, shopping sucks. Yep. Retail is "the suxor". I hate having to go shopping. It's such a tiresome exercise and such a waste of time. So, if you're in that busines remember this: going shopping is the most annoying, time-consuming and awful thing in my life. I do not enjoy it. I do not even consider enjoyment. It's guaranteed to suck. All you can do is make it so it sucks as little as possible whilst I'm in your store.

Rule #2 of Retail: Make it easy, make it friendly. Whenever I go in to my local shops, the people are friendly and helpful. You can't have one without the other. To be friendly, you must be helpful and obliging, and to be helpful and obliging, it helps a lot of you're friendly. Pretend friendly does not help. By pretend friendly I mean places like the Gap who have some 'token' standing by their front door saying "Hi, Welcome to the Gap". Don't I feel loved? Don't I just feel lovely inside? No. I feel like I've just been welcomed by a robot. If I go in to my local curry take-away, the guy will engage in human conversation whilst waiting for the food to come out of the kitchen - he knows what's going on in the news, he know's about his customers (what they are like etc.) and he'll engage you in conversation about family or work or school or whatever. That's real friendly. But most of all, if I'm not sure what a dish is like, I can ask him and he'll know. He doesn't need to check on a computer screen. If I ask him what a Chicken Dupiaza is like he'll tell me what a Chicken Dupiaza is like. Ditto if I go in to my local bakery - they have knowledgable, intelligent people working there. Same with the bookshop or the camera shop. They know what they are selling, and they are happy to tell you about it.

Rule #3 of Retail: That previous point - do it, okay. I knew whilst writing that previous passage that people are going to stand up and shout "you're so romantic - real life isn't like that". Why not? We're paying for the privilege? We're making some executive super-rich so why can't we have knowledgable people? It's not that difficult. The economy isn't in dire straights. That's just what the rich people want you to believe so that you don't go and harangue them for better wages. So - get intelligent people, pay them a good wage and watch your customers be happier (now think - I know that your BA in Business Studies does not allow you to do that, but just try... what do happier customers equal? It means that they are more likely to open up their wallet and let you take money out of it.)

Rule #4 of Retail: I know what I want. You're just there to sell it. I know up-front what I want. I don't need you to market to me, because I'm unmarketable. If I have decided to buy something it's after checking websites, reading reviews and seeing that what I hope to buy will serve my purposes. I don't need you to tell me what will suit my needs, because only I know what will suit my needs. So stop wasting your time marketing products to me - just put up a usable website, then I'll be able to decide if what you are flogging is what I be needing.

For example: I hate coffee. Always have done. I absolutely hate the sight, smell and taste of the stuff. Which means that every time you spend a penny marketing coffee to me, it's wasted. Because however flashy you make your coffee ad, however sexy you make the 'coffee experience', I'm still not going to buy your stupid coffee, because I hate it.

Rule #5 of Retail: Shut up about lifestyle. I don't give a shit. Right. Let's have a few little lessons. You are not selling me a lifestyle. You are selling me a toaster. You are not selling me an experience. You are selling me a chocolate bar. You are not selling me a philosophy. You are selling me a pair of jeans. This bedspread is not 'extreme', nor is this blank CD a religion. So stop trying to sell me lifestyles, concepts, experiences, philosophies, social contexts, popular psychology or attitudes. Because any sod knows they are intangible and completely unretailable. Get back to basics: sell me my jeans, my toaster and my chocolate bar as they are. I don't go in for price inflation. I'm afraid this roach has been sprayed so many times he's become resistant. Quit the sham because I really don't care anymore.

Rule #6 of Retail: I don't want your stinking storecard. I don't care. Instead of badgering me about credit cards, loyalty cards or anything like that, if you just STOP and spend all the time, money and energy you do on that in to lowering your prices for all your customers, I will appreciate your efforts far more.

Rule #7 of Retail: Leave it out with the music. Music rarely enhances a shopping experience. 99.99999% of the time it pisses me off. Now, remember, what do pissed of customers not do - spend money. It's okay in record shops, but most other places it's a stupid idea. And that's it. Boil it down, and I'm just apathetic. Retailing will always suck. Let's just try and make it as pleasantly crappy as we can.

'Read My Diary'

To the uninitiated, bloggers can seem narcissistic and slightly geeky, but by putting their lives online they're probably closer to the DIY utopian dreams of the early internet pioneers than any dotcom 'cash cow' can ever be.

In this article (which I found by accident whilst serching through the archives) on plasticbag is saying what I think about the internet and how it's developed. The "dotcom 'cash cow'" culture really blew out of all proportion. People strutting around shouting out that they were "web millionares". That's not how it should be. The web is not a business. It's a library, and a meeting place rolled in to one.

Wouldn't it be excellent if we could post blog entries about movies via TrackBack to IMDb? That way it would be so much easier to tell IMDb about lame movies (like Bubble Boy). Each movie could have a TrackBack URL so that people could ping it with information. That would rule.

Why are they dead? Why? Thanks to Scientology, that's why. Let us never forget the flames these people carry, but remember them. They died at the hands of true evil. Then after their death, the families of these people continued to be harrassed by the Church of Scientology. Scientology - together we can bring it down.

Thank some higher being (whatever) that I'm not going abroad on holiday this year. (Ananova) Because the last thing I could face hearing as I left this country is a rendition of "We are the Cheeky Girls, we are the Cheeky Girls - you are the Cheeky boys, you are the Cheeky boys." Why don't people just go the whole hog and become pornstars rather than being pornstar-lite pop stars and forcing inane Eurodance down our throats whenever you flick on the radio?

Even more worrying - they're releasing a Boney M cover tommorow. It's enough to make me want to go deaf voluntarily. Now, I'm just trying to work out what crimes, torts or European Convention on Human Rights articles this new single and their forthcoming album might be committing. I think that it may be committing the tort of 'nuisance', possibly GBH against my eardrums, and it falls foul of the ECHR on Articles 2 (right to life - because after hearing The Cheeky Song your life is as good as over), 3 (prohibition of torture), 9 (freedom of thought - because after hearing aforementioned track, you won't be thinking any longer) and 10 (because you won't be expressing yourself in any meaningful way either - just mindlessly repeating that "we are the cheeky girls").

According to a survey in AdAge, teenagers are spending more time online than they are watching TV. Well from someone who is technically a teenager, I'd like to say this... the reason I spend more time online than watching TV is simply because TV sucks. It insults me, treats me like a moron and 'humours' me with advertising aplenty. I can log on to the Internet, and I'm insulted by real people, not treated like a moron and can filter pop-up adverts. In fact, a few of the advertisers are getting around to realising that when it comes to advertising "less is more". Simple and straight ads with your message in text are best. None of these multi-million pound flashy campaigns with "punch the monkey". Simplicity rules, especially when you're trying to sell me something.

The excellent Plastic ask their community... America's gone to the dogs. Where to go next? Suggestions include Canada, Tuvalu etc...

How about you - where do you find a nice alternative to the totalitarian Bush regime?

So says James Watson, the scientist who discovered the stucture of DNA. And I'd agree. But I find that stupidity as a disorder can be solved using the steel-toe cap boots and a tube of epoxy resin.

Or to have delivered some quality logistics? Or maybe you want to do a course on contemporary post-modern lens-based media studies?

Alternatively, you could buy a new car, hire a lorry to do some road haulage or study photography. But due to the fact that some foolish middle management needs to feel cleverer than they really are, some brand spanking new words have arrived - so get ready to use them kids!

If you can't sell a product based on it's merits, all you need to do is sell it on it's 'lifestyle'. If you have a company that doesn't really do anything, just sell 'solutions'. If you don't want to write that horrid phrase 'road haulage' on the side of your brand spanking new lorries, you can just write 'logistics' and if you don't like saying photography - it sounds too common for your company / university / college - then you could just write 'lens-based media'.

But what about if you used a pinhole camera - which has no lens. Would you not be able to include the use and study of pinhole photography as part of your dissertation / project because it's not 'lens-based'?

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm just off to enjoy a lifestyle beer solution that covers my needs pub-to-pissed and browse some contemporary lens-based pornography on the Information Superhighway. Now, about that Synergy we spoke about the other day...

Once you start watching The Cheeky Girls video at ten to two in the morning while compiling category lists and action plans for the imminent launch.

So it's done. That was easy. The difficult bit is to come shortly - porting over all the old content and users from the previous database.

A gallery of high-speed photos of bullets being fired through objects. Rather cool...

This is rather cool. The infamous Zeldman has provided a list (yep, on A List Apart) that you must consult when you pick up your pen, or the virtual equivalent of one. It really does have some fantastic advice, and if you haven't already read it, you must. Now.

There is quite a lot of good content. I wasn't so bothered about the technical stuff, but some of the more interesting stuff is fantastic: Indie Content Production, why do we go on the web?, how the web is becoming a glut of content and is the web at an end?.